{"id":69165,"date":"2011-05-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-05-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011"},"modified":"2016-08-17T11:52:02","modified_gmt":"2016-08-17T06:22:02","slug":"mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011","title":{"rendered":"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011<\/div>\n
                         CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                             Club Building (Near Post Office)\n                           Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067\n                                  Tel: +91-11-26161796\n\n                                                     Decision No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000500\/12191Penalty\n                                                                    Appeal No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000500\n\nRelevant Facts<\/pre>\n
 emerging from the Appeal:\n<\/p>\n
Appellant                             :      Mr. Nitin Goel\n                                             124, NCPA Apartment\n                                             12th Floor, B Wing,\n                                             Nariman Point, Mumbai- 4\n\nRespondent                            :      Mr. Parshadi Lal\n                                             Public Information Officer & Dy. Director\n                                             Property Tax Department\n                                             New Delhi Municipal Council\n                                             Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg\n                                             New Delhi- 110001\n\nRTI application filed on              :      20\/01\/2010\nPIO replied                           :      15\/02\/2010\nFirst appeal filed on                 :      23\/06\/2010\nFirst Appellate Authority order       :      24\/09\/2010\nSecond Appeal received on             :      08\/02\/2011\n\nInformation sought:- 20\/01\/2010\n<\/pre>\n
   1. Background papers on the basis of which the NDMC Committee constituted u\/s 9 of the NDMC
\n      Act, 1994 to advise upon the Property Tax system, has recommended as follows quae occupancy
\n      factor:\n<\/p>\n
          a. As per the original proposals in MCD, an occupancy factor was to be applied for all types
\n              of properties (residential or non-residential) if these premises were rented. Subsequently,
\n              the guidance were revised and the occupancy factor of 2 is being applied in case of
\n              Residential Properties only.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            The rental values of commercial properties in area under the jurisdiction of NDMC, are high
\n            as compared those prevailing in the rest of Delhi. In case of Khan Market, the rentals can even
\n            go beyond Rs 500 a square ft. per month. The rentals in residential areas are also fairly high.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Keeping this in view, the Committee recommends that an occupancy factor be applied on both
\n            types of properties i.e. residential as well as non-residential, if these are not self occupied<\/p>\n
         A trend has been noticed in the NDMC area wherein properties are being acquired in the
\n         names of companies. These properties are invariably being used for residence of the Directors,
\n         employees or relatives of such Director\/employees. The Committee recommends that such
\n         properties should not be treated as self occupied properties for the applicability of the
\n         occupancy factor.\n<\/p>\n
   2. Copies of the file notes qua the aforesaid recommendation.\n<\/p>\n
   3. Copy of the Action taken by the NDMC quae the aforesaid recommendation.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                               Page 1 of 4<\/span><\/p>\n
 PIO response 1: 15\/02\/2010
\nReport of the committee available on NDMC website<\/p>\n
1st Appeal to PIO: 24\/02\/2010
\nInformation given was not what was requested.\n<\/p>\n
PIO response 2: 30\/03\/2010
\n Response gives objectives of the Committee, Recommendation of modified form of Unit Area method.
\nAcceptance of recommendations in principle by the Council. Details of who all letters were sent to elicit
\nopinion. Introduction of Unit Area Method via notification.\n<\/p>\n
2nd Appeal to PIO: 05\/04\/2010
\nInformation given was not what was requested.\n<\/p>\n
Grounds for the First Appeal: 23\/06\/2010
\nInformation given was not what was requested.\n<\/p>\n
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA): 24\/09\/2010
\nPIO instructed to give comprehensive reply of points raised by the applicant. Appeal is disposed.\n<\/p>\n
PIO response to FAA Order: 11\/11\/2010
\nInformation was given before via “PIO Response 2”. Approval or recommendations was published in
\nDelhi Gazette. Copy of report of the sub-committee shall be provided after payment.\n<\/p>\n
Grounds for the Second Appeal: 08\/02\/2011
\nInformation not received.\n<\/p>\n
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing the on 29 April 2011:
\nAppellant: Mr. Nitin Goel on video conference from NIC-Mumbai Studio;
\nRespondent: Mr. Parshadi Lal, Public Information Officer & Dy. Director; Mr. J. P. Garg, APIO;\n<\/p>\n
       “The Appellant had sought information about the background papers and file notings based on
\nwhich NDMC committee had made recommendation regarding occupancy factor. The PIO did not offer to
\ngive this information at all but kept offering the Gazette Notification and the subcommittee’s
\nrecommendation. The PIO has no explanation for this strange behavior.”\n<\/p>\n
Commission’s Decision dated 29 April 2011:\n<\/p>\n
The Appeal was allowed.\n<\/p>\n
      “The commission directs the PIO to send an attested photocopy of the entire file
\nincluding noting to the Appellant before 10 May 2011.\n<\/p>\n
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO
\nwithin 30 days as required by the law.\n<\/p>\n
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information
\nwithin the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the
\nrequirement of the RTI Act. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1).
\nA showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show
\ncause why penalty should not be levied on him.\n<\/p>\n
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 31 May 2011 at 10.30am
\nalongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated
\nunder Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the information to the appellant.”\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                                 Page 2 of 4<\/span><\/p>\n
 Relevant Facts emerging during the showcause hearing the on 31 May 2011:
\nRespondent: Mr. Parshadi Lal, Public Information Officer & Dy. Director; Mr. J. P. Garg, APIO & SO;\n<\/p>\n
        The PIO states that he has now provided the complete information to the Appellant on 06\/05\/2011
\nafter the order of the Commission by speed post. The Commission asked the PIO Mr. Parshadi Lal why he
\nhad not provided the complete information to the Appellant initially. The Commission also pointed out to
\nthe PIO that even after the order of the FAA he had failed to supply the information to the Appellant. The
\nPIO Mr. Parshadi Lal has brought no written submissions and only state that he missed sending the
\ninformation and is sorry about it.\n<\/p>\n
Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act states, “Where the Central Information Commission or the State
\nInformation Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the
\nopinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case
\nmay be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not
\nfurnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the
\nrequest for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed
\ninformation which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the
\ninformation, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received
\nor information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty five
\nthousand rupees;\n<\/p>\n
Provided that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case
\nmay be, shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on him:\n<\/p>\n
Provided further that the burden of proving that he acted reasonably and diligently shall be on the Central
\nPublic Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be.”\n<\/p>\n
A plain reading of Section 20 reveals that there are three circumstances where the Commission must
\nimpose penalty:\n<\/p>\n
1)     Refusal to receive an application for information.\n<\/p>\n
2)     Not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 – 30
\n       days.\n<\/p>\n
3)     Malafidely denying the request for information or knowingly giving incorrect, incomplete or
\n       misleading information or destroying information which was the subject of the request\n<\/p>\n
4)     Obstructing in any manner in furnishing the information.\n<\/p>\n
All the above are prefaced by the infraction, ‘ without reasonable cause’.\n<\/p>\n
Section 19 (5) of the RTI Act has also stated that “In any appeal proceedings, the onus to prove that a
\ndenial of a request was justified shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or State Public
\nInformation Officer, as the case may be, who denied the request.”\n<\/p>\n
Thus if without reasonable cause, information is not furnished within the time specified under sub-section
\n(1) of section 7, the Commission is dutybound to levy a penalty at the rate of rupees two hundred and fifty
\neach day till the information is furnished. Once the Commission decides that there was no reasonable
\ncause for delay, it has to impose the penalty at the rate specified in Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act and the
\nlaw gives no discretion in the matter. The burden of proving that denial of information by the PIO was
\njustified and reasonable is clearly on the PIO as per Section 19(5) of the RTI Act.\n<\/p>\n
The RTI application had been filed on 20\/01\/2010 and the complete information sought by the Appellant
\nshould have been provided before 20\/02\/2010. The FAA had also ordered on 24\/09\/2010 that the
\ncomplete comprehensive information should be provided. Yet this order was also not complied with. The
\nPIO has given no reasonable cause for not providing the information. Hence the Commission sees this as a
\n                                                                                                Page 3 of 4<\/span>
\n fit case for imposition of penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act. The Complete information appears
\nto have been provided only on 06\/05\/2011. Since the delay in providing the information has been over 100
\ndays the Commission imposes the maximum penalty of `25000\/- under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act on
\nMr. Parshadi Lal, Public Information Officer & Dy. Director.\n<\/p>\n
Decision:\n<\/p>\n
          As per the provisions of Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act 2005, the Commission
\nfinds this a fit case for levying penalty on Mr. Parshadi Lal, Public Information Officer &
\nDy. Director Since the delay in providing the complete information has been over 100
\ndays, the Commission is passing an order penalizing Mr. Parshadi Lal `25000\/ which is
\nthe maximum penalty under the Act.\n<\/p>\n
      The Chairman, New Delhi Municipal Council is directed to recover the amount of
\n`25000\/- from the salary of Mr. Parshadi Lal and remit the same by a demand draft or a
\nBanker’s Cheque in the name of the Pay & Accounts Officer, CAT, payable at New Delhi
\nand send the same to Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar, Joint Registrar and Deputy
\nSecretary of the Central Information Commission, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
\nNew Delhi – 110066. The amount may be deducted at the rate of `5000\/ per month every
\nmonth from the salary of Mr. Parshadi Lal and remitted by the 10th of every month starting
\nfrom July 2011. The total amount of `25000 \/- will be remitted by 10th of November,
\n2011.\n<\/p>\n
This decision is announced in open chamber.\n<\/p>\n
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
\nAny information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                                      Shailesh Gandhi
\n                                                                                            Information Commissioner
\n                                                                                                         31 May 2011
\n(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(BK)<\/p>\n
CC: To,<\/p>\n
1-         The Chairman
\n           New Delhi Municipal Council
\n           Palika Kendra, Sandad Marg,
\n           New Delhi<\/p>\n
2.         Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar,
\n           Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary
\n           Central Information Commission,
\n           2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
\n           New Delhi – 110066<\/p>\n
                                                                                                              Page 4 of 4<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Club Building (Near Post Office) Old JNU Campus, New Delhi – 110067 Tel: +91-11-26161796 Decision No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000500\/12191Penalty Appeal No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000500 Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal: Appellant : Mr. Nitin Goel 124, NCPA Apartment 12th Floor, B Wing, Nariman […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-69165","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nMr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-17T06:22:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-17T06:22:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1637,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011\",\"name\":\"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-17T06:22:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-17T06:22:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011","datePublished":"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-17T06:22:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011"},"wordCount":1637,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011","name":"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-05-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-17T06:22:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-nitin-goel-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-31-may-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mr.Nitin Goel vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 31 May, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69165","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69165"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69165\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69165"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69165"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69165"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}