Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Dr.V K Jha vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 24 June, 2010

                         CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                             Club Building (Near Post Office)
                           Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                  Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                               Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001320/8298
                                                                      Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001320
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                               :       Dr. V.K Jha
                                                Vijay Polyclinic, Hanuman Mandir Road.
                                                Kiran Garden, Uttam Nagar,
                                                New Delhi - 59.

Respondent                              :       Mr. Rajesh Khanna

Public Information Officer & SE Municipal Corporation of Delhi O/o Superintending Engineer Najafgarh Zone, Over Head Water Tank Building, Tilak Nagar Road, Delhi RTI application filed on : 14/10/2009 received on 04/11/2009 PIO replied : 14/12/2009 First appeal filed on : 09/01/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 23/02/2010 Second Appeal received on : 20/05/2010 Sl. Information Sought Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)

1. Details of the property tax deposited by occupants of the following The matter of property tax does not residential and Non- residential properties for the period of pertain to Building Department, 01/04/2004 to 31/03/2010 showing year wise break up under the Najafgarh Zone. following headings : Property No. RZ- C/1, Gali No.8 Sadh Nagar, Plam Colony, New Delhi - 45 and two properties situated on left side of the above property and two properties situated on the right side of the above property

2. If the property tax is not deposited by occupants of the above The matter of property tax does not mentioned property, during the period 01/04/2004 to 31/03/2010. pertain to Building Department, No. and date of the letter/ notice under which occupants has/have Najafgarh Zone. been called for, to deposit the same. If the reply is negative, then the reasons should be intimated

3. Details of the "registration fee" deposited by the occupant Registration fee of Rs. 1000 has been carrying business in property No. RZ- C/1, Gali No. 8, Sadh deposited vide Registration No. Nagar, Palam Colony, New Delhi - 110045 2110035455 on 08/01/2007

4. Details of "Annual Mixed use charges " deposited by the occupant As per record available in the office, the carrying business in Property No. RZ- C/1, Gali No. 8, Sadh applicant has paid partly payment Nagar, Palam colony for the period of 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, conversion charges vide G-8 no. 464041 2008-09 & 2009-10 dt.30/06/2007 amount: 960, G-8 No. 773082 amount 3110.

5. Details if the occupant is carrying business of retail small shop as As per self assessment submitted by the laid down in Public Notice within 20 sqm. Area as per directions occupant the area of the shop is 20 Sqm.

of the supreme Court of India. If the occupant of the said property is carrying business is more than 20 Sqm. Area in contravention of orders of the Supreme court of India, what action is being proposed/ taken against the above mentioned occupant?

6. Details of the first Appellate Authority alongwith Name and Mr. S.K Jain, D.C/ NGZ is 1st appellate contact information in the present case. Authority, Office on 2nd floor, near Sai Baba mandir, Opp. Power House, Najafgarh. Ph: 011-25321302. (Part of the reply is illegible) Grounds for the First Appeal:

Unsatisfactory information provided for point No.1 and 2. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):

PIO is directed to send the complete reply for point No. 1 and 2, within 7 working days.

Grounds for the Second Appeal:

Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present:

Appellant: Absent;

Respondent: Mr. R. S. Garg, AE on behalf of Mr. Rajesh Khanna, PIO & SE;

The Respondent states that the entire information has been given to the appellant. A perusal of the information provided appears to bear this out.

Decision:

The Appeal is disposed.

The information appears to have been provided. This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.

Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 24 June 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(YM) Page 2 of 2