Central Information Commission
Mr. Tanzim Ahmed vs Slum & Jj Department, Municipal ... on 31 December, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2009/002905/6171
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002905
Appellant : Mr. Tanzim Ahmed,
768/1, 774, Ballimaran,
Delhi-110006
Respondent : Mr. Y.P.Rawal
Public Information Officer
Slum & JJ Department
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Room No. 8, Punarvas Bhawan,
I.P Estate, New Delhi-110002.
RTI application filed on : 17/09/2009
PIO replied : 15/10/2009
First Appeal filed on : 13/10/2009
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned
Second Appeal Received on : 13/11/2009
Notice of Hearing Sent on : 27/11/2009
Hearing Held on : 30/12/2009
Information sought:
Appellant sought information regarding demolition of property no.768/ 1, 2nd floor, Gali Saudagaran, ward-VI, Balli Maran, Delhi
1. Name and designation of the official who broke the lock of the above mentioned property, by whom this order was passed, whether he was competent for passing this order. Under which Act the lock of said property was broken. Provide certified photocopy of the Act and copy of order by which the lock was broken.
2. Certified copy of Act under which demolition of said property was done.
3. Certified copy of Act under which goods were taken away after demolition of said property.
4. Whether list of goods taken away was prepared by the Slum and J. J. department.
Provide certified copy of that list.
5. Who were present at the time of demolition?
6. Number of officials from Slum and JJ, MCD presented at the place of demolition,
7. Date on which request was made by Slum and JJ Department for help of police. Name and designation of the official who made request. Date which was accepted by the police for help. Provide certified copy of concerned with mentioned above.
PIO's Reply:
Reply given by PIO was as follow:
"2.(i) The information asked for is enclosed for reference.
The reply of OSD(Demolition) has been received and enclosed.
Or
(ii) The following partly information is being enclosed.
(iii) The remaining information about the other aspects cannot be supplied due to followings reasons.
3 The requested information does not fall within the jurisdiction of this Competent Authority."
In Enclosure dated 21/09/2009 from O/o Dy. Director (Demolition), Slum and J J Department, MCD, was mentioned that demolition was not done at said property, as what document was provided to competent officer, Demolition Branch. Therefore, reply to question no. 1 to 7 were not concerned with Demolition branch.
Grounds for First Appeal:
No clear information or any letter was given. Reply did not clarify that from where Appellant could retrieve goods captured during demolition.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
Not mentioned.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Appellant requested for true, complete and clear information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Saud Ahmad on behalf of Mr. Tanzim Ahmed; Respondent: Mr. Abdul Dayyan on behalf of Mr. Y.P.Rawal, Public Information Officer;
The FAA Mr. S.K.Sharma, Financial Advisor, Slum & JJ is guilty of dereliction of duty since he had not passed any order in this matter. The Commission will consider recommending disciplinary action against him if he does not discharge his duty under the RTI Act.
The Appellant had earlier sought the demolition action taken on the roof of property 768. The PIO has given the complete file in this regard since he states that as per the department the structure on the roof was a temporary structure. The respondent states that the property is 768 and the appellant is creating a fictitious property 768/1. The Respondent states that they have not carried out any demolition non property no. 768/1 for which information has been sought by the appellant. The Respondent also states that this matter is in court and the appellant appears to be asking information repeatedly on the same matter. The Respondent states that all the available information of this demolition has been given to the Appellant consisting of 215 pages.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed.
The information has 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 31 December 2009 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj