Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Mr.Sanjeev Bharara vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 9 August, 2011

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

                                                            Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001787/13979
                                                                    Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001787
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                                  :         Mr. Sanjeev Bharara
                                                     2/412, Subhash nagar
                                                     NewDelhi-110027

Respondent                                 :         Mr. Naurang Singh

PIO & SE-I (West Zone) Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Vishal Enclave, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi RTI application filed on : 27-12-2010 PIO replied : 07-01-2011 First appeal filed on : 08-02-2011 First Appellate Authority order : 20-04-2011 Second Appeal received on : 05-07-2011 Sl. Information Sought Reply of PIO

1. What is the name scheme under which The work of construction already constructed S.W.D.'s (which are not water drains is being carried out the scheme of "I/S causing any water stagnation) are being of internal roads of demolished and reconstructed. Also supply subhadh nagar from block 8 to 17" Total cost of the brief of the scheme including total cost andscheme is Rs. 673.52 lakhs in which various works to be carried out. How much amount development works such as widening of road, of has been spent so far tinder the scheme. road, C/o drainage, imp. to berms & Shifting of electric poles etc. will be executed as per provision taken & approved by the Hon ble L.G under H.O.A LA-

Roads. The amount of Rs. 255.00 lakhs has been spent for drainage & strengthening work in the above Mentioned scheme.

2. Supply the name of officer along designation The scheme has been moved from the office of the who has moved formulated the scheme. undersigned & formulated by Anil Sharma.

3. Supply the name and designation competent The Scheme has been sanctioned by the Hon'ble authority who has approved/sanctioned the L.G. of Delhi & approved by the technical scheme. committee constituted under the chairmanship of E-

in-C.

4. Whether lay out plan of block no. 1 to 17 Yes, The layout plan of subhash Nagar was Subhash Nagar was consulted? consulted before formulation of scheme, however considered before formulation of the scheme R.OW. of the most of the roads have not been and whether R.O.W. of roads was taken in to mentioned in the layout of Subhash Nagar.

consideration.

5. Whether the survey of each and every Encroachment from Govt. Land can be demolished Property in each block was conducted to any time without doing any survey. demolish the Pucca encroachment.

6. Supply name of the division under which The work of their scheme is being carried out under works under the scheme are being carried out the control of division Vii if reply is E.E-Vll division then supply the information relating to question no/-.

7. Give brief of the maintenance works Total 54 nos, maintenance works out of which 23 carried out in ward total amount spent have been carried out for development for no-112 along with during the current developments in ward C-112 during the current financial date till date. financial year and amount of Rs.71.53 lacs have been spent on these works till date.

8. Supply name and designation of the officer The SW. drains are being constructed after leaving who is taking decision at the time of behind a safe distance from the original building line demolition of encroachment and construction under the control and directed of the technical staff of 5.W.D.s because in some blocks 10 ft to of the area. 15 feet and in some blocks 5 feet municipal land has been left out &!3.Ds. were diverted at the will & whim of above officer.

9. Supply details of each block of property no, The proposal in the scheme for construction of S.W. falling on main road or wide road which drain from block 1 to 17 in Subhash Nagar on the neither been demolished nor S.W.D.s roads having R.O.W. 30' 40' 45' 60' & 80' and the constructed till date. work is in progress tI)) date and in the remaining blocks the work of? construction of S.W. drain shall be carried out in due course and where the of SW.

drain is being taken up, simultaneously the encroachment is removed.

10 What necessitated the officer who has As per the direction of High Court in Mont r' . formulated scheme of reconstruction Committee was constituted to monitor the of S.W.Ds (storm water drains) when no such encroachment removal from MpI. land in blocks, 1 drain was causing any inundation of rain to 17, Subhash Nagar. It was also notice by the water on roads except opposite Rajouri Monitoring Committee that on all the main roads Apartments. massive encroachment has been made by the . owner /occupier in the form of extend rooms, gates, gardens, ramps etc. In view of the observation made by the Monitoring Committee it was decided at senior level meeting to prepare; scheme for widening & Imp. of roads in Subhash Nagar. The matter of encroachment removal is still being monitored by the Monitoring Committee and report of encroachment removal in Subhash Nagar sent to competent authority for their kind perusal time & a9ain. The scheme covers the development of roads as well as drains & prepared comprehensively (composite) and accordingly taken up for executing the development works.

11 Under whom orders the shops constructed on It is to inform that part work of drainage has been . municipal land opposite blocks no. 17 and completed and the remaining will be taken up in due shops opposite block 7 on main road were not course after obtaining the orders from the concerned demolished and S.WiJ.s wore diverted. dept.

12 Give name of the officer who can be held Encroachment on Govt. Land can be removed . responsible if residents Re-Encroach on without any notice. This encroachment intimate the S.W.Ds and Municipal Land. concerned deptt. after removing the S.H.O. to taken action has per IPC against the offender who re encroach the Govt. Land.

13 Whether above responsible officer has The information furnished by the . Conducted any inspection for prevention of in this regard is to Police Authorities.

re-encroachment. Give details of his visits along with date and also supply property no.

where ho has seen encroachment on Municipal Land.

14 Please state whether a demolition of The scheme envisages the various developments . encroachment on Municipal Land. Under works such as constriction of S.W. drains, whom order the demolition was not started Improvement to berms and widening of roads. The right from Ill, Subhash Nagar, New Delhi- encroachment on Govt. Land can be removed any 110027 and onwards without leaving any time without any notice. In the first phase block. encroachments are being removed from main roads where the work of construction of SW. drain is in progress and in which main road of 1 Block is also covered.

15 Supply the detail of property nos. of The unauthorized constriction in the property is the . unauthorized constructions and encroachment matter related to Building deptt. therefore the on Municipal Land in Subhash Nagar. information in this regard is be provided by E.E. (Bldg.) (M)-l. As regards the encroachments on Govt. Land the information desired in present Perform a is riot viable date 17500 Sqm encroachment has been removed in ward No. C-112 arid remaining encroachment will be removed in due course simultaneously During the construction SW. drain on main roads/internal lanes.

Ground of the First Appeal:

The reply of the PIO was dissatisfying and incomplete. Order of the FAA:

The reply has been given by the PIO except point no. 5 as the record is lying with the Planning Department. The PIO is directed to forward the application to the Planning Department for reply of point no. 5 directly to the appellant.

Ground of the Second Appeal:

The PIO reply was not satisfying.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

Following were present:

Appellant: Mr. Sanjeev Bharara;

Respondent: Mr. Ajay, Gautam, EE(M) on behalf of Mr. Naurang Singh, PIO & SE-I (West Zone);

Some of the information had not been provided earlier. The PIO has brought the complete file and has handed it over to the Appellant before the Commission. As regards query-5 the information has been sent after procuring from the Planning Department.

Decision:

The Appeal is disposed.

The information available on the records 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 09 August 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (kh) Page 4 of 4