Central Information Commission
Deepak Kumar vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation ... on 29 July, 2019
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NDMCR/A/2017/607274
Shri Deepak Kumar ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
Pio, Deputy Director (Horticulture) Rohini, North
Delhi Municipal Corporation, Horticulture
Department, Rohini Zone, Delhi. ...प्रनतवादी /Respondent
Through: Sh. Brijbir Singh - APIO, Sh. Nanak
Chand - PIO
Date of Hearing : 05.07.2019
Date of Decision : 29.07.2017
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 26.07.2017
PIO replied on : 25.08.2017
First Appeal filed on : 31.08.2017
First Appellate Order on : Not on record.
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 07.11.2017
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant vide his RTI application on 26.07.2017 sought information on 05points regarding his letter dated 07.03.2017, addressed to Director - Horticulture, North Delhi Municipal Corporation about non-maintenance of a park behind House No. 95, Block G-3, Rohini, Sector-16, Delhi-110089. The appellant sought daily progress on his letter, details of names, designation and contact nos. of the officials/staff responsible for maintenance of this park, details of deployment of gardener to the park behind House No. G3/95, Sector
- 16, Rohini during the last 3 months and the matter related thereto.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the CPIO vide letter dated 25.08.2017, the Appellant filed first appeal on 31.08.2017. Upon non adjudication of the First Appeal, the appellant was aggrieved and hence he approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.Page 1 of 2
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Both parties are present during hearing. Appellant states that since the park in question is unkempt and ill maintained, as a member of the RWA, he raised these queries with the authorities responsible for maintenance thereof. He is aggrieved with the non-deployment of gardener and hence objects to the general reply of the respondent. Appellant says that no manure has been used in the parks in the G-3 Block, Rohini Zone.
The APIO present for hearing states that there is acute shortage of staff and hence they are unable to cope with the upkeep and maintenance of parks very diligently and with as much regularity as would be desired. However, he counters the statement of the appellant, stating that manure has been provided to the parks pointed out by the appellant.
Decision Perusal of records of the case and averments of the parties reveal that the questions raised by the appellant serve a social and environmental cause. The queries have been duly responded by the PIO well within the mandated time frame. However, as the arguments of the appellant reveal, the germane issue about negligence in upkeep of the parks still persists.
Considering that the subject matter of upkeep of the parks is part of the functions of the civic authority, the matter at hand is being remanded to the FAA-Dy. Commissioner- Ms. Aditi Reddy to address the grievance of the appellant, upon giving a chance of fair hearing to the appellant. The respondent is expected to take appropriate steps for proper maintenance of the parks in the G-3 Block, Rohini and shall ensure that an action taken report is submitted before the Commission by 20.08.2019, reporting the conclusion of the hearing of the First Appeal by the FAA.
The appeal is disposed off with the above directions.
Y. K. Sinha(वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner(सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/ 011-26180514 Page 2 of 2