Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

R L Makhija vs Delhi Fire Services on 29 January, 2026

                                    के ीय सूचना आयोग
                           Central Information Commission
                                बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                           Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                            नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067


ि तीय अपील सं या/ Second Appeal No. CIC/DLFSR/A/2024/108289

R L Makhija                                                              ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                          VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Delhi Fire Service Hq.                                               ... ितवादीगण/Respondent

Date of Hearing                :      21.01.2026
Date of Decision               :      29.01.2026

 Chief Information Commissioner : Raj Kumar Goyal

  Relevant dates:
 RTI application filed on       :       30.09.2023
 PIO replied on                 :       10.11.2023
 First Appeal filed on          :       29.11.2023
 First Appellate Order on       :       26.12.2023
 2ndAppeal/complaint            :       13.03.2024
 received on

 Information sought

and background of the case:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 30.09.2023 before the PIO, Delhi Fire Service, Hq., seeking the following information in respect of Metro Hospital (CANCER) at Preet Vihar:

"1. Whether Metro Hospital has taken Fire certificate. If yes, please provide on which date it was issued and validity period.

2. Please provide the copy for Hospital guidelines issued by Fire department.

3. If any Hospital is running the without the Fire NOC (No Objection Certificate). Please provide the copy of guidelines what type of action can be taken by the Fire Department.

4. As per fire guidelines, front gate should have width of how many meters, in case of any emergency fire conditions, fire vehicles will enter the hospital premises. please provide the width details.

5. Whether the Metro Hospital has fulfill the conditions of Fire safety. please provide the details.

6. As per fire guidelines whether hospitals can work in Basement. please provide the details.

7- As per fire guidelines how much parking space should be left in Hospitals. Please provide the details.

8. Please provide the plot size & plot number.

9. At the time of hospital authorizes has applied for NOC, how many floors were applied for and has how many floors were given to Fire NOC. please provide the details.

10. Please mention in reply Reference No. RLM I 2023-xxxxx while replying to this RTI.

11. Please provide the plot number details."

[reproduced verbatim]

2. The PIO sent a response dated 10.11.2023 furnishing the point wise information as under:

"1. All the Fire Safety Certificates alongwith inspection reports, issued or renewed by Delhi Fire Service are available on the DFS website www.dfs.delhigovt.nic.in. Same can be viewed, downloaded at free of cost. However, copy of Fire Safety Certificate issued to Metro Hospital, Plot No. 21, Community Centre, Preet Vihar, Delhi-92 is enclosed thereof.

2. Copy enclosed.

3. Question does not fall under the category of information as per section 2(f) of RTI Act 2005.

4. Please see reply of 01.

5. Please see reply of 01.

6. The requirements of structural parameters as well as fire safety shall be as per the provisions of UBBL-2016 and NBC 2016.

7. No information is available.

8. Please see reply of 02.

9. Please see reply of 01.

10. Reference No. RLM/2023-24/214 dated 30/09/2023.

11. Please see reply of 01."

[reproduced verbatim]

3. Not satisfied with the reply sent by the PIO, the Appellant filed the First Appeal dated 28.11.2023, which was disposed of vide FAA's order dated 26.12.2023 upholding the PIO's reply.

4. Aggrieved by the FAA's order, the Appellant filed the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in course of Hearing:

5. Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.

Appellant: Present.

Respondent: Mr. Ravi Nath -PIO, Delhi Fire Service, ADO(DFS) was present.

6. The Appellant's primary contention is that the PIO has provided information with respect to another Metro Hospital located in the area. He reiterated his contentions indicated in the Second Appeal that there is an irregularity in the Fire Department's issuance of NOC, as Metro Hospital is established on two plots namely plot No. 21 & 22. The Fire Department issued the NOC for plot No.21, but physically, Plot numbers 21 & 22 are part of a club building with no division/ partition.

7. The Respondent contended that information available on record had been furnished by the PIO, and in so far as the error in providing information about another hospital is concerned, it was purely unintentional and was not comprehensible from the pleadings filed by the Appellant. The Respondent further averred that the Building Plan is not sanctioned by the Delhi Fire Services, and the Building Sanctioning Authority in the DGHS sanctions the Building Plan after obtaining NOC from the relevant departments including the Delhi Fire Services. This leads to the next logical step, in terms of Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, which is transferring the question to the actual custodian of information, viz. the building sanctioning authority, DGHS. But the Respondent from the Delhi Fire Service was unable to answer as to why the query related to DGHS had not been transferred to the relevant public authority.

Decision:

8. On examination of the records, it is noted that though the Respondent had sent a reply and the First Appeal was also adjudicated, yet the issues which transpired during the course of hearing, specifically revolving around the queries pertaining to the Building Sanctioning Authority, in DGHS and issuance of Fire NOC had not been addressed by either the PIO or the FAA. In the light of the aforementioned discussion, the PIO, Delhi Fire Services is directed to transfer the RTI application to the actual custodian of information, viz. Building Sanctioning Second Appeal No. CIC/DLFSR/A/2024/108289 Page 3 of 4 Authority, in DGHS under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act to answer the queries related to the said department. The PIO, DFS shall report compliance in this regard within two weeks of receipt of this order.

9. Upon hearing the averments of the Respondent during the hearing, the Commission hereby directs Mr. Ravi Nath -PIO, Delhi Fire Service to send the Appellant a revised reply addressing his queries with clarity in terms of his oral averments made during hearing. The Respondent - PIO, DFS shall send the revised reply within two weeks of receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. It is made clear that non adherence of the above direction is liable to attract penal action, as per law.

The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.

Sd/-

Raj Kumar Goyal (राज कुमार गोयल) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) Bijendra Kumar (िबज कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/011-26186535 Second Appeal No. CIC/DLFSR/A/2024/108289 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)