Central Information Commission
Man Mohan Chhabra vs Delhi Development Authority on 30 June, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/DDATY/A/2024/102754
Man Mohan Chhabra .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Delhi Development Authority,
Office of the Dy. Director (MIG)
H, D Block, Vikas Sadan,
New Delhi - 110023 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 26.06.2025
Date of Decision : 27.06.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 04.08.2021
CPIO replied on : 27.09.2021
First appeal filed on : 10.09.2021
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 29.01.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an (offline) RTI application dated 04.08.2021 seeking the following information:
"Seeking information under RTI Act- 2005 file no 29(778) 87/NN/NP2008 BPKTF MIG CTB Enclave MIG DELHI9 93. Seeking Information
1. Details and copy of duplicate DDA documents issued in this property.
2. Details and copy of documents issued and used for duplicate paper submitted and supported documents."Page 1 of 4
2. Having not received any response from CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.09.2021. The FAA order is not on record.
3. The PIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 27.09.2021 stating as under:
"This is with reference to your RTI no. 377 dated 04.08.2021 and First Appeal dated 10.09.2021. In this regard, it is intimated to you that main file is not traceable in our records. As and when the main file is traced, information sought by you will be provided to you as per provision of RTI Act 2005. Your RTI dated 04.08.2021 and First Appeal dated 10.09.2021 is accordingly disposed of."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent.
Respondent: Ms. Kamakshi Kumari, CPIO-cum-AD, attended the hearing in person.
5. The Appellant did not participate in the hearing.
6. The Respondent submitted that the main allotment physical file bearing No. 29(778)1987/NN/NP is not traceable, as per available record. However, as per scanned file data available in scanning record, duplicate DDA documents have neither been applied nor issued in this file.
7. A written submission has been received from Ms. Kamakshi Kumari, CPIO-cum-AD, vide letter dated 23.06.2025, a copy of which has been sent to the Appellant and the same has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:
"With reference to Notice of Hearing w.r.t File No. CIC/DDATY/A/2024/102754 dt. 05.06.2025 in the case of Sh. Man Mohan Chhabra fixed for hearing on 26.06.2025 at 11.05 A.M. at Room No. 313, it is to inform that the RTI of Sh. Man Mohan Chhabra was received in this office on 05.08.2021 which was replied by the then PIO vide Letter dt. 27.09.2021. (copy enclosed) Also, the RTI Appeal of Sh. Man Mohan Chhabra was duly replied by FAA/MIG- H on 19.03.2024. Now, a notice of CIC hearing is received in this office. In this Page 2 of 4 regard, it is informed that the main allotment physical file bearing No. 29(778)1987/NN/NP is not traceable, as per available record. However, as per scanned file data available in scanning record, duplicate DDA documents have neither been applied nor issued in this file."
Decision:
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of the records, observes that the initial reply provided by the then CPIO vide letter dated 27.09.2021 simply says that the file is not traceable and express it publicly which is unacceptable. Under the RTI Act, 2005, a public authority is required to properly maintain the records in a manner that allows for efficient retrieval of data. A custodian of record in a government office can't simply claim that a file is not traceable without taking any reasonable steps either to locate it or to fix responsibility on the erring official from whose possession the file went missing. In the instant case, apparently neither an inquiry was instituted in the incident of file going missing nor a FIR was lodged.
9. In todays hearing there is another case bearing Second Appeal file No. CIC/DDATY/A/2024/103659, which is also of exactly the same nature where file has gone missing and the Respondents unabashedly states so publicly and has not taken any action to either trace the file or cause an inquiry or lodge FIR till receipt of CIC hearing notice. It is noted that these files pertain to high value land allotment, handing over possession, transactions, other similar issues. It appears to be an accepted practice in Respondent Public authority where not only do the files go missing but are also declared publicly in reply to RTI Applications. It speaks volumes about the organisation.
10. This scenario is outrageous and calls for an immediate inquiry and therefore, in order to achieve the Preamble and Object of the RTI Act and by virtue of the powers of the Commission envisaged under Section 19 (8)
(a) read with Section 19 (8) (c) of the RTI Act, the Chief Vigilance Officer of the DDA is directed to investigate this matter by following due process of principles of natural justice and fix accountability on the erring official/officials from whose possession the relevant file got misplaced and take suitable and necessary action as per the law. He is also directed Page 3 of 4 to provide broad outcome of the averred inquiry to the Appellant within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Copy To:
Chief Vigilance Officer Delhi Development Authority, B- Block, 7th Floor, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110023 The FAA, Delhi Development Authority, Office of the Dy. Director (MIG) H, D Block, Vikas Sadan, New Delhi - 110023 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)