Central Information Commission
Shyam Sunder Kaushik vs Office Of The Additional Distt. ... on 19 April, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मनु नरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/ADDDM/A/2023/113996
Shyam Sunder Kaushik .....अपीलकर्ाग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
O/o District Magistrate (South),
M.B. Road, Saket,
New Delhi - 110068. ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 16-04-2024
Date of Decision : 18-04-2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 25-07-2022
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 20-10-2022
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 24-03-2023
Page 1 of 5
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 25-07-2022 seeking the following information:
"In writ petition (Civil) no. 10896/2019 and CM Appeal No. 45076/2019 in the High Court of Delhi in the matter of YOGESH SAROHA AND ORS. V/S UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. the Ld. Sub Divisional Magistrate (Saket) in his Counter- Affidavit dated 03.12.2019 (copy enclosed) has submitted that one appeal against the order dated 29.05.2007 passed by the Forest Settlement Officer/ADM (South) in the matter of Shankar Sahni & ors. V/S DCF (South) was filed in the court of the Appellate Authority u/s 17 of the Indian Forests Act, 1927 on 18.01.2010. Kindly supply me the following details with respect to the said appeal dated 18.01.2010:
1. Number of the said appeal dated 18.01.2010.
2. Name of the Appellate Authority.
3. Last date of hearing of the said appeal.
4. Date of Judgment in the said appeal, if any."
The PIO, O/O. SDM (Saket), GNCTD transferred the RTI Application to the Department of Forest & Wildlife, GNCTD on 29-08-2022 under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act for providing the information to the Appellant.
The PIO, Department of Forest & Wildlife, GNCTD forwarded the RTI Application to the DCF/PIO, South Forest Division, GNCTD on 13-09-2022 under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act for providing the information to the Appellant.
The SPIO, Department of Forest & Wildlife (South), GNCTD transferred the RTI Application to the PIO, O/O. SDM (Saket), GNCTD on 21-10-2022 under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act for providing the information to the Appellant.
Having not received any specific response from the PIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20-10-2022. The FAA's order is not on record.
Page 2 of 5Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Not present.
The Appellant while narrating the factual background stated that an order was passed by the Forest Settlement Officer/ADM on 29-05-2007 where it was noted that Khasra No. 32, 33 & 34 of Village Neb Sarai, New Delhi belongs to private bhumidars and said land cannot be said to be Government/Gram sabha land, for the purpose of constituting any forestland. It was also noted that the Khasra No. 32, 33 & 34 have been wrongly notified for creation of Reserve Forest. Hence, the direction was issued that the said lease Khasra No. 32, 33 and 34 be de-notified from the Ridge. Despite this order, the Forest Settlement Officer/ADM issued the impugned public notice dated 21-09-2019 advising alleged encroachers to vacate the said land which was challenged before the Hon'ble Delhi Court through the above-mentioned Writ Petition by his co- sharer Shri Yogesh Saroha. During the pendency of Writ Petition, the Ld. Sub Divisional Magistrate (Saket) in his Counter- Affidavit dated 03-12-2019 (copy enclosed) has submitted that one appeal against the order dated 29-05-2007 passed by the Forest Settlement Officer/ADM (South) in the matter of Shankar Sahni & Ors. v/s DCF (South) was filed in the court of the Appellate Authority u/s 17 of the Indian Forests Act, 1927 on 18.01.2010 which is pending adjudication. Therefore, the Appellant has sought the requested information; however, he is aggrieved by the fact that despite multiple transfer of his RTI application to the different PIOs back and forth, no information has been provided to him till date.
Respondent did not participate in the hearing, despite receipt of notice in advance.Page 3 of 5
Decision:
At the outset, the Commission upon a perusal of records adversely viewed the conduct of the PIO O/O District Magistrate (South), Saket, GNCTD, Delhi in having transferred the RTI Application back and forth amongst their offices without providing complete material information to the Appellant till date. This fact is evident from the record that the RTI Application received by the PIO, O/o. SPIO/SDM, GNCTD who on 29-08-2022, transferred the same to PIO, Department of Forests & Wildlife, I.P. Estate, GNCTD Under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act. The SPIO, of transferee office upon receipt of RTI Application under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act further forwarded it to the DCF/SPIO South Forest Division on 13-09-2022. Further, PIO, O/o South Forest Division, GNCTD sent the RTI Application back to the O/O SDM (Saket), GNCTD on 21-10-2022 by stating the RTI Application does not pertain to their office.
In addition to the above, the present PIO, O/O SDM (Saket), GNCTD New Delhi did not even take the pain to gather the requested information from their concerned branches, to facilitate relevant information to the Appellant nor they appeared during hearing despite prior intimation. Such casual conduct of the PIOs' causes unwarranted obstruction to the free flow of information to the information seeker under the RTI Act. This conduct is not appreciated.
Now that considerable time has elapsed, the Commission directs O/O District Magistrate (South), M.B. Road, Saket, New Delhi - 110068 to take all necessary steps to procure the available information as sought for in the RTI Application from the concerned record holder under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act and provide the same directly to the Appellant within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of these directions.
Notwithstanding the above, the Commission expresses severe displeasure on the absence of the Respondent without intimating any reasons for the same and sternly cautions them not to repeat the same in future so as to avoid attracting penal action under the RTI Act.Page 4 of 5
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार तििारी) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयक् ु ि) Dated-18-04-2024 Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणणर् सत्यापपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181827 Date Copy to:
First Appellate Authority, O/O ADM. Dist. South, Revenue Department, GNCTD, M.B. Road, Saket, New Delhi- 110068.Page 5 of 5
Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)