Central Information Commission
Mr. Sube Singh vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 5 January, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC /SG/A/2008/00091/2172Adjunct-I
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2008/00091
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Sube Singh,
House No. 274, Bawana,
Delhi-110039.
Respondent : SDM & PIO,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Alipur, Narala Zone,
New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 31/01/2008
PIO replied : not replied.
First appeal filed on : 13/03/2008
First Appellate Authority order : 31/03/2008
Second Appeal filed on : 25/10/2008
The appellant had asked in RTI application for details and information of Khasra
Girdaqari in P4 & P5 form after inspecting his corps sown appellant wants information about
the action by the Hon'ble SDM office on his application, and Khasra no. 73/4 (4-16) and
Khasra No. 74/25 (4-16) Bawana (Revenue Estate). The appellant wants information of the
action taken on his applications and orders of the Hon'ble High Courts vide writ No.
14354/2005, by the C.O. office.
Detail of information required:-
1. The appellant wants information about the action taken by the Hon'ble SDM office on
his application.
2. Inspecting his crops sown in Khasra No. 73/4(4-16) and Khasra No. 74/25(4-16)
Bawana rakba.
3. The appellant wants information of the action taken on his application and orders of
the Hon'ble High Court vide writ No. 14354/2005. by the C.O. office. And give
information of the action taken on all the application listed.
4. Details of application diarized at C.O./Tehsildar Narela office and the corps sown at
that time.
The PIO replied.
Not replied.
The First Appellate Authority ordered.
"Appellant stated in the appeal that he has not received any reply from PIO/SDM
(Narela) till date. On perusal of records it reveals that indeed no reply has gone.
PIO/SDM(Narela) is directed to furnish suitable reply to the appellant within 15 working
days."
Relevant Facts that emerged during Hearing on 4 March 2009:
"The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Sube Singh
Respondent: Mr. Deepak Kumar on behalf Mr. Kunal PIO
The action taken must be given in detail to the appellant by the PIO. The PIO is warned to
ensure that a proper detailed report of action taken giving dates, names of officers with the
designations must be provided to the appellant. The respondent states that a decision has been
taken in the matter. A copy of the decision will also be provided to the appellant."
Commission's Decision of 4 March 2009:
"The appeal is allowed.
The complete information will be sent to the appellant before 15 March, 2009."
The PIO was also asked to give his written explanation for not supplying the information
within 30 days as mandated under the RTI Act 2005.
Facts leading to re-hearing/schedule:
The Commission subsequently had issued a direction dated 01/08/2009 to the PIO to provide the complete and correct information to the appellant before 20/08/2009. The appellant on receiving the information approached the Commission by it letter on 12/09/2009 stating that the information provided to him was incomplete and incorrect. Based on this communication the Commission issued a notice dated 07/10/2009 scheduling another hearing in the matter on 10/11/2009 to decide whether there has been non-compliance of the order of the Commission. Since the PIO did no appear before the Commission on that day another hearing was scheduled on 22/12/2009.
Relevant Facts that emerged during Hearing on 22 December 2009:
"The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Sube Singh Respondent: Mr. Deepak Kumar, APIO & Naib Tehsildar;
The Respondent has given certain information but the Appellant claims this is not complete. After discussing with both the sides it appears that an inspection of the records may serve the purpose better. The Appellant is willing to inspect the records. The PIO is directed to bring the following records to the Commission on 05 January 2010 at 10.00am to facilitate and inspection by the Appellant of these records relevant to the year 2005 onwards:
1- Patwari Rojnamcha .
2- Records of P-4, P-5 & P-5A in respect of the Khasra no. 73/11(4-16) &
74/25(4-60) village Bawana.
3- Any of the records relevant to the Khasra numbers mentioned above including
Khasra Khatauni."
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 05 January 2010: The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Sube Singh;
Respondent: Mr. Deepak Kumar, APIO & Naib Tehsildar;
The inspection has been done and photocopies of the records that the appellant wants has been given to him. The Appellant states that the records show that there are number of mistakes. For this he will have to agitate at some other forum. The PIO is directed to give the information in writing to the appellant that Sabji can be cultivated in Bagh Majraba.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 5 January 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)