Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Central Information Commission

Mr.Virender Pal Gupta vs Dtc, Gnct Delhi on 13 October, 2010

                        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                            Club Building (Near Post Office)
                          Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                 Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                             Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002404/9768
                                                                    Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002404

Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal

Appellant                            :      Mr. Virender Pal Gupta
                                            MR-19, 22
                                            Vijay Nagar, Bawana
                                            Delhi-39

Respondent                           :      Mr. V. D. Sharma

Deemed PIO & Enforcement Officer Government o NCT of Delhi Transport Department 5/9 Under Hill Road Delhi-110054 RTI application filed on : 19/04/2010 PIO replied : 03/05/2010 First appeal filed on : 14/05/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 08/06/2010 Second Appeal received on : 07/08/2010 Information Sought:

1. From date 15/08/2008 to 31/03/2010 how many chalan was under the department. What were the names and address of those who gave the complaints and what are the record number.
2. How many number of pollution check were present with the numbers of auto and drivers from date 15/08/2008 to 31/03/2010.
3. According to the Act 66/92 how many number of autos were seized.
4. Provide the full names with address of the autos which had been seized..
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)
1. There were 540 chalan.
2. There were 19582 numbers.
3. No chalan could be illegally registered.
4. The information about the autos could be provided from the auto department of Burari.

Grounds for the First Appeal:

Unsatisfactory reply of the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
It was ordered to provide the information accurately and completely.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete reply of the PIO. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present Appellant: Mr. Virender Pal Gupta Respondent: Mr. V. D. Sharma, Mr. M.P. Yadav and Mr. I. P. Singh the Deemed PIOs & Enforcement Officers;
The appellant states that he had received the information and the CD containing Data which was not opening. He states that he has received another CD and is satisfied with the information.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 13 October 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AM)