Central Information Commission
Shyam Sundar Singh vs Gnctd on 11 September, 2020
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/DGHGG/A/2018/159434/GNCTD
Shri Shyam Sunder Singh, ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
The PIO, ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Dy. Director (JJR), DUSIB, JJR Branch,
New Delhi - 110002
The PIO,
DUSIB, South Zone,
Dakshin Puri, New Delhi - 110002
Date of Hearing : 09.09.2020
Date of Decision : 10.09.2020
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 06.06.2018
PIO replied on : 10.07.2018/ 17.09.2018
First Appeal filed on : 17.07.2018
First Appellate Order on : 31.08.2018
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 28.09.2018
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.06.2018 seeking information on following points relating to allotment of plots in Madangir, New Delhi to the displaced residents of Basti Bawdi, Defence Colony, New Delhi in 1965:
1. (A), (B) & (C) Provide name of the allottee, his father's name, allotment Receipt Number and date of allotment of Plot No. H-II/152, Madangir, New Delhi.
2. (A), (B) & (C) Provide name of the allottee, his father's name, allotment Receipt Number and date of allotment of Plot No. H-II/153, Madangir, New Delhi.Page 1 of 3
3. (A) Whether the allottee of Plot No. H-II/152, Madangir, New Delhi.was Kanhaiya Lal S/o Chhitar and whether the allotment was made in 1965?
(B) Whether the allottee of Plot No. H-II/153, Madangir, New Delhi was Ganga Ram S/o Kanhaiya Lal and whether the allotment was made in 1965?
4. Whether multiple plots were allotted to a single allottee?
The PIO/Dy. Director (JJR),Delhi furnished a reply to the appellant vide letter dated 10.07.2018 informing him that the allotment file of Plot No H-II-152/ 153, Madangir, New Delhi is not available in their office.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 17.07.2018. The FAA vide order dated 31.08.2018 directed the PIO/APIO to provide the information afresh w.r.t. Plot No. H-II/152, Plot No. 152, Madangir, a copy of Site register) if available in the Zonal office, as requested by the appellant during the appeal hearing, within seven days from receipt of the order.
In compliance of the FAA's order, the Asstt Director (South Zone) vide communication dated 17.09.2018 provided a copy of page of the site register containing the details regarding Plot No. H-II/152, Madangir, New Delhi.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A copy of the point wise reply sent by the PIO, JJR, DUSIB, Delhi to the Appellant dated 08.09.2020 is forwarded by the Respondent to the Commission.
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, audio hearings were scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
The Appellant participated in the hearing on being contacted on his telephone. While referring to the FAA's order dated 31.08.2018, the Appellant submitted that the same was not satisfactorily complied with by the CPIO since the copy of the site register document provided to him containing details of Plot No. H- II/152, Madangir, New Delhi cannot be considered as a valid legal document establishing the allotment of the said plot to the person mentioned therein. Arguing that the aforementioned plot was allotted in the name of his father, the Appellant stated that a matter pertaining to the ownership of the plot was sub- judice before the ADJ 601 Saket, New Delhi. He therefore requested that a reply Page 2 of 3 be given by the Respondent specifically mentioning that the plot was issued in the name of his father in the year 1965.
The Respondent is represented by Shri Rama Kant Sharma, Asst Dir and APIO through audio conference. While referring to the reply of the CPIO dated 10.07.2018; FAA's order dated 31.08.2018 and the reply given by the CPIO in compliance to the FAAs order dated 17.09.2018, the Respondent stated that being a very old matter pertaining to the year 1965, the allotment-related documents were not available. However, in compliance with the FAA's order a copy of the relevant portion of the site register prepared by the Engineering Department, DDA as available in their record, was provided to the Appellant, and a copy of which was enclosed with their written submission sent to the Commission dated 08.09.2020.
Decision Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission observed that as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, only such information which is held and available with the public authority can be provided. Therefore, taking into consideration the averments made during the hearing, the Commission instructs the Respondent to submit a detailed affidavit to the Commission under intimation to the Appellant on a non judicial stamp paper explaining the factual position regarding the availability of record and the documents provided to the Appellant in reference to Plot No H- II/152, Madangir, New Delhi, by 30.09.2020. No other intervention of the Commission is warranted in the matter.
With the above direction, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . िस हा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस ािपत ित) Ram Parkash Grover (राम काश ोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/ 011-26180514 Page 3 of 3