Central Information Commission
Mr.Bishan Singh Solanki vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 22 July, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001620/8645
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001620
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Shri Bishan Singh Solanki
S/a late Jug Lal,
R/o 306A, Prince 1-lavelly,
Mohalla Chhotial, Viii. &
P.O.Palam, New Delhi-
110045.
Respondent : Public Information Officer &
Asst. Engineer(MIII) Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Office of Executive Engineer, Najafgarh Zone, New Delhi RTI application filed on : 06/10/2009 PIO replied : 04/11/2009 First appeal filed on : 07/12/2009 First Appellate Authority Ordered on : 09/03/2010 Second Appeal received on : 14/06/2010 Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Kindly inform whether the metalled road on the land admeasuring Biswas MCD follows layout plan falling in Khasra no. 67/Sfl, situated in the area of Sadh Nagar Palam Colony, at the time of preparation in between Gall No. 7 and & has been laid by MCD and kindly furnish the of estimate, execution & details of contractor. Kindly provide details of the tender/works order & the measurement of work at name of contractor. site instead of Khasra no.
2. Kindly provide details of the account from which the payment has been As above released to the contractor.
3. Kindly furnish document for the land admeasuring 5 biswas falling in Khasra As above no 67/5/2 situated in area of Sadh nagar Palam Colony, if yes then on what bases.
4. Kindly furnish document for the land admeasuring 5 biswas falling 'in Khasra As above no. 76/5/2. situated in the area of Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony in be(Gali No land 8 has been acquired by the MCD.
5. Furnish information regarding Award through which the said land has been As above acquired including the acquisition proceeding & the compensation and the names of parties to whom the compensation is given. Ground of First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by CPIO.
FAA Order L "The departmental officer Mr. R. S. Garg, AE is present on behalf of PIO SE(NGZ) during the course of appeal.
The appellant field an appeal on 07/12/2009 of RTI Application no. 334 dated 09/10/2009 vide which he stated that the requisite information has not been provide to him. PIO SE(NGZ) is directed to is directed to provide correct information as per questions within 10 days." Ground for Second Appeal:
Non compliance of FAA order by the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant : Shri Bishan Singh Solanki Respondent : Absent;
The appellant who is senior citizen of 82 years old and this appeal was completely unnecessary since the FAA had directed the PIO to provide the information to the appellant within 10 days. Thus the information should have beenprovdied to the appellant before 19/03/2010. Since this was not done the appellant had to take the trouble of filing appeal before the Commission and coming for a hearing. The Commission decides that the appellant must be compensated for havingn to file a second appeal and coming to the Commission for the hearing. The Commission awards a compensation of Rs.1000/- to the appellant for the loss and detriment suffered by him.
The Commission can see no reason for the PIO not having obeyed the order of the FAA.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information to the appellant before 10 August 2010.
He will also ensure that the cheque of Rs.1000/- as compensation is sent to the appellant before 30 August 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. He has further refused to obey the orders of his superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has clearly ordered the information to be given. It appears that the PIO's actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 18 August 2010 at 11.30am alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the information to the appellant. If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the Commission with him.
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 22 July 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(ARG)