Central Information Commission
Raman Gupta vs Ndmc on 15 July, 2020
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई ददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या/Second Appeal No. CIC/NDMCN/A/2018/172660
CIC/NDMCN/A/2018/172658
CIC/NDMCN/A/2019/100983
CIC/NDMCN/A/2019/100979
CIC/NDMCN/A/2019/101125
Shri Raman Gupta ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO/Dept. of Architecture and ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondents
Environs, NDMC, New Delhi.
PIO/NDMC (Law Dept.), Palika
Kendra, New Delhi.
PIO/NDMC, Palika Kendra,
New Delhi.
Through: Shri Vijay Kaushal, PIO/Dy. Chief
Architect; Shri Gurcharan Singh,
PIO/Dy. Chief Architect and Shri Chandra
Mohan, PIO/Law present through audio
conference
Date of Hearing : 14.07.2020
Date of Decision : 15.07.2020
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
together for hearing and disposal.
Case RTI Filed CPIO reply First appeal FAO Second
No. on Appeal
filed on
172660 02.07.2018 31.08.2018, 26.09.2018 Nil 07.12.2018
10.09.2018
172658 06.07.2018 18.09.2018 27.09.2018 25.10.2018 08.12.2018
100983 06.07.2018 18.09.2018 27.09.2018 25.10.2018 05.01.2019
100979 07.09.2018 05.11.2018 13.11.2018 Nil 01.01.2019
101125 06.09.2018 17.10.2018 21.11.2018 Nil 03.01.2019
Page 1 of 8
(1) CIC/NDMCN/A/2018/172660
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.07.2018 seeking information on
the following 9 points:
1. Definitions of following :-
a. Land use - Determining Authority
b. Purpose - Granted
c. Habitable - For office
d. Useable - For office
e. Partitions - Dimensions
f. False ceiling - Less Ht. allowed
g. Smoke - Extractors - Fire Act
h. Exhaust fans - Building Nature
2. (a) Status for available Discretions, Relaxations, Tolerances, Interpretations,
Applications, Concessions etc upon the mandatory adoptions,
executions/implementations.
Compliances etc. of the aforementioned at para: 1 here in above.
(b) Discriminatory privileges exercise under what circumstances.
3. Details, etc of commensurating facilities/amenities etc. (viz. drinking water-
connections; urinals; toilets; etc.) which are applicable to the NDMC
properties/premises in respect of the
Following usage etc:-
(i) Office,
(ii) Commercial,
(iii) Store/Godown,
(iv) Residence,
(v) Basement/Underground,
4.(a) Details of existing NDMC properties, structures, basements, existing etc. Which
have been constructed and built by NDMC in violations of aforementioned para 3
herein above of the statutory violations
(b) Nature of violations of each
(c) Disputes, controversies, Litigations, etc. For tolerating/allowing/permitting of such
structural deficiencies, violations, etc. in order to resolve and settle the a foresaid
disputes, etc. as per para 4(c) herein above.
5. Avoidable mandatory-losses having been thus accrued and continue to be accrued
up NDMC on account of Para 4 herein above and etc.
[Queries are verbatim]
PIO/DCA, NDMC vide letter dated 31.08.2018 informed the Appellant to refer to
MPD-2021 and UBBL-2016 for definitions on point nos. 1, 2 and 3 of the RTI
Application; on point nos. 4, 5, 6, 8 & 9 of the RTI Application it was stated that
queries are not specific, hence no such record/information is available with
them and on point no. 7 of the RTI Application, Appellant was conveyed that the
information pertains to audit department, NDMC.
PIO/DCA, NDMC vide letter dated 10.09.2018 informed the Appellant on point
no. 7 of the RTI Application as: "RTI is not clear about the specific period,
particular/respective audit issues of the department".
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, Appellant filed a First Appeal
dated 26.09.2018 which was not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority.
Therefore, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second
Appeal.
Page 2 of 8
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
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.
Shri R.P. Jain participated in the hearing and represented the Appellant on being contacted on his telephone. He stated that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the Respondent pubic authority. He further stated that the First Appeal has not been adjudicated till date and requested the Commission to facilitate a personal hearing with the First Appellate Authority.
Respondent is represented by Shri Vijay Kaushal, PIO/DCA-Building Plant through audio conference. He submitted that information has been provided to the Appellant as available in their records. He further submitted that he will abide by the order of the Commission, if any in the matter.
Respondent submitted that Appellant was called for the First Appeal hearing, but he did not attend.
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during hearing, Commission observes that the First Appeal has not been adjudicated till date and given that the Appellant has also requested for a personal hearing before the First Appellate Authority, it is deemed expedient that the instant matter be remanded to Shri Rajeev Sood, FAA/Chief Architect, Room no. 1201, 12th Floor, Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg, Delhi to adjudicate the First Appeal, hear both the parties (since the Appellant has been hospitalized, he will be represented by Shri R.P. Jain upon submission of an authorization letter) and decide the matter on merits with a reasoned, speaking order by 31.08.2020. A compliance report from the office of the FAA must reach the Commission within a week thereafter.
(2) CIC/NDMCN/A/2018/172658 (3) CIC/NDMCN/A/2019/100983 The Appellant filed two RTI applications dated 06.07.2018 seeking information on the following 5 points:
1. Circumstances, Procedures, Criterion, Circumstances, Rules, Guidelines, etc. under which the Estate Officer - quasi/judicial authority is allowed to sit upon his own judgment.
2. Legal implications, consequences, etc. for not following, adhering adopting, etc. the directions and orders vide judgments of Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi, by NDMC.
a. Time- Period for Compliance.
b. Obligations, responsibilities, liabilities, etc. upon failures of NDMC to avoid Contempt proceedings, etc. c. Stipulated time period prescribed for ensuring of early-compliances, etc.
3. Status of NDMC not making self use of its properties/premises in event of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi invokes injunction preventing NDMC from granting of Third Party allotment of premises.
4. Reasons for NDMC (Govt. Body) not to incorporate have Arbitrations Clause in its License Deed despite being constitutionally undemocratic.
Page 3 of 85. Rationale/Basic to consider the case/matter on record being sub-judice.
[Queries are verbatim] PIO/Law Dept. (NDMC) vide letter dated 18.09.2018 informed the Appellant that the information sought does not fall within the purview of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 27.09.2018. FAA vide order dated 25.10.2018 upheld the reply of the PIO.
Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
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.
Shri R.P. Jain participated in the hearing and represented the Appellant on being contacted on his telephone. He stated that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the Respondent public authority.
Respondent is represented by Shri Chandra Mohan, PIO/Law through audio conference. He submitted that the information sought in the instant RTI Application is outside the purview of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and the same has been conveyed to the Appellant vide letter dated 18.09.2018.
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during hearing, Commission observes that the information sought in the instant RTI Application is in the form of seeking clarification/interpretation of the CPIO, which is outside the purview of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Hence, Commission upholds the reply of the PIO.
However, Commission also observes that the reply to the instant RTI Application was not provided within the stipulated time-frame as specified in the RTI Act, hence the PIO is warned to be more careful in future while handling matters pertaining to the RTI Act.Page 4 of 8
(4) CIC/NDMCN/A/2019/100979 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.09.2018 seeking information on the following 4 points:
1. Please clarify/explain regarding an "Out-of-Court Amicable-Settlement"
reso1ved/decided by the NDMC (public-body); and is also furnished by the NDMC to the Licensee under: Right to Information ACT, 2005 is construed to be:-
a. Internal-Meeting; and/or b. Privileged-Communication.
c. The Role and scope of: the "Committee on Privileges", applicable thereupon.
2. The relevant and specific Policy, Procedures, Punitive-Measures, Rules, etc. applicable for the "injudicious-functioning", "ir-regularities", procedural-lapses, beyond jurisdiction, etc. and in event of an Estate-Officer (NDMC): a „semi-quasi judicial-authority‟ knowingly, deliberately, maliciously and adamantly "sits on his own-judgment" under the P.P. ACT, 1971.
3. The "fate" of the said Proceedings, Eviction-Orders, etc. passed by such an Estate-
Officer in NDMC, duly appointed by the Administrative-Ministry (i.e. Ministry for Home-Affairs, Govt. of India).
4. The details, etc. of the Action Taken Report (ATR) for intently avoiding/scuttling upon the specific Show Cause Explanations - Notices - Reports - etc. categorically issued to the NDMC by the concerned Under-Secy. (Letter no : ________ dated :
29.06.2006 bears testimony).
[Queries are verbatim] PIO/Director (DP), M/o Home Affairs, vide letter dated 09.10.2018 transferred the RTI application to NDMC.
PIO/DCA (NDMC), vide letter dated 05.11.2018 informed the Appellant that his application was referred to the EE (BP) and the reply is as under:-
"The matter does not pertain to Building Plan Section of Dept. of Architecture and Environs, NDMC".
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.11.2018 which was not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
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.
Shri R.P. Jain participated in the hearing and represented the Appellant on being contacted on his telephone. He stated that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the Respondent public authority. He further stated that the Respondent is not following the provisions of the NDMC Act, 1994, Building Bye-Laws and Rules, 1983 and Delhi Fire Prevention and Safety Act, 1983 which is in violation of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.Page 5 of 8
Respondent is represented by Shri Gurcharan Singh, PIO/DCA through audio conference. He submitted that the Appellant was informed on 05.11.2018 that the information sought does not pertain to their Department. He further submitted that issuance of licenses are being done at the behest of the State Government.
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during hearing, Commission observes that the instant RTI Application was filed with M/o. Home Affairs which was transferred to RTI Cell of NDMC, Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg, New Delhi vide letter dated 09.11.2018. Since the Commission is not in a position to determine as to which Department the information sought in the instant RTI Application pertains to, it is difficult to adjudicate. Hence, it is deemed expedient that the instant matter be remanded to Shri Rajeev Sood, FAA/Chief Architect, Room no. 1201, 12th Floor, Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg, Delhi to adjudicate the First Appeal, hear both the parties (since the Appellant has been hospitalized, he will be represented by Shri R.P. Jain upon submission of an authorization letter) and decide the matter on merits with a reasoned, speaking order by 31.08.2020. A compliance report from the office of the FAA must reach the Commission within a week thereafter.
(5) CIC/NDMCN/A/2019/101125 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.09.2018 seeking information on the following 7 points:
1. (a). Please clarify upon the interpretations of terminology in respect of: Intention -
proposal - approval - decision for cancellation/ „withdrawl‟ of Licence under the P.P. ACT,1971 by the Chairperson, NDMC.
(b). The Remedies, etc. available against its mis-interpretations besides quashing of the P.P. ACT proceedings.
2. (a). The Powers, Authorities, etc. and the circumstances, conditions, etc. under which the Chairperson, NDMC can over-rule, prevail, supercede and decide against the specific „legal-opinion‟ obtained from the Law-Deptt. (NDMC) qua „Contempts‟ of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi judgments, to proceed for cancellation/revocation/withdrawl of Licence; and to subsequently (i.e. after initiating of the P.P. ACT-proceedings) repeat for the same-withdrawl once-again.
(b). Fate of the proceedings, etc. initiated and undertaken under the P.P.ACT without serving of the mandatory Final-Notice by the NDMC to the Licensee.
(c). The Legal Consequences of the Eviction-Proceedings, etc. under the P.P. ACT are initiated earlier and service of the mandatory Final Notice is admittedly/served subsequently.
3. Please apprise with the "Remedial-Measures", etc. available to the aggrieved- Licensees, against the NDMC as well as the individual wrong-doers.
4. Please point-out the relevant provisions, clauses, "sections", rules, etc. specifically- available to the Licensees under the P.P. ACT and the NDMC ACT.
5. The specified "Time-Period" within which the reliefs, etc. are ensure/ointed and made available upon sufferings, etc. of the Licensees.
Page 6 of 86. (a). The effective-steps which are stipulated to be initiated and undertaken under the P.P. ACT, to prevent/stop the NDMC from such similar-repetitions in future.
(b). Please furnish the Role and Power of the State-Exchequer.
7. The prescribed procedures, rules, provisions, etc. to entertain upon the „Contemptuous-Conduct‟ of public-servants under the garb of the P.P. ACT/NDMC ACT.
[Queries are verbatim] PIO/Director (DP), M/o Home Affairs, vide letter dated 09.10.2018 transferred the RTI application to NDMC.
PIO/DCA (NDMC), vide letter dated 17.10.2018 informed the Appellant as:
"...that the queries to be sought cannot be furnished on the same lines as asked for as the same do not pertain to this department."
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.11.2018 which was not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
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.
Shri R.P. Jain participated in the hearing and represented the Appellant on being contacted on his telephone. He stated that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the Respondent public authority. He further stated that the instant RTI Application has not been forwarded to the concerned PIO.
Respondent is represented by Shri Gurcharan Singh, PIO/DCA through audio conference. He submitted that the Appellant was informed on 17.10.2018 that the information sought does not pertain to their Department. Upon being asked, he submitted that he is not certain as to which Department in the State Government the information sought pertains to.
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during hearing, Commission observes that the instant RTI Application was filed with M/o. Home Affairs which was transferred to RTI Cell of NDMC, Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg, New Delhi vide letter dated 09.11.2018. Commission further observes that the Respondent has not forwarded the instant RTI Application to the concerned Department of the State Government till date.
In view of such an anomaly, Commission directs the PIO to ascertain as to which Department of the State Government the information sought in the instant RTI Application pertains to and forward the same to the concerned PIO before 14.08.2020. A compliance report to this effect shall be submitted by the PIO within one week thereafter, failing which action will be initiated against him as per the provisions of the RTI Act.Page 7 of 8
With the aforesaid observations and directions, all the five Second Appeals are disposed off.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/ 011-26180514 Page 8 of 8