Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Sanjay Gupta vs Delhi State Industrial And ... on 21 August, 2019

                        Central Information Commission
  बाबागंगनाथमागग                           ,मुननरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                          नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

 नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/DSIDC/A/2018/158440

Shri Sanjay Gupta                                               ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                   VERSUS/बनाम

PIO/Manager (Re-establishment),                            ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondent
DSIDC, Patparganj, New Delhi
Through: Sh. S S Meena - Divisional Manager

Date of Hearing                         :    19.08.2019
Date of Decision                        :    21.08.2019
Information Commissioner                :    Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on                 :   26.02.2018
PIO replied on                           :   09.04.2018
First Appeal filed on                    :   07.06.2018
First Appellate Order on                 :   28.06.2018
2ndAppeal/complaint received on          :   25.09.2018

Information sought

and background of the case:

Appellant filed RTI application dated 26.02.2018 seeking information on 7 points, inter alia;

1. Provide information in yes or no, whether each one mentioned in the list enclosed was allotted plots.

2. Provide the Name of allottees running commercial activities.

3. Provide copy of the inspection report stating that commercial activities in residential building have been stopped.

4. Provide a copy of terms and conditions regarding sale, purchase and renting of the allotted plots. etc PIO/Dept. Manager(Restoration), vide letter dated 09.04.2018 provided point wise reply to the appellant.

Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 07.06.2018. FAA vide order dated 28.06.2018 directed the PIO to supply the correct information to the appellant in Hindi.

In compliance of the FAA order, PIO/Dept. Manager (Restoration), vide letter dated 24.07.2018 provided point wise reply to the appellant.

Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Both parties are present for hearing. Respondent has placed some submissions dated 14.08.2019 on record during the hearing and given a copy to the appellant.

Appellant states that he is aggrieved by the delay caused in providing the response by the then PIO - Sh. S S Meena. Respondent states that since complete information is available on the website, hence appellant had been informed accordingly, with no intent to delay or deny the supply of information. Respondent in fact offered to provide all necessary information, if and when the appellant visits their office.

Decision Upon perusal of records of the case and hearing averments of the parties, the Commission stipulates that the appellant shall visit the office of the respondent on 26.09.2019 at 11am and respondent agrees that complete information shall be provided to him. The respondent-Sh. S S Meena shall submit an action taken report in this regard before the Commission, by 01.10.2019, failing which the Registry shall suo motu initiate proceedings for non-compliance.

The appeal is disposed off with these directions.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्हा) Information Commissioner(सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 2 of 2