Central Information Commission
Mrdaya Ram Sori vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 15 March, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066
F. No.CIC/ YA/A/2015/000872
CIC/YA/A/2015/000880
CIC/YA/A/2015/001995
CIC/YA/A/2015/001996
CIC/YA/A/2015/001997
CIC/YA/A/2015/002704
Date of Hearing 15.03.2016
Date of Decision : 15.03.2016
Appellant/Complainant : Shri Daya Ram Sori
New Delhi
Respondent : Sh. S K Mittal, EE(M-IV),
Sh. Surinder Singh, AE, Sh. R L Goel, JE, Sh. H M Meena, AE (B), EE (B-II) SDMC West Zone, Rajori Garden, New Delhi Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad Since both the parties are same in the above mentioned appeals, these appeals are clubbed together for hearing and disposal to avoid multiplicity of the proceedings Case No. RTI filed CPIO replied First appeal FAA order CIC/YA/A/2015/000872 06.05.2014 04.07.2014 16.01.2015 16.02.2015 CIC/YA/A/2015/000880 12.02.2015 28.02.2015 09.03.2015 23.03.2015 CIC/YA/A/2015/001996 16.03.2015 24.04.2015 18.05.2015 01.06.2015 CIC/YA/A/2015/002704 24.06.2015 20.07.2015 03.08.2015 24.08.2015 CIC/YA/A/2015/001997 13.04.2015 08.05.2015 18.05.2015 23.06.2015 CIC/YA/A/2015/001995 18.05.2015 16.06.2015 24.06.2015 06.07.2015 CIC/ YA/A/2015/000872 The appellant vide RTI application dated 06.05.2014 sought the following information:
1. In the last 10 years, how many times did the MCD took the drive for removing of encroachment on public land in AG-I Block of Vikas Puri, New Delhi - 18.
2. The date when the last such drive was taken to remove the encroachment on public land in AG-I Block, Vikas Puri, New Delhi
3. Also sought to know if any protruded/extended construction like chajjas or almiras are constructed as encroachment on public land, if so what is the action plan PIO vide letter dated 04.07.2014 provided reply to the appellant. The FAA by order dated 16.02.2015 disposed of the appeal dated 16.01.2015. Not satisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant filed the present appeal before the Commission.
During the hearing the PIO (Maintenance) submitted that 10 years record of encroachments is not maintained in the office of the JE. He further added that minor encroachments are attended to and demolished on a regular basis, though the same are not recorded.
CIC/YA/A/2015/000880 The appellant vide RTI application dated 12.02.2015 sought copy of the complaint on the basis of which his flat was booked for demolition. CPIO vide his letter dated 28.02.2015 provided the response received from the APIO (Bldg)-II/West Zone informing the appellant that whenever any complaint is received, the same is forwarded to concerned field staff and no record is maintained by the Department. He further informed that copy of register, in which the complaints are entered, can be obtained after depositing necessary photocopy charges. The appellant filed an appeal dated 09.03.2015 which was disposed of summarily by the FAA vide his order dated 23.03.2015 with a direction to the PIO to provide copy of the complaint.
CIC/YA/A/2015/001995 The appellant sought information against 4 points concerning booking of unauthorised/illegal construction / encroachment etc. on public land. PIO vide letter dated 16.06.2015 provided the response received from the APIO (Bldg)-II/West Zone informing the appellant that 28 flats were booked where encroachment activities were under construction in AG-1 Block since 01.01.2010 till date. The PIO provided replies against the remaining points as well. The appellant filed an appeal on 24.06.2015 which was simply disposed of by the FAA's order dated 06.07.2015.
The PIO(M) has given a representation during the hearing stating that the RTI application is regarding Vikas Puri area and it does not fall within the jurisdiction of his office.
CIC/YA/A/2015/001996 The appellant vide his RTI application dated 16.03.2015 sought information 4 points regarding MCD policy/guidelines/bye-laws on the unauthorised/illegal construction/encroachment with respect to booking of such properties, prioritisation for demolition etc. The CPIO vide letter dated 24.04.2015 provided the response received from the APIO (Bldg)-II/West Zone in a point-wise manner. The FAA vide his order dated 01.06.2015 disposed of the FA dated 18.05.2015 directing the PIO to provide modified reply in respect of questions 3 and 4 within a period of 7 days to the appellant.
CIC/YA/A/2015/001997 The appellant sought information against 5 points about the number of flats having unauthorised/illegal construction, or having encroachment on public land, number of flats booked by MCD for the said violations and as to whether demolition drive is conducted for the above said violation in AG I Block, Vikas Puri, New Delhi. PIO vide letter dated 08.05.2015 furnished point wise information to the appellant, as received from the APIO (Bldg)-II/West Zone. FAA vide order dated 23.06.2015 directed the PIO that exact number of flats booked along with deviation may be provided.
CIC/YA/A/2015/002704 The appellant vide RTI application dated 24th June, 2015 sought information against 4 points relating to the 768 flats in AG-1 Block of Vikas Puri, enquiring as to how many flats were protected under the notification which protected unauthorised constructions done before Feb 2007, how many were not protected and whether Flat No. 122B was protected or not. The CPIO vide letter dated 20.07.2015 furnished point wise information to the appellant as received from the APIO (Bldg)-II/West Zone. Not satisfied with the response the appellant filed an appeal on 03.08.2015 which was disposed of vide order dated 24.08.2015 passed by the FAA.
Decision:
After hearing parties and perusal of record, the Commission opines as follows:
i. In case number CIC/ YA/A/2015/000872: The PIO is directed to furnish a reply clearly stating that since there was no major encroachment hence no record to that effect is available. The PIO shall also specify the submissions made by him during the hearing about minor encroachments though attended to and demolished on a regular basis, but no record maintained in this regard. This reply shall be furnished to the appellant within a week of receipt of this order, with a copy marked to the Commission.
ii. In case number CIC/ YA/A/2015/000880: The response provided by the PIO is evasive and fails to address the query of the Appellant. Even the FAA's response does little to remedy the situation. Commission directs that the Appellant shall be provided a clear and specific reply as to whether his flat was booked for demolition on the basis of some complaint, and if so, the position taken by the PIO on the issue of providing the information or not. In the event that the PIO decides not to provide a copy of the complaint, he must seek appropriate exemption as per the RTI Act. The PIO shall supply the reply to the appellant within a week of receipt of this order, with a copy marked to the Commission.
iii. In case number CIC/ YA/A/2015/001995: The PIO response already reflects that 28 under construction properties were booked in AG-1 Block since 01.01.2010 till June 2015. It is directed that the PIO shall furnish a clear response indicating the number of under- construction properties booked for demolition (i) on the basis of complaints and (ii) on the basis of routine site visit/inspection. This response from the PIO should be provided to the appellant within a week of receipt of this order, with a copy marked to the Commission.
iv. In case number CIC/ YA/A/2015/001996: The PIO is directed to provide the appellant with the rules governing the Priorities for the Demolition of Unauthorised Constructions, as per the Office Order dated 22.11.2000 issued by the MCD, Delhi (copy whereof has been placed on record) within a week of receipt of this order.
v. In case number CIC/ YA/A/2015/001997: The PIO is directed to provide a complete report of the current position in response to the queries of the appellant about the properties located i.e. the 768 flats in the block AG I Block, Vikas Puri, New Delhi. This reply should be provided within two weeks of the receipt of this order, with a copy marked to the Commission.
vi. In case number CIC/ YA/A/2015/002704: The PIO in this case is directed to provide clear information.
While passing the directions in the above cases, the Commission has noted in all of the above appeals that at the First Appellate stage, the orders passed by the FAA were devoid of any application of mind. All of these appeals could have been addressed and remedied at the first stage of appeal with exercise of basic prudence which the FAA has miserably failed to do. In order to ensure that appropriate remedial measures in this regard are taken, dedicated and competent officers should be placed in the position of First Appellate Authority. The Commission directs the Registry to send a copy of this order to the Commissioner, MCD, to go through the kind of orders passed by the First Appellate Authority in the above appeals and take suitable remedial measures.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(V.D.Nanivadekar) Designated Officer Copy to:-
Public Information Officer under RTI First Appellate Authority under RTI Executive Engineer-(Bldg.-II) / West Zone, Superintending Engineer-II / West Zone, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, Building Department, West Zone, West Zone, Zonal Office Building, Vishal Enclave, Rajouri Garden, Vishal Enclave, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110027. New Delhi-110027.
Public Information Officer under RTI First Appellate Authority under RTI Executive Engineer-(M-IV) / West Zone, Superintending Engineer-II / West Zone, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, South Delhi Municipal Corporation, West Zone, M. C. Primary School, West Zone, Zonal Office Building, B-Block, Moti Nagar, Vishal Enclave, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110027. Shri Daya Ram Sori AG-1/121-B, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018.