Central Information Commission
Nasir Ahmad vs Delhi Electricity Regulatory ... on 25 June, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/DERCM/C/2023/117079
Nasir Ahmad ....निकायतकताग /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Delhi Electricity Regulatory
Commission, Vinayak
Bhawan, C - Block, Malviya
Nagar, Delhi .....प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.06.2024
Date of Decision : 24.06.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 27.05.2022
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 13.04.2023
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 27.05.2022 seeking the following information:
"मेने दिन ांक 7-5-2022 ओर 23-3-2022 को झूठे चोरी के बिल िी०एस०ई०एस० के िव र िन ने के ख़िल फ़ कम्प्लेंट स्पीड पोस्ट के िव र भेजी थी जजसकी क पी सांलग्न कर रह हू कृपय सूचन के अधिक र के तहत मुझे इस पर क्य क ययि ही हुई हे उसकी ज नक री Page 1 of 4 मोदहय कर ई ज ए ओर उससे सम्पिांधित जो भी डॉक्युमेंट आपके प स अवेलिल होिो भी दिए ज य।
आर०टी०आई० ऐक्ट 2005 के सि सेक्शन (३) ओर सेक्शन (६) के तहत आगर आपके ववभ ग से सम्पिांधित न हो तो सम्पिांधित ववभ ग में भेजने की कृप करे ।"
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Mr. Nasir Ahmad along with Mr. Sameer Arora, attended the hearing in person.
Respondent: Shri Chandra Kant Roy, Joint Secretary cum PIO, attended the hearing in person.
The Complainant stated that he has not received any reply qua the instant RTI Application from the Respondent.
The Respondent submitted that an adequate reply based on available records has been given by the CPIO vide letter dated 03.06.2022, wherein the Complainant has been informed as under:
"महोिय, यह पत्र आपके सूचन क अधिक र आवेिन दिन ांक 27.05.2022 के सिभय में है। आपके आवेिन के अांतगयत म ांगी गई सूचन ननम्पनवत है:-
इस सम्पिन्ि में आपको सूधचत ककय ज त है की आपके शशक यत पत्र दिन ांक 23.03.2022 और दिन ांक 07.05.2022 के सम्पिांधित ववषयो पर DERC द्व र , पत्र सांख्य F.7 (49) / DERC/Consumers/Gen.-B-88/2134 दिन ांक 28.03.2022 और पत्र सांख्य F.7(49)/DERC/Consumers/Gen.-B-92/336 दिन ांक 17.05.2022 के द्व र , जि ि दिय ज चूक है, जजसकी प्रनत अनुलग्रक- । के रूप में सांलग्न है।"
The contents of letter dated 28.03.2022 are as under:Page 2 of 4
"Refer to your letter dated 23.03.2022.
2. The complaint forwarded through your letter, ibid, has been perused. It is observed that the complaint is made in respect to Theft/Suspected Theft/ Unauthorized Use of Electricity. Such cases are dealt by special designated courts within whose jurisdiction such offence has been committed and DERC has no role to play in adjudicating such complaints. The DERC only deals with the petitions on violation of the provision of the Electricity Act, 2003 or the rules or regulations framed thereunder. It has no jurisdiction to entertain any individual consumer complaints."
The content of letter dated 17.05.2022 are as under:
"Sir/Madam, Refer to your email dated 07/5/2022
2. The complaint forwarded through your letter, ibid, has been perused. It is observed that the complaint is made in respect to Theft/Suspected Theft/ Unauthorized Use of Electricity. Such cases are dealt by special designated courts within whose jurisdiction such offence has been committed and DERC has no role to play in adjudicating such complaints. The DERC only deals with the petitions on violation of the provision of the Electricity Act, 2003 or the rules or regulations framed thereunder. It has, no jurisdiction to entertain any individual consumer complaints."
He further added that the averred reply dated 03.06.2022 has returned undelivered due to insufficient address as the Complainant has not mentioned his Gali number in his RTI Application which he has given in the instant Complaint. He further informed the Complainant regarding his representations that their office has no jurisdiction to adjudicate any individual's consumer complaints regarding theft and the Complainant has to approach the Assessment Officer of the respective discom and thereafter to approach a Special Court and the same has been made public under the head of Public Awareness Bulletin - 13: Three Tier Grievance Redressal Structure on their website.
A written submission has been received from Shri Chandra Kant Roy, Joint Secretary cum PIO, vide letter dated 14.06.2024, a copy of which has been served to the Complainant during the hearing and the same has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:
"Sir, Page 3 of 4 With reference to the above Notice for Hearing in the matter of Sh. Nasir Ahmed vs PIO, DERC and the subsequent hearing in the matter on 12.06.2024 and in compliance of directions of the Hon'ble Information Commissioner, Sh. Vinod Kumar Tewari, for uploading the response on the Hon'ble CIC's web link so provided; the facts of the matter are as given in the subsequent paragraphs.
2. Sh. Naseer Ahmed filed an undated RTI application which was received in DERC on 27.05.2022(Appendix A). Vide the said application the applicant sought to know the action taken on his complaints dated 07.05.2022 and 23.03.2022.
3. The PIO, DERC replied to the said RTI application vide his letter dated 03-06- 2024, wherein the replies sent to Sh. Naseer Ahmed in response to his complaints were attached (Appendix B).
4. However as seen from Sh. Naseer Ahmed's complaint to the Hon'ble CIC, he did not receive the reply of the PIO, DERC. On checking the Diary entries of the DERC's Despatch desk, it is noted that the PIO, DERC's letter dated 03.06.2022 which was sent by Speed Post (Regn. No. ED889554359IN) was returned to DERC by the postal department with the remark, street number is not given, incomplete address. Relevant extract from the despatcher's diary entry is given at Appendix C.
5. The above facts are submitted herewith for information please."
Decision Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Respondents, the Commission observes that the instant matter is a Complaint filed u/s 18 of the RTI Act, 2005 where the Commission is only required to ascertain if the information has been denied with a mala fide intent or due to an unreasonable cause which the Commission concludes in favor of the Respondent. Hence, no intervention of the Commission is required in the instant Complaint.
The Complaint is dismissed accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानित प्रनत) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)