Central Information Commission
Mr.Ashok Kapoor vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 14 December, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002676/16319
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002676
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kapoor,
BW-3C Shalimar Bagh,
Delhi.
Ph -9891440805.
Respondent : Mr. Suresh Chandra
Public Information Officer & SE
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
O/o The Executive Engineer (Building),
Karol Bagh Zone, DB Gupta Road,
Anand Parbat, New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 18/03/2011
PIO replied : 20/04/2011
First appeal filed on : Not Given
First Appellate Authority order : 03/06/2011
Second Appeal received on : 09/09/2011
Information sought: -
1. Whether all types of construction have been carried out as per MCD bye laws in the above standard.
2. Whether if there are any kinds of violations of bye laws in reference to the sanctioned plans in the area mentioned above. Proved the property no.
3. What is the status where in the construction has been carried out about 15 to 20 years back without any sanctioned plans by your office.
4. Whether there is any kind of deviation in reference to construction as per the original plans. Please provide the property no. accordingly in the said area.
5. Please provide the copy of survey of all the properties in reference to the violations of sanctioned plans with the property no.s as per the observations made by the chairman standing committee MCD in the said area.
6. Please provide the property no.s in the said area where in any notice of demolation and sealing of the properties have been issued wherein unauthorized construction has taken place as per the direction of the monitoring committee appointed by Hon'ble supreme court of India PIO response:-
1. No.
2. In this regard, it is informed that for easy access of information the details of all the building plans sanctioned since 1.1.2005 to 31.3.2011 and unauthorized construction is booked since 1.1.2001 to 31.1.2011 is available on MCD website i.e. www.mcdonline.gov.in However, if the applicant Page 1 of 2 wants, he may with prior intimation may also inspect the missal band registers in which all the unauthorized construction is booked are entered.
3. As mentioned in (2) above, the applicant may inspect the missal hand registers of the relevant period.
4. As informed in (2) above.
5. As informed in (2) above all the unauthorized constructions booked are entered in the missal band register, which can be inspected by the applicant on any working day.
6. The applicant with prior intimation may inspect the missal band registers, sealing registers and demolition registers as maintained in this office on any working day.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information was given by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Appellant has received the reply, but, he is not satisfied with the reply. APIO/EE(B), Clarified that information on record has been given to the RTI appellant. He further clarified that list of unauthorized construction/property nos. is available on the website. This list is pertaining to the properties. Which are booked for unauthorized construction? W.e.f. 1.1.2000 to 31.3.2011. Appellant further requested that the information available on website may be providing to him on the CD, for which he is reedy to pay the prescribed ....... APIO/ EE (B), is directed to provide a CD to the appellant with all the referred information recorded on it. After the appellant deposits the prescribed fee for the CD as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 within 10 days of the issue of these orders. The appeal is disposed off.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply and Order of FAA received by the Appellant.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Ashok Kapoor;
Respondent: Mr. Pushpender Kumar, AE(B) on behalf of Mr. Suresh Chandra, PIO & SE;
The FAA had passed an order asking for a CD of the website to be provided to the Appellant within 10 days on payment of the prescribed fee. It appears that no communication was sent to the Appellant informing him about fee to be paid. It may have been advisable if the FAA had indicated the fee in his order itself. However considering the delay that has occurred the Commission directs the PIO to provide the CD to the Appellant free of cost.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the CD free of cost to the Appellant before 30 December 2011.
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 14 December 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (IN) Page 2 of 2