Central Information Commission
Rajendra Gupta vs East Delhi Municipal Corporation ... on 14 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 Nos.
CIC/EDMCD/A/2019/101049 CIC/EDMCD/A/2019/101050
CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/103759 CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/103761
CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/106840 CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/106841
CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/120586 CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/120587
Shri Rajendra Gupta ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO/East Delhi Municipal Corporation, ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondent
Shahdara South Zone, Delhi
Date of Decision : 14.07.2020
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Case Nos. RTI dated CPIO reply First FAA's Second
Appeal Order Appeal
dated dated filed on
101049 29.06.2018 24.07.2018 18.10.2018 26.10.2018 07.01.2019
101050 25.06.2018 27.07.2018 12.10.2018 26.10.2018 07.01.2019
103759 24.08.2018 07.09.2018 22.11.2018 29.11.2018 24.01.2019
103761 23.08.2018 07.09.2018 15.11.2018 29.11.2018 24.01.2019
106840 31.08.2018 25.09.2018 30.11.2018 11.12.2018 14.02.2019
106841 06.09.2018 29.10.2018 06.12.2018 21.12.2018 14.02.2019
120586 27.11.2018 30.01.2019 21.01.2019 30.01.2019 03.05.2019
120587 27.11.2018 07.01.2019 21.01.2019 01.02.2019 03.05.2019
(1) CIC/EDMCD/A/2019/101049
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 29.06.2018 seeking information about property no. B-429, Ganesh Nagar II, Shakarpur Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 12.04.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on Page 1 of 7 the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 24.07.2018 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.10.2018 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 26.10.2018 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.
(2) CIC/EDMCD/A/2019/101050 Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 25.06.2018 seeking information about property no. S-171, School Block, Shakarpur Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 10.04.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 25.06.2018 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.10.2018 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 26.10.2018 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.
(3) CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/103759 Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 24.08.2018 seeking information about property no. B-218, Gali No.2,West Vinod Nagar, Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 04.07.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 07.09.2018 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.11.2018 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 29.11.2018 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.Page 2 of 7
(4) CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/103761 Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 23.08.2018 seeking information about property no. B-11/691, Gali No.2, West Ganesh Nagar II, Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 02.07.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 07.09.2018 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.11.2018 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 29.11.2018 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.
(5) CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/106840 Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 31.08.2018 seeking information about property no. C-66 Gali No.5, Ganesh Nagar, Pandav Nagar Complex, Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 06.07.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 25.09.2018 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 30.11.2018 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 11.12.2018 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.
(6) CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/106841 Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 06.09.2018 seeking information about property no. US-294, Mandavali, Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 10.07.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 29.10.2018 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.Page 3 of 7
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.12.2018 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 21.12.2018 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.
(7) CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/120586 Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 27.11.2018 seeking information about property no. 9/1244, Jurab Mandi, Subhash Road, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 18.10.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 30.01.2019 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.01.2019 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 30.01.2019 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.
(8) CIC/EMCDS/A/2019/120587 Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 27.11.2018.2018 seeking information about property no. Adj. A-623 A/1 (Opposite A-622), Guru Ram Dass Nagar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi in connection with complaint filed on 12.04.2018 alleging illegal construction being carried out on the property and sought action taken on his complaint; details pertaining to orders issued/comments made in response to his complaint etc. The PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara South Zone, EDMC vide reply dated 07.01.2019 provided point-wise reply to the Appellant from records available.
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.01.2019 which was decided by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 01.02.2019 directing the PIO to provide modified information with action taken report within 15 days.
Decision:
1. The current situation arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic, has caused a significant disruption in the functioning of all establishments and businesses alike. In respect of the Commission, this translates into a mounting backlog of Appeals and Complaints. In such circumstances, there is a pressing need to identify cases such as the ones under adjudication for cumulative disposal in order to facilitate expedient disposal Page 4 of 7 of cases of genuine information seekers. In other words, this is where the aforementioned juxtaposition comes into play as the Commission seeks to strike a fine balance between the interests of genuine information seekers, while keeping the menace of frivolous and repetitive RTI Applicants under check.
2. The Appellant introduces himself as President of Abhi Tak Swabhiman Foundation and states that he is fighting against the menace of unauthorized construction and thus, keeping a vigil on every nook & corner of the National Capital. In all the present appeals, the Appellant has made representations thereby bringing the various instances of unauthorized construction to the knowledge of Deputy Commissioners of the respective Respondent Civic Authority. It is contended by the Appellant in his RTI Applications that the Respondent Civic bodies have failed to adhere to the law regulating construction of buildings in Delhi. He alleges that the officials entrusted with the duty to check unauthorized construction suo motu, are not acting on his specific complaints highlighting the same. The Appellant follows up each such representation by seeking an action taken report thereon, through an RTI Application and has approached this Commission on non-compliance of the directions of the FAA in each case.
Perusal of the records reveals that each of the Appeals are a mere replica of the other, except for the description of the property.
3. The above Appeals reveal that the Appellant has endeavoured to conduct a performance audit of EDMC, SDMC and North DMC and monitor the work of the Civic bodies in curbing the aforesaid menace of unauthorised construction as well as their other regulatory functions. The sheer volume of information sought and the repetitive nature of queries obviously leads to burdening of the public authority, who cannot deployed to only respond to such a litany of questions, neglecting other pressing duties. The Courts have on various instances remarked that the right to information is a cherished and formidable tool in the hands of a sensitive citizenry and this tool is meant to be used diligently. Though the legislation has not manifestly restricted the scope of usage of the Right to seek Information, but the same is inherent. The preamble and object of the RTI Act categorically state that the RTI Act is meant to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority.
4. The expression "practical regime" mentioned in the very preamble of this welfare legislation cannot be overlooked and must act as a guiding light while reckoning the extent of right to secure access to information. Any right cannot be unbounded or aimless nor can any right can be enjoyed without observing the duty and responsibility that comes with it. A right cannot be enforced to such an extent that the underlying object beneath its parent statute gets defeated. A right ought to be exercised with responsibility. Reckless exercise of the right will defeat the purpose of the Page 5 of 7 statute bestowing that right upon the individual. In the facts of the present Appeals, the act of lodging RTI applications en bloc is not in consonance with the object of the statute. On this aspect, it is pertinent to place reliance on the ratio expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr. Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Ors. [MANU/SC/0932/2011] in the following words:
37. ..... The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties.
The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of a public authorities prioritizing 'information furnishing', at the cost of their normal and regular duties.
5. While the Commission appreciates the concern exhibited by the Appellant for checking the menace of unauthorized construction, it finds the means adopted for the same to be avoidable. Filing a series of RTI applications and flooding the CPIOs with such queries is not in keeping with the spirit of the RTI Act. This Commission being creature of the RTI Act is duty bound to guard the ethos propounded by the statute. Presently, the Commission is discharging its adjudicatory work through 7 Benches and still the average waiting time before an Appellant is heard in Second Appeal is more than one year. As rightly said, justice delayed is justice denied. Timely dispensation of justice is the foremost essential of institutional justice. A single information seeker cannot usurp a collective right to the peril of all others having an identical right nor a person be allowed to make indiscriminate and unchecked Second Appeals so as to clog the system of adjudication itself to the detriment of others. It will lead to a criminal waste of time and resources of the Commission which has the obligation to cater to thousands of genuine information seekers facing resistance. Such information sought in bulk cannot be allowed to eclipse the right of other information seekers. The Registry is directed that any further appeal by the Appellant on similar grounds shall not be listed for hearing before this bench before December 2021.
6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances in the aforesaid cases, and the current situation wherein a number of offices of Delhi Government have been sealed owing to corona positive cases in the premises or public officials are assigned to tackle the pandemic, Covid-19 or even quarantined, holding structured hearings of the above cases will only delay the dissemination of the desired information. Hence, Commission finds it expedient that all the aforesaid Second Appeals be remanded to the concerned FAA, East Delhi Municipal Corporation, Delhi to ensure compliance of the FAA's order/s and the PIO/EE-B-II, Shahdara (South) Zone, EDMC is directed to submit an action taken report before the Commission by 31.12.2020, failing which appropriate legal action shall be initiated against the errant official.
Page 6 of 7In view of the above, all the Second Appeals are disposed off with the above directions.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के .नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner(सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाभित सत्याभित प्रभत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 7 of 7