Central Information Commission
Govind Lal Arora vs Office Of The Additional Distt. ... on 28 September, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Baba Gang Nath Marg, Munirka,
New Delhi-110067
F. No.CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/121566
CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/113066
CIC/NDMCH/A/2018/113067
CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/181470
CIC/DPREL/A/2017/121809
Date of Hearing : 27.09.2018
Date of Decision : 27.09.2018
Appellant/Complainant : Shri Govind Lal Arora
Respondent : 1. PIO/O/o. Sub-Divisional
Magistrate-(Model Town)(Govt. of
NCT of Delhi)
Through: Sh. Shyam Prakash
Sh. Rakesh Kumar- Naib Tehsildar,
Alipur
2. PIO/O/o. the Chief Secretary
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
3. PIO/Addl. Dy. Commissioner-
(HQ), PIO, NDMC
4. PIO/Asstt. Commissioner/Karol
Bagh, NDMC
5. PIO/EE-(Bldg.)/Narela Zone,
NDMC
Through: Sh. A K Gupta
6.PIO/Addl. Public Prosecutor &
PIO, Directorate of Prosecution
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Through:- Sh. Balbir Singh
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
together for hearing and disposal.
Page 1 of 6
Case No. Filed on CPIO reply First appeal FAO
121566 29.01.2018 01.02.2018 22.02.2018 16.03.2018
113066 03.10.2017 - 01.12.2017 15.12.2017
113067 03.10.2017 12.10.2017 Nil - -
181470 17.08.2017 - 10.10.2017 31.10.2017
121809 25.11.2016 09.12.2016 02.01.2017 18.01.2017
Information soughtand background of the case:
CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/121566 Vide RTI application dated 29.01.2018, the appellant sought information regarding his complaint dated 01.12.14 wherein he had complained against the unauthorized construction on Khasra No. 144 and 145, Village Bhulaswa. In this regard, he sought the following information:-
1. Give the action taken report on his complaint to SDM (Model Town) on 01.12.2017.
2. Give the detail of report in which the staff of the Revenue visited in Khasra No. 144 & 145, Village Bhulaswa after the issue of Restrainment order dated 21.09.2016.
3. He want to inspect the file prepared as maintain in Para No. 1.
APIO(Model Town) vide letter dated 01.02.2018 stated as follows:-
1. Appellant's complaint was sent to S.D.M (M.T).
2. Copy of the order was sent to B.D.O, A.C.P and S.H.O. For further action the information can be sought from BDO.
3. Copy of order and copy of Restrainment is being enclosed.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed first appeal dated 22.02.2018. Shri Vivek Agarwal, ADM(North)FAA vide order dated 16.03.2018 upholding the reply of PIO.
Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Both parties are present for the hearing and their discussions reveal that while the Respondent had sent complete reply based on available information/ records, the appellant has not received the same and hence refutes the contentions of the Respondent.Page 2 of 6
Decision:
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commission hereby directs the Respondent to furnish complete reply including all relevant enclosures to be served upon the Appellant within a week of receipt of this order. Respondent must submit a Compliance Report within 10.10.2018, failing which appropriate action shall be initiated against him.
CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/113066 CIC/NDMCH/A/2018/113067 Vide RTI applications dated 03.10.2017, the appellant sought Action Taken Report on his complaint to the Chief Secretariat, Govt of NCT of Delhi on 18.08.2017 and inspect the concerned file prepared in this regard.
In regard to file No. CIC/NDMCH/A/2018/113067 APIO/HQ/North DMC vide letter dated 12.10.2017 stated as follows:-
Point No.1(a):- Sent to the office of Addl. Commissioner (Engg.) vide no 1124/P dated 24.08.2017 Point No. 2(b):- Sent to the office of Dy. Commissioner (Karol Bagh Zone) vide No. 1421/Addl. Commissioner (Engg) dated 25.08.2017.
For providing further action taken report and in view of above application is being transferred under section 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005 to PIO/Asstt. Commissioner, Karol Bagh Zone, North DMC.
Having not received any response with CPIO in response of file No. CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/113066, the appellant filed first appeal dated 01.12.2017. Shri Vivek Agarwal, ADM(North)FAA vide order dated 15.12.2017 stated as follows:-
"The PIO representative stated that the reply has not been given who assured that the reply/information will be provided within 15 days.PIO to provide information/reply to the appellant within 15 days from thedate of order as per RTI Act."
Feeling aggrieved over the non-compliance of FAO, the appellant approached the Commission.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Deliberations of both parties alongwith the records of the case reveal that the RTI application had been transferred to the PIO, Civil Lines Zone by the PIO, Narela Zone, since the information sought falls under the jurisdiction of PIO, Civil Lines Zone.Page 3 of 6
However, the intimation of today's hearing at the Commission has not been duly communicated to the PIO, Civil Lines Zone. Hence the requisite information is not found on record.
Decision:
Considering the facts of the case, the Commission hereby directs Sh. A K Gupta- AE/APIO, Narela Zone to obtain complete information from the PIO, Civil Lines Zone and furnish the same to the appellant within two weeks of receipt of this order. Sh. Gupta is further directed to submit a compliance report within 14.10.2018, before the Commission, failing which non compliance proceedings shall be initiated, in terms of law.
It is noted from perusal of the file number CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/113066 that the PIO/SDM(Alipur) has violated the directions of the FAA-ADM(North) in this case without sufficient cause. The PIO/SDM(Alipur) is thus directed to submit an explanation for non-compliance of the FAA's order dated 15.12.2017. the explanation from PIO/SDM(Alipur) should reach the Commission by or within 14.10.2018, failing which Non-compliance proceedings will be initiated by the Registry.
CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/181470 Vide RTI application dated 17.08.2017, the appellant sought information as under:-
1. Give the copy of Khasra Khatauni of the land situated at Kadi Pur Village No. 1325, 1326, 1327, 1328, 1329, 1330, 1331, 1332, 1333, 1334, 1335, 1338, 1340, 1370, 1345, 1348.
2. Give the current status of the aforesaid Khasra's
3. How many times demolition drive has been done by Department of Revenue after the order of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case title as Mohd.
--- Vs GNCTD on 05.03.2014. Give the detail.
4. He wants to inspect the record as stated in Para no. 3.
Having not received any response with CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal. Shri Vivek Agarwal, ADM(North)FAA vide order dated 15.12.2017 stated as follows:-
"PIO/SDM(AP) is directed to provide the reply/information to the appellant within 15 days from the date of order as per RTI Act."
Feeling aggrieved over the non-compliance of FAO, the appellant approached the Commission.
Page 4 of 6Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Both parties are present for hearing and reiterate their respective contentions during the hearing. On being questioned by the Commission about non - compliance of the FAO,the Respondent has now informed the Commission that the information sought by the appellant now vests in gram sabha land.
Decision:
The Commission finds the response of Naib Tehsildar from Alipur devoid of any material information. It is also noted that no cogent explanation for non- PIO/SDM(Alipur).
Under the circumstances, the Commission directs the PIO/SDM(Alipur) to furnish the appellant witha complete status report about the land situated at Kadi Pur Village including information aboutdemolition drive done by Department of Revenue pursuant to the order dated 05.03.2014 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The PIO/SDM(Alipur) must also submit an explanation for non-compliance of the FAA'sorder dated 15.12.2017. Both the aforementioned directions should be complied with and a Compliance report submitted before the Commission by or within 14.10.2018, failing which Non compliance proceedings shall be initiated forthwith by the Registry of this Commission.
CIC/DPREL/A/2017/121809 Vide RTI application dated 25.11.2016, the appellant sought information as under:-
1. Give the action taken report of his letter dated 29.08.2016 to the office at the Directorate of Prosecution (copy not enclosed).
2. He wants to inspect the concerned file.
Shri Balbir Singh, PIO, Addl. Public Prosecutor vide letter dated 09.12.2016 stated as follows:-
"In this regard, it is to informed that the desired information has been called from the concerned officer and as per the report of the Nodal Officer, an intimation regarding the status of your application has already been informed to appellant vide letter No. 2819/DOP/NO/2016 dated 17.10.2016 (copy enclosed for your ready reference).Page 5 of 6
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed first appeal.Shri Abdul Aleem, FAA vide order dated 18.01.2017 upholding the reply of PIO.
Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Both parties are present during the hearing and the appellant agreed that information has been received in this case.
Decision:
Since information has been received by appellant, there is no cause to adjudicate in this case.
The appeals are disposed of as such with the respective directions as above.
(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.
(R.P.Grover) Designated Officer Page 6 of 6