Central Information Commission
Mrram Prasad Bisimil vs Gnctd on 1 April, 2015
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, BWing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)
Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Information Commissioner
CIC/SA/A/2014/001476
CIC/SA/A/2014/001477
CIC/SA/A/2014/001478
Ramprasad Bismil v. SDM(Karawal Nagar)
Important Dates and time taken:
RTI: 1642014 Reply: 252014 Time: 17 days
FAA: 2352014 FAO: 2562014 Time: 32 days
SA: 1292014 Hearing:142015 Decision:142015
Result: Disposed of - Compliance to be reported.
Parties Present:
The appellant is present. The Public Authority is represented by Rakesh Sharma,
SDM. The appellant has filed the above three appeals against the same Public
Authority on the same subject and hence they are taken up together for hearing today.
FACTS:
CIC/SA/A/2014/001476 CIC/SA/A/2014/001477 CIC/SA/A/2014/001478
1. Appellant through his RTI application sought information with respect of a case of Mr Ramprasad pending before court under section 133 of CrPc, asking why his case file was not provided before the court after partition of the SDN court in several branches . PIO replied that no file with case no 1269 was received by their dept from SDM CIC/SA/A/2014/001476, 001477 & 001478 Page 1 Seemalpur. Being unsatisfied with PIO reply, the appellant made First Appeal. First Appellate Authority disposed off the appeal by stating that information pertains to SDM Seemalpur to whom separate appeal was already made by the appellant. Unsatisfied with FAA order, appellant approached the Commission through this present second appeal.
Proceedings Before the Commission:
CIC/SA/A/2014/001476 CIC/SA/A/2014/001477 CIC/SA/A/2014/001478
2. Both the parties made their submissions. The SDM(Karawal Nagar) who is present in the hearing submitted that section 133 CrPC deals with the dropping of the demolition proceedings and there will not be any separate file and once an order is issued under section 133 CrPC, the same will be going to Archives and no record is available in his office. Their office comes into picture only when there is a compliant of public nuisance regarding any property on which they will proceed under the said section. The appellant submitted that his shop was sealed by the respondent authority and it continues to be under seal even though the proceedings under 133 CrPc were taken by the respondent authority.
3. The respondent officer submitted that the matter pertains to SDM(Seelampur). He referred to a letter submitted to the Court in 2010 by AK Sharma, SDM(Seelampur) in a case between the appellant Vs. Rajesh Jain in which he had stated that the appellant's shop continues to be sealed and section 133 CrPc was not applicable to it.
4. Having heard the submissions from both the parties and having perused the record thoroughly, the Commission directs the PIO(HQ), NorthEast District to coordinate between SDM(Seelampur) and SDM(Karwal Nagar) and trace the file to provide the information sought by the appellant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, CIC/SA/A/2014/001476, 001477 & 001478 Page 2 failing which the Commission would be constrained to initiate the penalty proceedings against the PIO(HQ), PIO(Seelampur) and PIO (Karwal Nagar) under section 20 of the RTI Act.
5. The Commission orders accordingly.
(M.Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Babu Lal) Deputy Registrar
1. The PIO under the RTI Act, Govt of Delhi Sub Divisional Magistrate (Karwal Nagr), DC Office Complex, Nand Nagri, Delhi110094
2. The PIO under the RTI Act, Govt of Delhi Sub Divisional Magistrate (Seelampur), DC Office Complex, Nand Nagri, Delhi110094
3. The PIO under the RTI Act, Govt of Delhi Sub Divisional Magistrate (Headquarters), North East District DC Office Complex, Nand Nagri, Delhi110094
4. Shri Ramprasad Bismil S/0 Late Shri Siriya, 137, Gali No.01, Gaon: Chauhanpur, Delhi110094 CIC/SA/A/2014/001476, 001477 & 001478 Page 3 CIC/SA/A/2014/001476, 001477 & 001478 Page 4