Ashok Kumar vs Office Of The Additional Distt. ... on 27 January, 2021

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Ashok Kumar vs Office Of The Additional Distt. ... on 27 January, 2021

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                              के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                             बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                          नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

 नितीय अपील सख्ं या / Second Appeal No.:    CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/164837

 ASHOK KUMAR                                             .....अपीलकर्ता/Appellant

                                    VERSUS/बनतम
 PIO,
 Sub-Divisional Magistrate-(Kapashera)
 (Government of NCT of Delhi), Kapashera,
 South-West District, Old Terminal Tax Building,
 Kapashera, New Delhi-110037.

 2. Public Information Officer under RTI
 Sub-Registrar-IX, O/o. the S.D.M.-(Kapashera)
 (Governmentof NCT of Delhi), Kapashera,
 South-West District, Old Terminal Tax Building,
 Kapashera, New Delhi-110037.
                                                         ...प्रतर्वतदीगण/Respondent

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

  RTI application filed on          :   17-07-2018
  CPIO replied on                   :   Nil
  First appeal filed on             :   23/22-08-2018
  First Appellate Authority order   :   11-09-2018
  Second Appeal dated               :   15-10-2018
  Date of Hearing                   :   27-01-2021
  Date of Decision                  :   27-01-2021


                    lwpuk vk;qDr                :        Jh हीरालाल सामररया
       INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :                     Shri Heeralal Samariya

 Information sought

The Appellant sought information through 12 points regarding Farm Houses. The desired information is as under:

1. How many Farmhouses are existing developed by Ansal Farm House Pvt.

Ltd. Please provide the list of Farm Houses with addresses.

Page 1 of 3

2. Whether the following Farm Houses were developed under the aegis of Ansal Farm House Pvt. Ltd. Or not?

i.) Ram Chandra Mission Ashram, Farm House No. 40-41, also known as Ansal Plaza, Salahapur Khera, New Delhi. ii.) Santa Yog Ashram, Farm No. 45, Palam Vihar, Road, Bijwasan, New Delhi.

iii.) Farm no. 48, Ansal Farm House, Bijwasan, New Delhi.

3. If yes to above, whether CLU were obtained by the Farm House owners prior to developing the above Farme Houses?

4. If yes, a copy of the CLU granted by the Revenue Department, Teshil- Kapshsera, New Delhi to the Farm House owners be forwarded to Ashok Kumar.

5. If No, whether any action was taken by the Revenue Department for unauthorized development of above Farm Houses? A copy of action taken against the owner of above farm houses may be forwarded to Ashok Kumar etc. Grounds for Second Appeal:

The PIO has not provided information to the Appellant. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present: -

Appellant: Not present Respondent: R K Gupta, Tehsildar & Rep of the PIO, Sub-Divisional Magistrate-(Kapashera) South-West District, Old Terminal Tax Building, Kapashera, New Delhi, present in person.

Rep. of the PIO submitted that relevant information sought pertains to SDMC and same was transferred to them on 19.01.2021 and Appellant was categorically informed about the same.

Decision:

Commission takes very strong exception over the conduct of the PIO in having not provided timely response to the Appellant. Thus, PIO is hereby directed to file a written explanation justifying the said conduct, failing which an action under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act will be initiated against him/her, if necessary. PIO is further directed to send copy of supporting documents on which he relies upon in his submission as well as copy of reply sent on the RTI Application, if any.

Page 2 of 3

CIC/ADDDM/A/2018/164837 PIO is directed to ensure that his written submission reaches the Commission within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which ex-parte action will be initiated against him.

Now, Commission after perusal of the case records observes that information sought in the instant RTI Application is extremely cumbersome in nature. Further, Appellant has sought interrogative queries seeking clarification of the PIO which is outside the purview of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. Yet, PIO in his wisdom has provided reply on 19.01.2018 and the same is deemed appropriate.

Also, Appellant has not availed the opportunity to appear before the Commission to plead his case/contest said PIO's submission. Commission upholds the submission of the PIO. No further action lies.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.




                                           Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया)
                                        Information Commissioner (सच
                                                                   ू ना     आयुक्त)

Authenticated true copy
(अभिप्रमाणित सत्यापित प्रतत)

Ram Parkash Grover (रतम प्रकतश ग्रोवर)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011-26180514




                                                                          Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission