Central Information Commission
Mr.Vivek Mahna vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 11 October, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002374/15126
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002374
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Vivek Mahana,
C/o Pushpanjali Farm Owners &
Residents Association,
A-8, Pushpanjali Farms,
Bijwasan, New Delhi-110061
.
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Municipal Corporation of Delhi O/o The Superintending Engineer, Nazafgarh Zone, Over Head Water Tank, Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 12/05/2011 PIO replied on 10/06/2011 First Appeal filed on : Not enclosed. First Appellate Authority order of : 04/08/2011 Second Appeal received on : 29/08/2011 Information Sought:
1. Latest list of farm houses given permission to hold commercial Wedding/Special functions in Pushpanjali Farms along the Dwarka Link Road from NSG Camp to BPCL Oil Depot with specific information as follows:
(i) What is the size of the plot?
(ii) How much is the parking area allocated inside the farm. A site plan may kindly be
provided.
(iii) Which farm houses are currently sealed for holding functions without permission or in violation of the MCd guidelines for holding wedding functions?
(iv) Number of social functions and fee collected by MCD at each farm.
The PIO Reply
1. List Attached.
(i) As Above.
(ii) As Above.
(iii) As Above.
(v) 488 number of social function have been organized in Farm houses and Rs. 48, 80200/-
revenue has been received against holding of marriage functions from 01/04/2010 to 31/03/2011.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Not Enclosed.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
"On perusal of record it is seen that the reply to the RTI of the appellant has been furnished by the APIO in which it is noticed that there is no reply in respect of second part of 1(iii) i.e. furnishing site plan of the farm houses. Also the PIO has not furnished information of social functions and fees collected individually against each farm house.
PIO is directed to furnish the said information to the appellant within 15 days."
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information had been given by the PIO. No reply has been given after the order of the First Appellate Authority.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a perusal of the papers it appears that despite the clear order from the FAA complete information has been provided. The FAA had clearly directed the PIO to furnish the reply to the Appellant within 15 days.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information as directed by the First Appellate Authority to the Appellant before 30 October 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. He has further refused to obey the orders of his superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has clearly ordered the information to be given.
It appears that the PIO's actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 04 November 2011 at 3.30pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the Commission with him. If no other responsible persons are brought by the persons asked to showcause hearing, it will be presumed that they are the responsible persons.
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 11 October 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (BK))