Central Information Commission
Krishna Kumar Gupta vs Mcd on 29 October, 2019
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MCDND/A/2017/160966
Shri Krishna Kumar Gupta ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Asst. Commissioner/Civil Line ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondents
NDMC, Rajpur Road, Delhi-110054
Through: Smt. Anita Ved, Sh. Rajesh Mann
Date of Hearing : 30.05.2019
Date of Decision : 12.06.2019
Date of Show Cause hearing : 22.07.2019
Date of Decision : 22.07.2019
Date of Show Cause Hearing (II) : 16.09.2019
Date of Decision : 29.10.2019
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 27.03.2017
PIO replied on : Nil
First Appeal filed on : 20.06.2017
First Appellate Order on : Nil
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 20.08.2017
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed RTI application dated 27.03.2017, seeking information on six points, inter alia-:
1. What did your office do to the letters submitted by me? What is hindrance in payment of lump sum dues/balance?
2. Despite seeing the original receipt of my tehbazaari, why is the outstanding amount not being accounted for?
3. Am I being treated like a senior citizen in your office because I have written in my letter that I am a senior citizen and suffering from various diseases.
4. On the loss of record of my tehbazaari, what action was taken? Etc Page 1 of 4 Having not received any response from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 20.06.2017 which was not adjudicated therefore appellant filed Second Appeal in the Commission.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Submission dated 22.05.2019 has been received from the appellant reiterating facts of the case.
Both parties are present for hearing.
Respondent has furnished a reply dated 29.05.2019 during the course of hearing whereby it has been informed that in terms of the letter submitted by the appellant it is evident that he had submitted a copy of the rent receipt for the tehbazari stall (khokha) without the original allotment letter. As per the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act - 1957, on non payment of the rent for a continuous period of three years, the allotment of tehbazari stall stands cancelled. On being asked by the Commission, to explain the cause of delay in furnishing the response, the respondent states that she has recently taken charge of this post and on the basis of digital records, the instant reply was prepared.
The queries of the appellant arise out of his grievance regarding allotment of tehbazari stalls. PIO has provided information about the policy of cancellation of allotment, but the specific case of the appellant and why his allotment has been cancelled has not been answered. The respondent/PIO-Asstt. Commissioner, Smt. Anita Ved is hereby directed to provide complete point- wise accurate information, specifically about the case of the appellant. This revised reply should be provided by the PIO/respondent within two weeks of receipt of this order, marking a copy to this Commission which should reach by 03.07.2019.
Considering the complete non response by the respondent so far, the Commission directs the Registry of this Bench to issue Show Cause Notice on the then PIO - Sh. Ravinder Saini, to be served through the current PIO/AC- Smt. Anita Ved. The Noticee - Sh. Ravinder Saini shall submit a cogent explanation for not responding at all to the RTI Application dated 27.03.2017 and for the blatant violation of the RTI Act. The explanation which should reach the Commission atleast one week prior to the hearing.
Facts emerging during Show Cause hearing: 22.07.2019 Pursuant to the aforementioned order of the Commission, Show Cause Notice was issued on 17.06.2019 on Sh. Ravinder Saini, the then PIO/CLZ to be served through the current PIO/AC-Smt. Anita Ved. As is evident from the above decision dated 12.06.2019, the current PIO-Asstt. Commissioner, Smt. Anita Vedwas specifically directed by this Commission to provide complete point-wise accurate information, specifically about the case of the appellant, within a stipulated timeline of 03.07.2019, for marking a copy to this Commission.
Page 2 of 4Neither the Noticee Sh. Ravinder Saini has appeared nor submitted an explanation in response to the Show Cause Notice. It is further noted that Smt. Anita Ved, the current PIO, Asst. Commissioner who was present in the hearing on 30.05.2019 has not complied with the specific directions of this Commission.
Under the circumstances, the Commission hereby directs Registry of this Bench to issue SHOW CAUSE NOTICE/s on: i) the then PIO - Sh. Ravinder Saini and ii) Smt. Anita Ved, the current PIO, Asst. Commissioner, CLZ for causing deliberate obstruction in the flow of information, violation of the RTI Act and non-compliance of specific directions of the Commission. The Noticeesare granted a last and final opportunity to submit cogent explanation/s for non-adherence of the specific directions of the Commission, absence during hearing and for demonstrating utter disregard of the RTI Act as such. The explanation-s/reply to Show Cause Notice must reach the Commission at least one week prior to the hearing, failing which the case shall be decided ex parte.
Facts emerging during Show Cause Hearing: 16.09.2019 A written submission has been received from Former Asstt. Commissioner, Civil Lines Zone vide letter dated 06.09.2019 in this case. Smt Anita Ved has explained her stance vide reply dated 09.09.2019 satisfactorily and provided available information. She has stated that the Appellant had not submitted the requisite documents viz. the relevant receipts which would aid in tracing the documents, hence the desired information could not be furnished at the relevant point of time. She further stated that due to busy and varied work schedule and shortage of staff, the respondent was unable to furnish the information to the appellant on time. It is noted from the above that there were adequate reasons behind non-furnishing of information by the respondent, and it is not a case of deliberate concealment of facts by the respondent.
Sh. Ravinder Saini has also submitted a reply dated 06.09.2019 stating therein that the aforesaid RTI application was transferred to the concerned Licensing Inspector, being the deemed PIO in the matter. Shri Saini was transferred and repatriated to the parent department w.e.f 20.07.2017 and was unaware of the proceedings further proceedings in the matter. However, he did not explain the cause of inaction by him till 20.07.2017.
Decision of Show Cause: 29.10.2019 The Commission finds the explanations furnished by the Noticee No. 1 and 2 to be acceptable and feasible in as much as efforts were clearly made by both the Noticees, in their respective tenures to assist the appellant. The appellant has been unable to submit the necessary documents viz. the original receipt bearing the tehbazari site no. and actual period of allotment. As a result, the current PIO/Dy. Assessor/CLZ could not assist the appellant in addressing his queries. Thus, the non-furnishing of information appears to be a contributory negligence for which the Noticee/s solely cannot be faulted.
Page 3 of 4It is noticed that there is absence of malafide denial of information made out in this case, and hence the Commission directs that the penal proceedings initiated against the Noticee/s may be waived and they may be exonerated of the charges.
The case is thus closed and it is directed that the file be consigned to Record Room.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner(सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/011-26180514 Page 4 of 4