Central Information Commission
Shahid Qureshi vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation ... on 6 August, 2019
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/SDMCS/A/2017/176144
Shri Shahid Qureshi ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO/Deputy Director-
Veterinary Services / SZ,
South Delhi Municipal Corporation,
Veterinary Services Department,
South Zone, Aurobindo Marg,
Green Park, New Delhi-110016. ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondent
Through: Dr.Maninder P S Sodhi
Date of Hearing : 06.08.2019
Date of Decision : 06.08.2019
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 04.08.2017
PIO replied on : 09.09.2017& 25/09/2017
First Appeal filed on : 07.09.2017
First Appellate Order on : -
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 09.11.2017
Information soughtand background of the case:
The appellant filed an RTI application dated 04.08.2017, seeking information on the following four points pertaining to Meat Shop No 1, T-35A, Khirki Extension, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi - 110016 :-
(1) Please provide information about name of the licensee of the aforesaid Meat Shop.
(2) If meat license is issued, please intimate under what provisions of MCD/NDMC Act it is issued.
(3) If license is issued, please provide copy of all the documents which were produced by the applicant along with his application. Page 1 of 2 (4) If licence is issued, please provide a certified copy of the same.
PIO/Deputy director (VS), South Delhi Municipal Corporation vide letter dated 25.09.2017 forwarded point wise reply to the appellant. Being dissatisfied with the reply of the PIO, the appellant filed Ist appeal before the Appellate Authority on 09.11.2017.
FAA/Deputy Commissioner, South Zone vide letter dated 06.10.2017 scheduled the hearing for 17.10.2017. Subsequently FAA re-scheduled the hearing on 03.11.2017. However, no record of hearing of FA or order issued by the FAA is available on record.
Feeling aggrieved, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Both parties are present for hearing. Respondent has submitted a written submission dated 08.07.2019 which indicates that query raised by the appellant has been duly addressed by the respondent. Some of the information has been denied on account of being related to third party, which is upheld. It is also brought to the notice of the Commission that the First Appeal had been duly adjudicated by the FAA vide a speaking order dated 07.11.2017. Appellant is still not satisfied with the information provided to him and seek copies of documents as mentioned in points 3 and 4 of the RTI application.
Decision Upon perusal of records of the case and hearing averments of the parties, the Commission is convinced that information as can be disclosed under the RTI Act, has been provided by the respondent to the appellant. No further direction is required to be passed in this case. Respondent is even ready to provide inspection of the concerned file, but seeks exemption from furnishing copies of the documents as sought vide query number 3 and 4. The appellant is at liberty to visit the respondent and inspect the records, though no copy/ies of document/s needs to be given to him.
The appeal is disposed off without any directions.
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 2 of 2