Central Information Commission
Sanjay Dalal vs Ut Of Dadra And Nagar Haveli And Daman And ... on 3 September, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/DNHDU/C/2023/605082 & CIC/DNHDU/A/2023/631761
Sanjay Dalal ...Complainant/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Executive Engineer, Works Division - I,
Public Works Department, Multi Office
Complex, Moti Daman, Daman - 396220 .... तवाद गण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 27-03-2024
Date of Decision : 28-03-2024
Date of SCN Hearing : 23.07.2025
Date of SCN Decision : 02.09.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
1. CIC/DNHDU/C/2023/605082
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 09-11-2022
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 27-01-2023
Information sought:
The Complainant/Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09-11-2022 seeking the following information:Page 1 of 8
"I am an affected person under Notice No. 3/91/LND-ACQ/2020-21/2159 dated 09/05/2022 and as affected person; I am seeking following information with reference to "Acquisition of land for widening of road from Nani Daman Char Rasta to Circuit House, Nani Daman (Part 2)":
(1) Certified copy of proposal received to widen and develop road received from Daman Municipal Council (2) Certified copy of map of proposed acquisition (Hard copy) (3) Certified copy of proposed acquisition (Soft copy in AutoCAD) (4) "Road from Nani Daman Char Rasta to Circuit House, Nani Daman" is neither mentioned as MDR nor ODR in Official Gazette No. PWD/SE/DMN/1294 dated 24/08/1994; Major District Roads (MDRs) are of 25 Mts. Width and Other District Roads (ODRs) are of 15 Mts. Width and all other roads are 12 Amy's. width. This road is Municipal Road.
Give certified copy of Gazette Notification that specifies this road as 15 Mts. With its classification."
No First Appeal is available on record. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing: 27.03.2024 The following were present:-
Complainant: Present.
Respondent: Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, attended the hearing.
The Complainant submitted that the Respondent has not provided any reply qua the instant RTI Application within stipulated time frame as per the provisions of RTI Act. He further reiterated the contents of his RTI Application. He added that PWD has no authority for acquisition of the averred road as the same comes under Daman Municipal Corporation.
The Respondent submitted that the then CPIO Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, Executive Engineer in-charge, who has now retired from the service did not Page 2 of 8 provide any reply to the Complainant within stipulated time frame as per the provisions of RTI Act. He added that upon receiving the hearing notice from the Commission, he has provided the information regarding the gazette notification to the Complainant vide letter dated 11.03.2024. He further submitted that their office was only an executing agency, and the acquisition of the road was done by the Revenue Department of the concerned State Government.
A written submission has been received from Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, vide letter dated 27.03.2024, a copy of which has been sent to the Complainant/Appellant and the same has been taken on record.
2. CIC/DNHDU/A/2023/631761 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 09-11-2022 CPIO replied on : Not on record First appeal filed on : 18-12-2022
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 29-06-2023 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18-12-2022. The FAA order is not on record. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 27.03.2024:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present.
Respondent: Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, attended the hearing.
The Appellant submitted that the Respondent has not provided any reply qua the instant RTI Application within stipulated time frame as per the provisions of RTI Act. He further reiterated the contents of his RTI Application. He added that PWD has no authority for acquisition of the averred road as the same comes Page 3 of 8 under Daman Municipal Corporation. He further added that the First Appellate Authority at the relevant time was Sh. VC Warli, Superintendent Engineer, who has not adjudicated his First Appeal in the instant matter. He added that the reply provided by the Respondent on 11.03.2024 is incomplete.
The Respondent submitted that the then CPIO Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, Executive Engineer in-charge, who has now retired from the service, did not provide any reply to the Appellant within stipulated time frame as per the provisions of RTI Act. He added that upon receiving the hearing notice from the Commission, he has provided the information regarding the gazette notification to the Appellant vide letter dated 11.03.2024. He further submitted that their office was only an executing agency, and the acquisition of the road was done by the Revenue Department of the concerned State Government.
A written submission has been received from Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, vide letter dated 27.03.2024, a copy of which has been sent to the Complainant/Appellant and the same has been taken on record.
Order on 28.03.2024:
"In case file No. CIC/DNHDU/C/2023/605082:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that the instant matter is a complaint filed under Section 18 of the RTI Act. Hence, the only adjudication required to be made by the Commission is to determine if the information has been denied with a mala fide intention or unreasonable cause to the information seeker. The Commission finds that the then CPIO Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, Executive Engineer in-charge, has not provided any reply qua the instant RTI Application to the Complainant within stipulated time frame which also raises doubt that the denial of information is with a mala fide intent. Therefore, the Commission deems it expedient to direct the Registry of this Bench to issue Show Cause notice to the then CPIO Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, Executive Engineer In charge, for flouting the provisions of RTI Act. The then PIO shall explain in writing as to why action should not be initiated against him under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act for the foregoing reasons, written explanation of the then PIO should reach the Commission within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the then CPIO within one week of receipt of this order.Page 4 of 8
In case file No. CIC/DNHDU/A/2023/631761:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that no reply qua the instant RTI Application was provided by the then CPIO within stipulated time frame as per the provisions of the RTI Act. The Commission further observes that the reply provided by the present CPIO vide letter dated 11.03.2024 is not complete. During the hearing, it has also come to the notice of the Commission that Sh. VC Warli, Superintendent Engineer, who was the First Appellate Authority at the relevant time has not adjudicated the First Appeal in the instant matter. The Commission cautions the Respondent authority for their casual approach, and they shall avoid such lapses in future.
In view of the above, the Commission deems it fit to direct the present CPIO to re-examine the RTI application and provide a revised and complete reply to the Appellant within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. In the event Respondent is required to seek further assistance from any other office/officer for compliance with the above directions, the same shall be sought under Section 5(4) of RTI Act. The Commission further directs the present CPIO that no information shall be disclosed to the Appellant which is exempted from disclosure under the provisions of Section 8 and 9 of the RTI Act. The FAA shall ensure compliance of this order.
The Complaint and the Appeal are disposed of accordingly."
Relevant Facts emerged during Show-Cause proceedings held on 23.07.2025:
I. The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through VC.
Respondent: Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, the then CPIO (Retired) and Shri Nayan Patel, MTS (appeared without any authorisation letter from the present CPIO Shri Hitesh Shuka, EE), attended the hearing through VC.
II. The Complainant submitted that the Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, has not provided complete information to him even after his commitment to provide information on the remaining points of the RTI Application made in the previous hearing.Page 5 of 8
III. Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, the then CPIO (Retired), submitted that the Appellant has filed the instant RTI Application on 09.11.2023 which is after his retirement dated 31.08.2022 and therefore he was not having the charge of CPIO at the time of filing the instant RTI Application. He added that Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, has misled Bench in the previous hearing that the then CPIO has not provided the information to the Complainant.
IV. A written explanation to the SCN has been given by Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, the then CPIO (Retired), vide letter dated 23.07.2025, informing as under:
"Respected Sir, I, the undersigned, Shri Mukeshchandra Dhanji Gohil, aged 62 years, Retired Govt. servant, R/o H.No. 5-46/1, Casa Oleiro 'Dhanganga", Kumbharwada, Opp. Jalaram Temple, Diu-362520, do hereby humbly submit my explanation to the subject matter and reference cited above, as under:
1. That sir, I have attended hearing in the above matter, on VC today dated:
23/07/2025 at 12.55pm onwards from the NIC, Collectorate, Diu-362520 and presented my facts.
2. That sir, I was retired from the Govt. Service on superannuation on 31/08/2022, from the last office post of i/c Executive Engineer, WD-I, PWD, Daman.
3. That sir, I am enclosing herewith copies of my relieving order dated 27/08/2022, effecting relieved on dated 31/08/2022, issued by Chief Engineer, PWD, Daman, for your kind information.
4. That sir, in subject matter, the RTI application of Applicant is on dated:
09/11/2023, which is after my retirement dated: 31/08/2022.
5. That sir, given my retire status at the time of the RTI application, I am of the view that there is no question of taking action against me in this regard. I believe that the Notice may have been issued under an incorrect assumption about my status at the time of the alleged action.
Hence, on the facts stated above, I respectfully request your kind self to consider my explanation and please to withdraw the show cause notice. Thanking you sir, in anticipation." Decision in respect of Show-Cause proceedings:
V. Perusal of the documents submitted by the Noticee- Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, the then CPIO (Retired), reveals that the Appellant has filed the instant RTI Application on 09.11.2023 which is after his retirement dated 31.08.2022 and therefore he was not having the charge Page 6 of 8 of CPIO at the time of filing the instant RTI Application and in order to substantiate his statement, suitable explanation has been provided by him and the same have been taken on record. The Commission accepts the reply/explanation of the Noticee Shri Mukesh Chandra Gohil, the then CPIO (Retired), and SCN issued to him is hereby dropped.
VI. At this juncture, the Commission observes that Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, has misled Bench in the previous hearing that the then CPIO has not provided the information to the Complainant. During the hearing, it became clear from the submission of the then CPIO that he was neither the CPIO at the time of filing RTI Application nor the record holder of the relevant information and indeed Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, was the concerned CPIO at the relevant time. It is pertinent to mention that even after the lapse of more than two years of time, Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, has not provided the complete information to the Complainant.
VII. The Commission is anguished to note that Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, has sent an MTS of the rank even below to a LDC in the instant SCN hearing to plead the matter before the bench and that too without any authorization letter and without explaining any reason for his absence. He tried to mislead the Bench by transferring the onus of replying to the RTI Applications to the then CPIO who was not having the charge of the CPIO at the time of filing RTI Application and indeed he himself was the record holder of the information. This approach violates the letter and spirit of the RTI Act and accordingly the Commission expresses severe displeasure on the conduct of Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, and he is admonished for the same.
VIII. In view of the above, inaction on the part Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, is prima facie established. The act of the CPIO is deliberate, and mala fide is established on his part and therefore, the Commission finds it a fit case for imposition of penalty under provisions of Section 20 (1) of RTI Act. Hence, a penalty of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) is hereby imposed on Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO. This penalty amount shall be deducted from salary of Shri Hitesh Dhuka, Executive Engineer & CPIO, by the Public Authority and paid by way of demand draft drawn in favor of "PAO, CAT", Page 7 of 8 New Delhi, forward the demand drafts addressed to the Deputy Registrar (CR-II), email: [email protected] Room No. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110067. The aforesaid penalty amount should reach the Commission by 30.09.2025. The First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance with the directions and also send a copy of this order to the concerned Drawing & Disbursement Officer, under intimation to the Commission, for necessary action.
The matter stands disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
THE FAA, The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Multi Office Complex, Moti Daman, Daman - 396220 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)