Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Mr.Sanjay Agarwal vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 11 May, 2011

                         CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                             Club Building (Near Post Office)
                           Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                  Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                     Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000334/11904Adjunct
                                                                    Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000334
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                             :      Sh. Sanjay Aggarwal
                                             H.No. E-4/18, Krishna Nagar,
                                             Delhi-110051

Respondent                            :      Mr. Pushkar Sharma
                                             PIO & Superintendent Engineer-II
                                             Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
                                             South Zone, Zonal Office Building,
                                             IIIrd Floor, Karkardooma,
                                             Delhi-110092

RTI application filed on              :      19/08/2010
PIO replied                           :      not attached
First appeal filed on                 :      25/10/2010
First Appellate Authority order       :      29/11/2010
Second Appeal received on             :      28/01/2011

Information sought

by the appellant RTI is about illegal construction of Gandhi Nagar.

i) The appellant has asked regarding 50 illegal constructions in the areas of Gandhi Nagar, Vidhan Sabha. List attached.

a) Did police inform MCD in written in the relation of above mentioned illegal construction?

           b)        Did MCD register above construction?
           c)        Any illegal action is taken by MCD against these constructions? If yes, then what?
           d)        Is MCD took bribe for these construction?
           e)        Who is the responsible J.E. and beldar during the above illegal construction?
           f)        Did local J.E. can apart from the responsibility of these illegal constructions? If no,
                     then what action should take against them?
           g)        Can MCD checkout the secrets of these illegal constructions?
           h)        Is any legal action will be taken against these illegal constructions? If yes, then when
                     and what action will be taken.
           i)        Is these illegal construction are contempt of Delhi High Court and MCD Act?
           j)        Is MCD, take the information of Delhi Police as wrong?
           k)        Is these illegal constructions were held under pressure of Politicians?

Grounds of the First Appeal:
Reply was unsatisfactory.

Order of the FAA:

I have gone through the reply of the PIO. The PIO is directed to go through the record and provide specific and point wise reply to the appellant within a week.

Ground of the Second Appeal:

No information given after the order of the FAA.

Relevant Facts emerging during the hearing held on 07/04/2011:

The following were present Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Agarwal;

Respondent : Mr. J. P. Verma, EE(B) on behalf of Mr. Pushkar Sharma, PIO & SE-II;

"The Respondent states that a reply was sent to the Appellant on 21/10/2010 but has no evidence to show that this was dispatched. The Appellant states that he has not received this. The Appellant states that he has received the information on 04/04/2011 personally in which the information provided is false. The Appellant had given 15 properties and sought information on unauthorized construction on this. In a second query he had asked whether Delhi Police had informed MCD about this. The information provided to him was that no unauthorized construction on the records of MCD and that Delhi Police has not provided any information to MCD about the illegal construction. The Appellant has produced before the Commission a number of papers by which Delhi Police has informed MCD about the illegal and unauthorized construction going on. It appears that there is a collusion between MCD officials and those engaged in unauthorized construction because of which the information is delayed and false information is provided."

Decision dated 07/04/2011:

The Appeal was allowed.

"The Commission directs Mr. J. P. Verma to provide the correct information to the appellant before 25 April 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.

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 11 May 2011 at 11.00am 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."

Relevant facts emerging during the hearing on 11/05/2011: Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Agrawal;

Respondent: Mr. J.P. Verma, EE(B) and Mr. Iqbal Umar Khan, JE(B);

The Respondent Mr. J.P. Verma admits that the order of the FAA issued on 29/11/2010 to provide information within a week was not implemented. Information was provided only on 04/04/2011 in which it had been stated that no police complaints have been received about the unauthorized construction on the said properties. The Appellant has provided 65 complaints given by Police to MCD about the properties. It appears that MCD officers probably treat the police complaint about unauthorized/illegal constructions with complete contempt. Yet it is impossible to believe that not a single complaint is being taken seriously when given by the police.

The Commission directs the Additional Commissioner (Engineering) to inquire into this matter and send a report to the Commission and the Appellant on the following points: 1- Person responsible for giving the false information that no police complaints about the unauthorized/illegal construction on the said reports is on the record. 2- Whether the Police Complaints received about unauthorized/illegal construction is not being taken cognizance of by MCD officers.

Adjunct Decision:

The Commission directs the Additional Commissioner (Engineering) to send the report on the above two points to the Commission and the Appellant before 15 June 2011, after which the Commission will take further action.

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 May 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (MS) CC:

To, The Additional Commissioner (Engineering) Municipal Corporation of Delhi O/o The Additional Commissioner, Engineering Department (HQ), 6th Floor, Dr. SPM Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi.