Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Central Information Commission

Mr.Ramesh Sharma vs Ministry Of Urban Development on 20 September, 2011

                                  1


              Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama 
                     Place, New Delhi­110066
     Telefax:011­26180532 & 011­26107254 website­cic.gov.in

              Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000436

 Appellant /Complainant       :       Shri Ramesh Sharma, 
Delhi      
Public Authority              :    DDA, New Delhi 
                              (Shri D.K. Gupta, Dir.
(Housing).II) 

Date of Hearing               :       20 September 2011  
  
Date of Decision              :       20 September 2011 
      
Facts:­ 

1. Shri   Ramesh   Sharma   submitted   RTI   application  dated  11  February  2010  before  the  CPIO,  , office  of  Director   (Housing)   -   II,   DDA,   New   Delhi   to   seek  information through four points pertaining to his own  flat - enclosed herewith as Annexure A.

2. Vide   CPIO   order   dated   23   March   2010   the   RTI  application was forwarded to the office of the Chief  Engineer,   Rohini   Zone,   DDA   as   they   were   the   holders  of information with the request that the information  be sent directly to the applicant.

3. Appellant   preferred   appeal   dated   10   March   2010  before the first appellate authority.

4. Matter was decided vide FAA order dated 21 April  2010 directed the CPIO, Deputy Director (LIG) - H to  provide   the   requisite   information   to   the   appellant  without   any   further   loss   of   time   and   the   appellant  was directed to visit his office on 30 April 2010 at  11   AM   in   case   he   did   not   receive   any   satisfactory  information from CPIO.

5. Appellant   preferred   second   appeal   before   the  Commission. 

6. Matter   was   heard   today.   Both   parties   were  present   as   above   in   person   and   made   submissions. 

Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000436 2 Respondent   stated   that   information   was   provided   to  the appellant only on receipt of the first appeal as  they had not received the RTI application. Appellant  countered   by   showing   proof   of   receipt   of   the   RTI  application by the DDA to the Commission. Furthermore  appellant   stated   that   he   was   called   by   the   first  appellate authority to visit his office by this order  dated  21  April  2010 in  response  to  his first  appeal  but when he went there, he was told by the FAA that  he   was   not   holder   of   information.   Appellant  complained   that   this   had   caused   great   inconvenience  and   harassment   particularly   since   he   was   physically  challenged and had to put in special effort to attend  the   meeting   with   the   first   appellate   authority.  Appellant   also   stated   that   to   date   he   had   not  received   any   information   whatsoever   from   the   CPIO,  office   of   the   Chief   engineer,   Rohini.   Respondent  submitted   that   vide   their   letter   dated   14   September  2011, a copy of the CIC's notice of hearing today was  sent   to   the   office   of   the   Chief   engineer   (Rohini)  however no one from this office has appeared today in  spite   of   a   reminder   telephone   call   from   the  respondent.

Decision notice

7. Through this order notice is issued to the CPIO,  office of the Chief engineer (Rohini), DDA New Delhi to  show cause why penalty should not be imposed upon him  for not having provided information to the appellant as  per   the   provisions   of   the   RTI   act   and   also   why  compensation should not be awarded to the appellant for  the   undue   harassment   caused   to   him   due   to   the   non­ furnishing of information . Accordingly opportunity of  personal   hearing   is   given   to   him   and   he   directed   to  appear before the Commission on 29.11.2011 at 12.30 PM.  Respondent is also directed to provide information as  sought by the appellant in his RTI application within  one week of receipt of the order. Appellant has drawn  the   attention   of   the   Commission   to   notice   under  section   30   (1)   and   under   section   31   (1)   of   the   DDA  Act,   1957,   dated   4   May   2011   issued   to   him   by   the  Assistant Engineer (Rohini) Zone, Housing Enforcement  Branch   vide   which   Appellant   has   been   asked   to   show  Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000436 3 cause   why   fixed   fibre   sheet   in   front   of   balcony  should not be demolished. According to the averments  of the appellant this notice has been sent to him on  account   of   his   preferring   the   RTI   application   and  that   such   temporary   fibre   sheets   have   been   fixed   by  many   others.   Accordingly   the   CPIO   will   also   bring  before   the Commission  information  regarding  how many  others in the same area had been issued such notices  along with copies of the notices issued. 

8. Appellant can appear in person or will be heard  via audio conferencing.

(Smt. Deepak Sandhu) Information Commissioner (DS) Authenticated true copy:

(T. K. Mohapatra) Under Secretary & Dy. Registrar Tel. No. 011­26105027 Copy to:­
1. Shri Ramesh Sharma E­III/555, Sector­18 Rohini, Delhi­110089
2. The CPIO Dy. Director (Housing) DDA, D­Block, Vikas Sadan, INA New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority Director (Housing­II)    DDA, D­Block, Vikas Sadan, INA New Delhi
4. The CPIO O/o Chief Engineer (Rohini Zone) Delhi Development Authority Near Madhuban Chowk, DDA Office Complex Rohini, Delhi­110085
5. The Sr. Research Officer (RTI) RTI Implementation & Coord.Br., C­1, Block, 3rd. Floor, Vikas Sadan, INA Mkt., Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000436 4 New Delhi       Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2011/000436