Central Information Commission
Jai Prakash vs Office Of The Additional Distt. ... on 2 December, 2019
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/ADDDM/A/2017/165918
Shri Jai Prakash ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO/Sub-Divisional Magistrate-(Kapashera),
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondent
Through: Sh. Nitin Jindal - SDM, Sh. Mahesh
Dutt-Tehsildar, Sh. M T Kom - FAA
Date of Hearing : 13.06.2019
Date of Decision : 20.06.2019
Date of Show Cause Hearing I : 12.09.2019
Date of Decision : 12.09.2019
Date of Show Cause Hearing (II) : 14.11.2019
Date of Final Decision : 02.12.2019
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 21.04.2017
PIO replied on : 14.07.2017
First Appeal filed on : 29.06.2017
First Appellate Order on : 31.07.2017
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 19.09.2017
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.04.2017, seeking information regarding his application of correction of land records with regard to various Khasra Numbers. In this regard, he sought the following information:-
1. Action taken on his various complaints and copy of ATR.
2. Is there any mismatch in DC (South West)'s revenue records? If so, provide reasons for not making necessary correction in them.Page 1 of 6
3. Is there any record with the Revenue Department that may contain mismatch in the above complaints? If yes, provide copy of the same?
PIO/Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Kapashera)vide letter dated 14.07.2017 provided information to the Appellant enclosing reply dated 09.06.2017 stating that the concerned file is pending consideration of the SDM/Kapashera.
Dissatisfied with the information received from the PIO, the Appellant filed the First Appeal dated 29.06.2017. ADM(South West)/FAA vide order dated 31.07.2017 stated as follows:-
"PIO/SDM(KH) is instructed to provide photocopies of the ATR on the complaints, if the information does not fall under Section 8 (exemption from disclosure of information) of RTI Act 2005 and rules thereof within 10 days of receipt of this order".
Feeling aggrieved over the non-compliance of FAO, the 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 12.06.2019 which reveals that on 09.06.2017, the appellant was informed that the concerned file was pending consideration with the SDM, Kapashera. The reply given by the current SDM, Kapasheraon 12.06.2019, after two years, is that the file has now been consigned to the record room and hence the appellant's request cannot be entertained by the SDM. The appellant has thus been denied the requisite information and subjected to unnecessary harassment.
Decision Facts of the case, which transpired during the hearing, indicate a prima facie case of deliberate denial and concealment of information by the SDM, Kapashera. The Commission finds that the case at hand has been handled in an unacceptable manner considering the blatant violation of the provisions of the RTI Act.
Under the circumstances, the Commission directs an Enquiry to be conducted by the FAA/ADM-Sh. M T Kom into the aforementioned contradiction in the stance of SDM, Kapashera on 09.06.2017 and 12.06.2019 and fix the responsibility of the official, whose lapse led to the file being consigned to the record room without replying to the appellant's RTI queries, after the file was released from the office of SDM, Kapashera.
The current PIO/SDM, Kapashera Sh. Nitin Jindal is directed to take necessary measures to obtain the requisite file from the record room and provide the Page 2 of 6 necessary information to the appellant, within two weeks of receipt of this order. Compliance report in this regard shall be submitted by him before the Commission by 12.07.2019.
Registry of this Bench is directed to issue SHOW CAUSE NOTICE to Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM for deliberate denial of information, non-compliance of FAA's specific orders and violation of the provisions of the RTI Act. The notice shall be served through the current PIO/SDM- Sh. Nitin Jindal. Reply from the Noticee must reach the Commission atleast one week prior to the hearing.
It is made clear that non-compliance of the aforementioned directions shall not be viewed with leniency.
Show Cause Hearing: 12.09.2019 Communication dated 04.09.2019 has been received from SDM (Kapashera)- Sh. Nitin Jindal indicating that the Show Cause Notice was sent to the Noticee - Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM.
No submission has been received so far from Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM, in response to the Show Cause Notice.
It is noted that no compliance report with respect to the directions of the Commission held vide order dated 20.06.2019 have been received so far. Hence, the following directions are passed:
i) A report of the Enquiry to be conducted by the FAA/ADM-Sh. M T Kom, as per the earlier direction in other order dated 20.06.2019, to be submitted before the Commission by 30.10.2019, failing which non- compliance proceedings shall be commenced against the errant official;
ii) The current PIO/SDM, Kapashera Sh. Nitin Jindal shall submit a Compliance Report with respect to the directions of this Commission for obtaining the requisite file from the record room and providing the necessary information to the Appellant by 05.10.2019, failing which appropriate penal proceedings shall be initiated against him for non- compliance of the directions of the Commission;
iii) Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM is given a last and final opportunity to submit his explanation for denial of information, non-
compliance of FAA's specific orders and violation of the provisions of the RTI Act. The notice shall be served through the current PIO/SDM- Sh. Nitin Jindal and response thereto must reach the Commission atleast one week prior to the hearing. It is made clear that no submission/reply shall be accepted thereafter.
Page 3 of 6Show Cause Hearing: 14.11.2019 Communication dated 17.10.2019 has been received from SDM (Kapashera)- Sh. Nitin Jindal indicating that the file mentioned in the appellant's RTI application dated 22.04.2017 was obtained from the record room and a copy sent to the appellant, attached with the letter dated 17.10.2019. Though copy of the file has not been placed on record so far, no rebuttal has been received so far from the appellant. Sh. Jindal was present during the hearing and referred to his written submission dated 17.10.2019 stating that compliance of the Commission's directions have been carried out by him. Furthermore, a detailed written statement dated 14.11.2019 has been submitted by the PIO/SDM, Kapashera about the contradiction of statements about the records being initially cited to be under consideration and subsequently consigned to record room. The relevant extracts in this regard are as follows:
".....file which was reported to be pending consideration vide reply dated 09/06/2017 and the records which was reported as consigned to record room vide reply dated 12/06/2019, both are different things/records."
Elaborating the position, the PIO/SDM, Kapashera stated that file reported to be pending consideration vide reply dated 09/06/2017 relates to the RTI reply of the appellant. However, the consolidation proceedings qua village Kanganheri was completed in the year 1970 and thereafter the records were consigned in the record room. Upon completion of the consolidation proceedings in 1970 and consignment of records, the Consolidation Officer becomes ex functus officio and has no power to make any correction/change in the chakbandi records. The tehsildar had by letter dated 09.11.2019 informed the appellant accordingly. It was further informed to the appellant that since the tehsildar was no more vested with the power of rectification of records after completion of consolidation proceedings, grievance of the Appellant could be redressed only by the competent court/authority. The PIO/SDM, Kapashera has further added that the land bearing khasra no. 112, 274 & 275 situated in Kanganheri village has been encroached and a case in this regard had been filed against the demarcation in different courts in order to divert the attention of the authorities from the actual issue of encroachment. Since the PIO was awaiting final decision of the Civil Court on this issue, clear and complete information could not be provided earlier. The Civil Suit has attained finality by order dated 14.01.2019 passed by the Civil Judge, Dwarka Court dismissing the claim of the ownership by the encroachers on the said land and the said order of dismissal was duly affirmed by the District & Sessions Judge, Dwarka Court vide order dated 13.08.2019. This complete background of the case has been submitted thus by the PIO/SDM, Kapashera.
The FAA/ADM-Sh. M T Kom has submitted a letter dated 09.10.2019 addressed to the PIO/SDM, Kapashera seeking response of the PIO/SDM and directing the SDM to submit compliance report directly to the Commission.
No submission has been received so far from Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM, in response to the Show Cause Notice.
Page 4 of 6Final Decision: 02.12.2019 Adjudication in the instant case is three fold based on the three specific directions pronounced by the Commission vide the earlier order dated 12.09.2019.
In response to the specific and categorical direction of this Commission to the FAA/ADM-Sh. M T Kom to submit a report of the Enquiry to be conducted by him, the FAA has submitted a communication dated 09.10.2019, passing the onus of carrying out the Commission's directions on the PIO/SDM, Kapashera. The Commission takes an adverse view of the conduct of the FAA of circumventing his responsibility and passing the onus upon the PIO/SDM, Kapashera. A copy of this order is directed to be marked to the Principal Secretary, GNCTD to bring to his notice the inappropriate and inadequate knowledge of senior officials in handling of the RTI Act.
It is noted that the PIO/SDM, Kapashera- Sh. Nitin Jindal has on the other hand submitted adequate inputs comprising a thorough background of the case at hand and duly complied with the directions of the Commission, which is found satisfactory. The factual and legal aspects brought forth by the PIO/SDM- Kapashera has enabled the Commission to get a complete idea and genesis of the case as such. The rendition of the PIO/SDM-Kapashera though quite detailed, it is hoped that such comprehensive reports will be submitted by the public authorities on time, preferably before the hearing or atleast during the course of hearing, to avoid wastage of time in adjudication of an open-and-shut case. The Court orders dated 14.01.2019 and 13.08.2019 should have been submitted by the PIO/SDM, Kapashera during the First Show Cause hearing held on 12.09.2019, which would have prevented the need for the instant hearing altogether.
The next aspect of the Commission's directions were with respect to Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM, Kapashera who was given two opportunities to submit his explanation for denial of information, non- compliance of FAA's specific orders and violation of the provisions of the RTI Act. No response has been received despite repeated opportunities being granted to the Noticee- Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, to explain the denial of information by him and complete violation of the specific order dated 31.07.2017 passed by the FAA. The Commission cannot condone the repeated, unexplained and deliberate lapses on the part of the Noticee- Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM, Kapashera, ignoring the opportunity to clarify his position and demonstrating complete disregard of the law, in blatant violation of provisions of the RTI Act.
In the light of the above discussion, the Commission holds the Noticee - Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM, Kapashera responsible for causing unnecessary delay and denial in the dissemination of information and violation of the FAA's order without furnishing any reasonable cause for the same. He has failed to submit any cogent explanation for the delay in supply of information before the Commission, despite being granted repeated opportunities. Hence, a Page 5 of 6 penalty of Rs. 15,000/- [Rupees Fifteen Thousand] is imposed on the Noticee- Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM, Kapashera under Section 20 of the RTI Act, for violation of provisions of the RTI Act in causing delay and denial in the supply of information without any reasonable cause.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त ) As per the decision of Commission of even date, in exercise of powers vested under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 penalty/s of Rupees Fifteen Thousand is being imposed on the Noticee, Sh. Bhupesh Chaudhary, the then PIO/SDM, Kapashera which should be paid in three equal instalments of Rupees Five Thousand each. The first instalment of the aforesaid penalty should reach the Commission by 15.12.2019 and the last instalment of penalty should reach the Commission by 15.02.2020. The penalty imposed should be remitted through Demand Draft or a Banker's Cheque drawn in favour of the Pay & Accounts Officer, CAT, payable at New Delhi and the same should be sent to Central Registry-II, Central Information Commission, Room No. 109, Baba Gang Nath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi - 110067.
Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 6 of 6