Central Information Commission
Gian Chand vs Department Of Urban Development on 17 September, 2019
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal Nos. CIC/DOURD/A/2017/147191
CIC/GNCTD/A/2017/147190
CIC/ADDDM/A/2017/155589
Shri Gian Chand ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
1. PIO, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Alipur (Delhi)
2. PIO, Dy. Secy.(UD) Dept. of UD,IP Estate,
New Delhi
3. PIO, Dy. Secy.(LB), Directorate of Local Bodies,
IP Estate, New Delhi
4. PIO, Block Development Officer (North), Alipur, ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondents
Delhi
Through: Ms. Jasvinder Kaur- AD(Plg)MP&DC;
Ms. ShikhaBhargav - Dy. Dir. (Plg) MP
Date of Hearing : 29.04.2019
Date of Decision : 29.04.2019
Date of Show Cause Hearing : 13.06.2019
Date of Show Cause Hearing (II) : 12.09.2019
Date of Final Decision : 17.09.2019
Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
together for hearing and disposal.
Case No. RTI Filed on CPIO reply First appeal FAO
147191 10.01.2017 Nil 27.02.2017 04.05.2017
147190 12.04.2017 Nil 17.05.2017 13.06.2017
155589 30.01.2017 Nil 15.03.2017 05.04.2017
Information soughtand background of the case:
Page 1 of 8CIC/DOURD/A/2017/147191 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.01.2017 before the Deptt. of Urban Development, GNCTD, seeking informationabout a copy of circular dated 28.09.2011 of MCD pertaining to street width and clearance from Rev/Service deptt/Fire etc. in respect of Lal Dora Building plans. Information on following two pointswere sought:-
1. Action taken on receipt of Notification be informed.
2. A copy of the letter vide which that has been sent to the Divisional Commissioner for further circulation be provided.
Having received no reply from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 21.02.2017. FAA by order dated 04.05.2017 stated as follows "....in view of the above, PIO(LB) is directed to get the photocopy of the notification dated 17.01.2011 from the Appellant, being an important notification issued by DDA and further to make efforts to provide copy of forwarding letter issued by UD Dept. to Divisional Commissionerfor implementation of provision of the Notification within 15 days time positively".
Feeling aggrieved over non-compliance of the FAA, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant alone is present whereas none is present for the respondents despite service of notice of hearing.
Dy. Director (RTI), DDA has submitted written submissions dated 10.04.2019 which indicates the RTI application dated 10.01.2017 was received in their office on 16.01.2017 and duly forwarded to the Dy. Director, Planning by letter dated 20.01.2017. Since none of the information sought pertained to them, hence no information could be furnished by them.
Appellant states that the implementation of the notification was to be done by the Department of Local Bodies, who have neither appeared nor implemented the DDA notification.
Respondent from the O/o Director of Local Bodies has submitted a written submission dated 03.04.2019 which reveals that the RTI application was transferred to the PIO(HQ), South, North and East DMC vide letter dated 25.01.2017. The PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies)- Sh. Pawan Chopra has further submitted that in compliance with the FAA's order dated 04.05.2017, a copy of the DDA notification dated 17.01.2011was forwarded to the Div.
Commissioner vide covering letter dated 09.05.2018, to provide the action taken report.
Decision:
On a combined perusal of records of the case and averments of the parties, it is noted that Sh. Pawan Chopra - the PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies) complied with the FAA's order dated 04.05.2017, by forwarding the same to the Page 2 of 8 Divisional Commissioner vide letter dated 09.05.2018, a year ago. No explanation is found for the inordinate delay of over one year in complying with the FAA's directions. Moreover, the submission of the PIO, LB is not a conclusive response to the queries of the appellant, it is only an evasive and time barred communication, which fails to satisfy the query of the Appellant. Though such violation of timeline and non-compliance of FAA's order attracts penal action, yet taking a lenient view, the Commission hereby directs Sh. Pawan Chopra - the PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies) to obtain the relevant Action Taken Report from the Divisional Commissioner and provide the information to the appellant within three weeks from the receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission.
CIC/GNCTD/A/2017/147190 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 12.04.2017 seeking information on three points which are as follows:-
1. Total area of Khasra No. 91 Alipur may be informed.
2. Total Numbers of min of Khasra 91 in 91/1 min to 91/37 onwards with the numbers of the Bhumidar may be informed.
3. As and when mutation of plot in Ext. Lal Dora is recorded the demarcation as recorded as per Sale Deed be informed.
Having received no reply from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 17.05.2017. FAA by order dated 13.06.2017 directed thePIO/SDM, Alipurto provide the information within 7 days as per RTI Act.
Feeling aggrieved over non-compliance of the FAA, Appellant approached the Commission with instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant states that partial information has been provided to him but since no layout plan of LalDora land has been prepared by the authorities, hence the information in this respect could not be provided.
Two documents have been placed on record by the PIO/APIO, Alipur, one of which is dated 16.05.2017 and the other dated 19.07.2017, whereby the RTI application appears to have been answered, though not conclusively.
Decision:
Upon examination of facts of the case, the Commission notes that neither the PIO/SDM, Alipur has submitted any written submission nor is he represented to assist the Commission with the factual position of the case at hand. As a consequence, the process of adjudication is vitiated, for want of complete facts related to the subject matter. Furthermore, it is noted that the PIO has not explained the cause of delay in furnishing the information. In view of such unexplained delay in providing a response against the RTI application and causing disruption in dissemination of information, the Registry of this Bench Page 3 of 8 is directed to issue SHOW CAUSE NOTICE on the then PIO/SDM, Alipur, to be served through the current PIO/SDM, Alipur. The Noticee must respond with a reasonable explanation as to why penal action should not be initiated against him for non-furnishing of response till the FAA's directions and causing obstruction to the flow of information. Response from the Noticee must be submitted atleast one week prior to the scheduled hearing of the Show Cause case.
CIC/ADDDM/A/2017/155589 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 30.01.2017, seeking information on two points which is as follows:-
1. Action taken on FCI letter dated 30.11.2016 and our letter dated 24.09.2016.
2. Action taken on the preparation of layout of Bakoli land in question.
Having received no reply from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 15.03.2017. FAA order dated 05.04.2017 directed the Consolidation officer and Settlement Officer/PIO to provide the reply as sought by the Appellant vide RTI application dated 30.01.2017 within 7 days as per RTI Act.
Feeling aggrieved over non-compliance of the FAA, Appellant approached the Commission with instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
The appellant alone is present for hearing and states that he is aggrieved by non-receipt of any information in response to his RTI application. None present for the respondent.
Decision:
In the light of the facts of the case, it is noted that neither the PIO/SDM, Alipur has submitted any written submission nor is he represented to assist the Commission with the factual position of the case at hand. As a consequence, the process of adjudication is vitiated, for want of complete facts related to the subject matter. There is no explanation or submission explaining the cause of non-furnishing of information and defiance of the specific orders of the FAA. In view of such unexplained denial in providing response against the RTI application, disruption in dissemination of information and violation of the provisions of the RTI Act, the Registry of this Bench is directed to issue SHOW CAUSE NOTICE on the then PIO/SDM, Alipur, to be served through the current PIO/SDM, Alipur. The Noticee must respond with a reasonable explanation as to why penal action should not be initiated against him for non furnishing of response and causing obstruction to the flow of information. Response from the Noticee must be submitted atleast one week prior to the scheduled hearing of the Show Cause case.Page 4 of 8
Show Cause Hearing I: 13.06.2019 I. Despite service of Show Cause Notice dated 14.05.2019 through the current PIO/SDM, Alipur, none appeared during the hearing, nor has the then PIO/SDM, Alipur submitted any explanation as yet.
In the given circumstances, the current PIO/SDM, Alipur, Shri Prakash Chandra Thakur is hereby directed to:
i) Explain why penal action should not be initiated against him for his failure to act in consonance of the Commission's specific order dated 29.04.2019 and serve the Show Cause Notice of this Commission;
ii) Ensure that the instant Show Cause Notice is served upon the then PIO/SDM, Alipur, who held charge between January to March 2017.
Noticee/s [current PIO- Sh. Prakash Chandra Thakur and the then PIO] are granted final opportunity to respond with a reasonable explanation as to why penal action should not be initiated against them for non- furnishing of response to the RTI application, causing deliberate obstruction to the flow of information, non-compliance of order/s of the FAA and of the CIC; and violating provisions of the RTI Act. Response from the Noticee must be submitted atleast one week prior to the scheduled hearing of the Show Cause case.
II. In the file no. CIC/DOURD/A/2017/147191 above, the Commission had vide order dated 29.04.2019 directed as follows:
" ....Sh. Pawan Chopra - the PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies) to obtain the relevant Action Taken Report from the Divisional Commissioner and provide the information to the appellant within three weeks from the receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission.."
Despite lapse of the mandated time frame, no communication has been received so far in the Commission, from the PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies)- Sh. Pawan Chopra. Cross checking the records from the Registry also reveal that till 13.06.2019, 1500 hours, no information has been received from Sh. Pawan Chopra. Thus the Commission is constrained to direct Registry of this Bench to issue SHOW CAUSE NOTICE on Sh. Pawan Chopra - the PIO/Dy. Director (LocalBodies). The Noticee- Sh.Pawan Chopra must respond with a reasonable explanation as to why penal action should not be initiated against him for acting in contravention of the order passed by this Commission. Response from the Noticee must be submitted atleast one week prior to the scheduled hearing of the Show Cause case.
Page 5 of 8Show Cause Hearing II: 12.09.2019 CIC/DOURD/A/2017/147191:Submissionsdated 29.08.2019 have been received from PIO/Dy. Director (Local Bodies) - Sh. Anil Ghildyal stating that no information was received from the Divisional Commissioner despite sending letters dated 06.06.2019, 24.06.2019 and 12.07.2019. The PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies) further stated that the SDM-III(HQ)/PIO vide letter dated 19.07.2019 informed about the following action being taken in this matter:
i. Letter dated 08.07.2019 with respect to compliance of FAA's order dated 04.05.2017 was forwarded to the PIO/SDM(North) to take further action;
ii. Letter was issued to all the District Magistrates for compliance of the notification However, since no information was received from the Divisional Commissioner's office, hence none could be provided to the appellant.
Copies of two letters dated 18.06.2019 & 26.07.2019 have been received from Sh. Sanjay Sondhi - PIO/SDM-V (HQ), Div. Commissioner requesting the PIO/SDM-III(HQ), Land Revenue Branch to furnish the action taken report directly to the PIO/DD Local Bodies.
The PIO/SDM-III, HQ- Sh. Anil Sirohi forwarded a letter dated 19.07.2019 circulating notification dated 17.01.2011 of DDA to all District Magistrates of Delhi.
CIC/GNCTD/A/2017/147190 & CIC/ADDDM/A/2017/155589:
Pursuant to the decision dated 13.06.2019, noted above, submissions dated 24.07.2019 have been received from the erstwhile SDM (Alipur)- Ms. Akriti Sagar.The communication from the erstwhile SDM (Alipur) encloses a letter dated 24.04.2019 from the current PIO/SDM(Alipur)- Shri Prakash Chandra Thakur revealing that the appellant had been informed that the consolidation proceedings of village Bakoli has already been completed in year 2010 by the then Consolidation Officer and any further change in repartition does not fall within the purview of the Consolidation Officer/Settlement Officer and can be conducted only by directions of Competent Court.
Ms. Akriti Sagar- the erstwhile PIO/SDM(Alipur) has submitted another communication dated 24.07.2019 explaining that the RTI application dated 12.04.2017 filed by the appellant had been duly replied vide letter dated 16.05.2017 and directions of the FAA had been duly carried out vide letter dated 19.07.2017. The relevant supporting documents in this regard have been duly placed on record by the respondent.
Another submission dated 29.08.2019 has been received from Sh. Suneel Anchipaka- the then SDM (Alipur) reiterating submissions of Ms. Akriti Sagar that the RTI application filed by the appellant had been duly replied vide letter dated 16.05.2017 and directions of the FAA had been duly carried out vide Page 6 of 8 letter dated 19.07.2017. Tendering his apology for the delay caused in providing the information despite FAA's directions, the then PIO has submitted satisfactory reason/s for the same and explained that the cause of the delay was unintentional and purely because of administrative lapse.
Show Cause Decision: 17.09.2019 CIC/GNCTD/A/2017/147190 & CIC/ADDDM/A/2017/155589:
Perusal of the records in these two appeals reveal that information had been provided to the appellant vide letter dated 16.05.2017 and again on 19.07.2017, with available records. Responses from three PIO/SDMs of Alipur viz. i) the PIO/SDM, Alipur - Shri Suneel Anchipaka, who held charge between January to March 2017, ii) the PIO/SDM who held charge thereafter viz. Ms. Akriti Sagar and iii) the current PIO/SDM - Shri Prakash Chandra Thakur reveal that relevant information has been provided and necessary efforts have been made by the respective PIOs in making the information available. The delay caused in complying with the FAA's orders have also been adequately explained by the Noticee/s. The Commission is convinced with the responses of the PIO/SDMs (Alipur) and directs that Show Cause proceedings initiated against them be dropped.
CIC/DOURD/A/2017/147191:
It is noted that the Noticee- Sh. Pawan Chopra, the then PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies) has not submitted any explanation for taking action on the FAA's order dated 04.05.2017, after lapse of one year vide letter dated 09.05.2018. Neither has he appeared for the hearing of the Show Cause case.
The action taken as explained by the current PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies)- Sh. Anil Ghildiyal notwithstanding, no cogent explanation from the Noticee- Sh. Pawan Chopra has been received, despite repeated opportunities given to him for the delay of one year in complying with the FAA's orders.
The current PIO- Sh. Anil Ghildiyal's submissions can be read as compliance of the FAA's order but cannot be treated as a reply to the Show Cause since neither the cause of delay has been explained therein nor is onus of response to Show Cause transferable as per law, on a successor officer.
The Commission is not inclined to overlook such repeated unexplained lapses on the part of the Noticee- Sh. Pawan Chopra, ignoring the opportunity to explain his stance and demonstrating complete disregard of the law, including violation of provisions of the RTI Act.
In the light of the above discussion, the Commission holds the Noticee -Sh. Pawan Chopra, the then PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies)responsible for causing unnecessary delay in the dissemination of information and violation of the FAA's order without any reasonable cause. He has failed to submit any cogent Page 7 of 8 explanation for thedelay in supply of information before the Commission, despite being granted adequate opportunity. Hence, a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand] is imposed on the Noticee, Sh. Pawan Chopra, the then PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies) under Section 20 of the RTI Act, for violation of provisions of the RTI Act by delaying 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 Ten Thousandis being imposed on the Noticee, Sh. Pawan Chopra, the then PIO/Dy. Director(Local Bodies) which should be paid in two equal instalments of Rupees Five Thousand each. The first instalment of the aforesaid penalty should reach the Commission by 15.10.2019 and the last instalment of penalty should reach the Commission by 15.11.2019. 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.
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 8 of 8