Central Information Commission
Mr.Vivek Sahni vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 18 August, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001522/13590Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001522
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Vivek Sahni
43, South Patel Nagar Market,
Opp. Pillar No. 188, New Delhi
Respondent (1) : Mr. Suresh Chandra
PIO & Superintending Engineer Municipal Corporation of Delhi Building Department, Karol Bagh, Anand Parbat, New Delhi (2) : Mr. T. P. Sharma PIO & AC, Land and Estate Department Municipal Corporation of Delhi 7th Floor, Civic Center, Minto Road, New Delhi (3) : Dy. Land & Development Officer, L&DO, Ministry of Urban Development, Govt. of India, 6th Floor, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 27/01/2011
PIO replied : Not mentioned.
First appeal filed on : 14/03/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 11/05/2011
Complaint received on : 07/06/2011.
Sl. Information sought by the appellant
1. The ministry of Rehabilitation had allotted commercial shop at ground Floor level and residential quarters at first floor of these shop in south Patel Nagar Market. Recently the allotment files of these properties were transferred to MCD.
2. Whether the MCD has started sanctioning of plan for reconstruction of 2nd and 3rd floor on the already residential portion at first floor. It not how the owner/ occupier/ purchaser of the flat no "V" had constructed second and third floor.
3. Whether the MCD had given special privilege to its ex employess in the matter of unauthorized cionstruction and no action was taken by MCD against the unauthorized construction made by its ex employees. If not, what action the MCD had initiated against the owner of the flat no "V" south Patel Nagar Market, so far ?
4. Supply the copy of allotment letter along with condition for allotment of flat no "V" south Patel Nagar market opposite Metro pillar no. 189.
Page 1 of 35. Whether the purchase of R.S. Gupta or his legal heirs had got this flat mutated in his/their name. If yes supply copy of mutation letter.
6. Whether the purchaser Mr. R. S Gupta or his legal heirs had got this flat mutated in his/their name. If yes kindly supply the copy of the mutation letter.
Reply of the PIO:
Not mentioned.
Ground of the First Appeal:
The appellant has not received any information within 30 days from PIO within the time frame of 30 days and hence appeal is filled by the appellant.
Order of the FAA:
After perusal of the records it reveals that the PIO/L&E has not provided the information to the Appellant. The PIO is directed to provide information within time period of 15 Days from the date of the order.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The information was not provided to the appellant by PIO even after the order of FAA and hence appellant has filed second appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 21 July 2011: The following were present Appellant: Mr. Vivek Sahni;
Respondent: Mr. Suresh Chandra, PIO & SE on behalf of Mr. V. K. Taneja, PIO & Assistant Engineer (Building Department);
"The respondent states that the information has been sent on 15/12/2011 and the Appellant states that he has received it. However the Appellant states that information on query no. 5 & 6 have not been provided. The PIO has replied with respect to query 5 & 6 that "file of Flat No. V has not yet been transferred from L&DO to MCD."
The Respondents state that the RTI application was transferred to his department on 16/06/2011 from PIO, Land & Estate Department.
It appears that the PIO, Land & Estate Department has not provided the information to the Appellant when he filed the RTI application and even after the order of the First Appellate Authority. The FAA has mentioned that Mr. T. P. Sharma was the PIO of Land & Estate Department."
Commission's Decision dated 21 July 2011:
The Appeal was allowed.
"The PIO, Land & Estate Department is directed to provide the information on query-5 & 6 after obtaining it from the concerned officer if necessary on query- 5 & 6 to the Appellant before 16 August 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO Mr. T. P. Sharma, Land & Estate Department 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.
Mr. T. P. Sharma, PIO Land & Estate Department will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 18 August 2011 at 4.30pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why Page 2 of 3 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 Hearing on 18 August 2011:
The following were present Respondent: Mr. T. P. Sharma, PIO Land & Estate Department;
The PIO has shown that the RTI application has never received by him office. In view of this explanation the Commission drops the penalty proceedings against him. However, when the FAA's order reached him he has replied to the Appellant that the files are not with him but are with Dy. Land & Development Officer, L&DO, Ministry of Urban Development, Govt. of India, 6th Floor, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi. The respondent has also stated that the area is now in the control of MCD. Logically the department that has control over this area should have all the files relating to it. The Commission directs Dy. Land & Development Officer, L&DO to transfer all the files of this area to Land Estate Department, MCD before 30 September 2011.
The PIO Land Estate Department is then directed to provide the information to the Appellant before 15 October 2011. If for any reason Dy. Land & Development Officer, L&DO sees reasons to hold on to the files the PIO of L&DO will provide the information to the Appellant before 30 September 2011.
Adjunct Decision:
The Commission directs Dy. Land & Development Office, L&DO, Ministry of Urban Development, Nirman Bhawan to transfer all the files of the area to the Land & Estate Department, MCD before 30 September 2011. In case the files are to be retained by L&DO Department the PIO of L&DO will provide the information directly to the Appellant before 30 September 2011.
The PIO of Land & Estate Department, MCD will provide the information to the Appellant before 15 October 2011; in case files are received from L&DO Department before 30 September 2011.
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 18 August 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (MS)) Attached copy of RTI application to PIO, L&DO;Page 3 of 3