Central Information Commission
Mr.Dharam Das Chawla vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 18 June, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001334/19289
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001334
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Dharmdas Chawla
7966, Araksha Road
Paharganj, New Delhi-110055
Respondent : Mr. Subhash Dodrai
PIO & SE Municipal Corporation of Delhi Supritendent Engineer (Bldg) Sadar-Paharganj Zone Idgah Road, Delhi-110006 RTI application filed on : 05/01/2012 PIO replied : 24/01/2012 First appeal filed on : 21/02/2012 First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 02/05/2012 Sl. Information Sought Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)
1. I have complained regarding the possibility of Information sought by the applicant through this incidents like lalita park happening in Sadar point is that the application was marked to the area Paharganj ward no 87 on 12/12/2011. Kindly JE for necessary action as per the DMC Act and provide me with the details of action taken on information regarding rest part of this point is complaint along with who was officer voluminous in nature and is not available in responsible, how long was the file with him, and compiled form. Applicants can inspect available what action was taken by the officer. record (Diary Dispatch Register) on any working day at 2.00 pm with prior information in this regard as per the RTI ACT within 7 days.
2. Kindly provide the copy of letters sent to various Desired copies will be provided after depositing department related to this complaint. charges at Rs 2 per page.
3. Kindly provide the notings and report received by Not available in the office.
other departments with relation to this complaint.
4. Kindly provide the departmental guidelines on The RTI received in this office is replied as per the deadlines for action on such type of complaints RTI Act. and a copy of order also.
5. If proper action is not taken by the officials The information is beyond the purview of RTI Act .
concerned in these type of cases then whether The contents of the point are in form of seeking action is taken by department or not. If yes, then options which the building department is not bound under which section of Delhi Municipal to provide. Corporation Act, action is taken.
6. Was any inquiry initiated on the basis of my No inquiry has been initiated regarding the complaint? If yes, kindly tell the name and application filed by the applicant and applicant posting of the officer concerned and what present inspect available record on any working day at 2.00 status is. I would like to inspect the report also pm with prior information in this regard as per the and have a copy of the report. If not, kindly RTI ACT within 7 days provide the reason as to what action was not taken.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA) Not Ordered Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO. No order by FAA Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Dharmdas Chawla;
Respondent: Mr. Mohit Sukhija, JE on behalf of Mr. Subhash Dodrai, PIO & SE;
The PIO has provided certain information but has not provided information clearly as sought by the appellant. In view of this the Commission is giving the following specific directions: 1- Query-1, 2 & 3: The PIO is directed to provide information about the progress of the application in the following format:
Date on which Name and designation of Action taken Date on which forwarded to Complaint received The officer receiving it. Next officer/office.
*there will be as many rows as the number of officers who handled the complaint. Attested photocopies of all letters and notings will be provided. 2- Query-4: The Respondent will provide information on whether there are guidelines for time in which complaints has been handled. If there are no such guidelines this should be stated.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant before 30 June 2012.
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 June 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AG)