Central Information Commission
Mrsukram Pal vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 25 April, 2014
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
ROOM NO. 329, SECOND FLOOR, C-WING
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066
Tel. No. 91-11-26717356
F.No. CIC/DS/A/2013/000291-YA
F.No. CIC/DS/A/2013/000292-YA
Date of hearing : 25.04.2014
Date of decision : 25.04.2014
Appellant : Shri Sukram Pal - rep. by
Sh. Hitendra Tomar,
Delhi
Respondent : Shri Feroze Muzaffar, AE (B)
South Delhi Municipal Corporation,
Delhi
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant fact emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 22.08.2012 & 30.08.2012
PIO Replied on : No reply & 26.09.2012
First appeal filed on : 03.10.2012
First Appellate Authority order : 01.11.2012
Second Appeal received on : 04.02.2013
Information sought:
The appellant had sought information regarding sealing/demolition action on unauthorized construction on Property 76/9, Plot No. 3, Kishangarh, Ward No.172 and several other queries.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both the parties are present. The abovementioned appeals are being heard together as the queries sought in both the RTI applications are regarding the same property and are similar. The appellant stated the matter has been raised in public interest and that in the area Kishangarh, on Aruna Asaf Ali Marg, the road is supposed to be of 45meters with a setback of 60 meters from thereon because of the green belt. The MCD has demolished smaller plots encroaching the road but have not demolished big plots. The appellant alleged that the owners of illegal/unauthorized construction in connivance with certain officials of MCD are enjoying their property. The appellant alleged that MCD's action on unauthorized construction has, thus, been discriminatory and for the same he has raised this issue. The respondent stated that the matter is shifted between DDA and MCD. The appellant stated that the property in question has been sealed but parts of it are still being sold to innocent buyers and that other facilities such as water/electric meters have also been provided, in spite of it being sealed by the order of Supreme Court Monitoring Committee. The respondent stated that the property in question was built in 2010 and was sealed in 2011. The appellant stated the he specifically wants information regarding exact measurement of the road whether it is 45 meters or 60 meters. The respondent stated that the area of Kishangarh falls in South Zone. The appellant stated that in the FAA's order, it mentions that the application has already been transferred to DDA.
Decision:
After hearing the parties, the Commission directs the respondent to provide a specific reply regarding the exact measurement of the road whether it is 45 meters or 60 meters. Further, the respondent authority is directed to coordinate with the concerned PIO in South Zone and in DDA with whom the additional information, concerning the property, sought by the appellant, will be available and fix a mutually convenient date and time with the appellant for inspection of records, in both the respondent authority's office and in the office of the South Zone. The appellant shall be provided copies of documents inspected on payment of requisite fees. This exercise be completed within two weeks of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(K.V.Mathew) Deputy Registrar