Central Information Commission
Sen Gupta vs Delhi Development Authority on 13 October, 2020
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/DDATY/A/2018/154528
Sen Gupta ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. The CPIO, Delhi Development ... ितवादी /Respondents
Authority, O/o the PIO/Executive
Engineer (PLG), Civil Circle-13,
Mangalapuri, New Delhi.
2. The CPIO, Delhi Development
Dy. Director (Blag.), Authority,
L&I, Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell,
Building Section, 1st Floor,
Vikas Sadan, INA, New
Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI :
FA : 16.01.2018 SA : 05.09.2018
31.03.2017/27.11.2017
CPIO : Not on record FAO : Not on record Hearing : 05.10.2020
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Delhi Development Authority, Building Section, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi. The appellant seeking information on two points, including, inter-alia:-
Page 1 of 4(i) "Kindly inform as per rules and records, what is the maximum allowed height of independent freehold/conveyance deed building in Bindapur, the said building MLU DP-6 in Bindapur, Dwarka abuts a 60 feet road and is open from 3 sides;
(ii) Detailed rules and policy regarding building height for DDA freehold/conveyance deed properties in Bindapur, Delhi".
2. As the CPIO had not provided the requested information, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 16.01.2018 requesting that the information should be provided to him. The response of FAA is not on record. He filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission on the ground that information has not been provided to him and requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.
Hearing:
3. The appellant was represented through his counsel Shri Alok Kumar Rai who attended the hearing through audio-call. The respondents, Shri M A Khan, CPIO and Shri Surjeet, Director (Building) attended the hearing through audio- call.
4. The respondent no.1 submitted their written submissions dated 15.09.2020 and the same has been taken on record. The respondent no. 2 submitted their written submissions dated 11.09.2020 and the same has been taken on record.
5. The representative of the appellant submitted that till date no information has been provided to the appellant on his RTI application dated 31.03.2017/27.11.2017. He further submitted that the appellant had asked basic rule position from the respondent but no reply was given to him.
6. The respondent no. 1 submitted that they have transferred the RTI application of the appellant to the respondent no. 2 for appropriate action in the matter. The respondent no. 2 submitted that they have informed the appellant that they have transferred his RTI application and first appeal to Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka for appropriate action in the matter. The respondent no. 2 further submitted that they have also forwarded the hearing notice of this Commission to the Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka.
Decision:
7. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that till date no information has been provided to the Page 2 of 4 appellant on his RTI application. The RTI application of the appellant was only transferred from one department to the another but no information was given to the appellant. The respondent no. 2 submitted that lastly the RTI application was transferred to the Dy. Director (Arch/FAA), Office of Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka, Dwarka Project Office, DDA, Manglapuri, Palam, New Delhi-110045. But no one was present from the office of Senior Architect to contest the case despite serving the notice by respondent no. 2. In view of this, the Commission directs the CPIO, Office of Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka, Dwarka Project Office, DDA, Manglapuri, Palam, New Delhi-110045 to show-cause in writing the reasons that as to why penalty should not be imposed on him for contravening the provisions of the RTI Act and for not giving reply/information to the appellant on his RTI application, within a period of 15 working days from the date of receipt of this order.
8. The CPIO, Office of Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka, Dwarka Project Office, DDA, Manglapuri, Palam, New Delhi is further directed to give point-wise reply/information to the appellant on his RTI application, as per the documents available on record and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, within a period of 15 working days from the date of receipt of this order.
9. The respondent no. 2 is directed to ensure service a copy of this order to the CPIO, Office of Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka, Dwarka Project Office, DDA, Manglapuri, Palam, New Delhi.
10. The Deputy Registrar is directed to send complete file along with this order to the Dy. Director (Arch/FAA), Office of Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka, Dwarka Project Office, DDA, Manglapuri, Palam, New Delhi-110045.
11. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Page 3 of 412. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज कुमार गु ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनां क / Date 05.10.2020 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स$ािपत ित) S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा), Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक), (011-26105682) Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO, Delhi Development Authority, O/o the PIO/Executive Engineer (PLG), Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell, Civil Circle-13, Mangalapuri, New Delhi-110045.
2. The CPIO, Delhi Development Authority, Dy. Director (Blag.), L&I, Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell, Building Section, 1st Floor, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110023.
3. Dy. Director (Arch/FAA), Office of Senior Architect, West Zone & Dwarka, Dwarka Project Office, DDA, Manglapuri, Palam, New Delhi-110045
4. Sen Gupta, Page 4 of 4