Central Information Commission
Neeraj Saini vs Mcd on 11 March, 2026
के ीय सू चना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MCDND/A/2024/127055
Neeraj Saini .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Municipal Corporation of
Delhi, Office of the Executive
Engineer (Building)-I, Central
Zone, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi - 110024 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.02.2026
Date of Decision : 11.03.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18.05.2024
PIO replied on : 20.06.2024
First appeal filed on : 14.07.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 20.08.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.05.2024 (offline) seeking the following information:CIC/MCDND/A/2024/127055 Page 1 of 5
"The applicant is making certain queries under the provision of RT.I. ACT2005, for seeking a reply as per lave. The queries are:
1. Please provide the certified copy of permission given to these properties A-64, E-40, E-45, E-2, B-2 AND J-24. South Extension, part- 1, New Delhi 110023. By your department.
2. Please provide the period given to make construction/re-construct / renovation to these to these properties. properties given above said question. And provide a certified copy of the period permission given
3. Under which plan department given permits for construction/re- construction on above said Properties? Kindly provide the certified copy.
4. If the building sanction plan was approved than the Building Completion Certificate issued by the department or not. If yes than please provide the certified copy of the building sanction plan and sanction letter.
5. That after completion of the building site visit was done by the concern authority AE and JE of your department or not.
6. That the above mentioned all building is constructed with building sanction plan or not.
7. That after construction of the building the deviation is existing at above mentioned building or not
8. If the deviation was found than any affirmative action was carried out against the deviation which is constructed beyond the sanction plan or not.
9. That the department has any sought to take action against the deviation or not."
2. The PIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 20.06.2024 stating as under:
"1. As per record, Online building plans are found sanctioned for the construction in respect of above mentioned P.No. A-64, E-40, E-46, E-2, B-2, and J-24, NDSE-I, New Delhi. Copy of requisite documents are CIC/MCDND/A/2024/127055 Page 2 of 5 restricted to any third party under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act-2005. However, it is also informed that detail of the building plans sanctioned, & CC issued by this office is available on municipal web site in public domain which can be viewed at www.mcdonline.gov.in, and link of the said web site is - go to MCD website www.mcdonline.gov.in than go to Engineering, and then go to MIS.
2. Validity of sanctioned building plan is for 05 years from the date of sanction.
3. Needs no reply in view of reply at (1) above.
4. -do-
5. Requisite information is not available on the record of this office.
6. Needs no reply in view of reply at (1) above.
7. Detail of booking of unauthorized construction/deviations against sanctioned building plan, noticed and booked by this office is available on above mentioned municipal web site in public domain.
8. Requisite information is not available on the record of this office.
9. Information being sought through this point is in the shape of seeking clarification which does not come under the domain of information as per section 2(f) of the RTI Act-2005."
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.07.2024. The FAA order is not on record.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent Respondent: Shri Faiz Ahmed Bakshi, Assistant Engineer/APIO, appeared in person.CIC/MCDND/A/2024/127055 Page 3 of 5
5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 20.08.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirmed non-service. Thus, Regulation No. 10 of the Central Information Commission Management Regulations 2007 has not been complied with by the Appellant.
6. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that point-wise reply has been given to the Appellant vide letter dated 20.06.2024. They stated that copies of sanctioned building plans and related documents pertain to third-party information and were therefore denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Decision:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records, observes that though a point-wise reply was furnished on 20.06.2024, the same is incomplete and not in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act. The denial of copies of sanctioned building plans and related documents under Section 8(1)(j) has not been properly justified. Directing the Appellant to access information from the website, without furnishing certified copies as sought, does not amount to adequate compliance.
8. The Commission further takes note that, subsequent to the unfortunate incident at Old Rajendra Nagar, New Delhi, the Additional Commissioner (Engineering), MCD, issued a circular dated 29.07.2024 mandating disclosure of building plans and related information in the public domain in larger public interest, so as to enable detection of violations and to promote transparency and public safety. In this background, the information sought in the present case assumes heightened public importance, as it relates to sanctioned building plans, completion certificates, deviations and action taken thereon.
9. Accordingly, the Respondent is directed to provide the revised point- wise information, free of cost as per records and in accordance with the RTI Act, within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. In case of any CIC/MCDND/A/2024/127055 Page 4 of 5 denial, a reasoned and speaking justification citing the relevant exemption clause shall be provided.
10. The FAA to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) Sd/-
(S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Office of the Superintending Engineer, Central Zone, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi - 110024 CIC/MCDND/A/2024/127055 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)