Central Information Commission
Aaryendra Kumar Rajput vs Mcd on 1 April, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147352
Aaryendra Kumar Rajput .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Municipal Corporation of
Delhi, Office of the Executive
Engineer (M)-II/RZ, F-2 Block,
Mangolpuri, Outer Ring Road,
Delhi - 110083 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 21.03.2025
Date of Decision : 28.03.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 14.07.2023
CPIO replied on : 18.08.2023
First appeal filed on : 06.09.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 17.10.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 05.12.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.07.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:Page 1 of 5
"That I am the law abiding and vigilant citizen of the society and it has come to my knowledge that lot of peoples have encroached the road property of Govt in A-Block, Camp No-4, Jwalapuri, Sunder Vihar, District- West, New Delhi-110087 and had constructed chabutra(s) extend their front house area in road owing to that roads have become narrow and two bikes do not passed each-other easily sometimes clash(s) and damage(s). Due to that in raining days roads have chocked and water do not get pass properly. Therefore, in view of above, kindly provide the following information:-
1. Whether the above said encroachment/construction is in the knowledge of the concern MCD Officers?
2. Whether any official of govt. department authorized to make kind of abovesaid construction within the area camp no-4, Jwalapuri, Sunder Vihar Delhi?
3. What action has been taken or is proposed to be taken against the said illegal encroachment and construction?
4. Please provide the details of authorized master plan/map of the Block A, camp no-4, jwalapuri, Sunder Vihar and sanctioned roads areas in colonies(gali)."
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 18.08.2023 stating as under:
"1. No such type of information available in this office.
2. Same as above
3. No such type of information available in this office. However, the routine encroachment programme has been taken in the various wards in the jurisdiction of EE M-II/RZ.
4. No such type of information available in this office."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.09.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 17.10.2023, held as under:
"During the course of hearing, the RTI application and reply of PIO/EE(M)-II/RZ have been gone through and observed that reply of PIO/EE(M)-II/RZ, specifically point No. 4 is not upto the mark and needs to reply again. Moreover, the instant RTI application should also be Page 2 of 5 transferred to PIO/Chief Town Planning Deptt. immediately, if not done earlier. PIO/ EE(M)-II/RZ is hereby directed to go through content of point No. 04 of instant RTI application and furnish the revised, specific correct reply within 10 days, free of cost, to the applicant, on receipt of this orders.
The appeal is disposed off with the above-said orders."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not Present.
Respondent: Shri G.S. Brijwasi, A.E. (M-II) and APIO present in person.
The Respondent while defending their case inter-alia submitted that vide their letter dated 18.08.2023, point-wise reply/information as per the documents available on their record was provided to the Appellant. Upon being queried by the Commission, as to whether the order of the FAA is complied with, the Respondent has no explanation in this regard.
The Respondent stated that information sought on point No. 4 of the RTI application is not available in their records.
Upon being further queried by the Commission, the Respondent informed that Shri D P Bhardwaj, Executive Engineer, Maintenance (M-II), Rohini is the concerned PIO.
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of the records, observes that the Appellant in his second appeal is aggrieved that complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the Respondent till date.Page 3 of 5
The Commission further observes that the FAA vide its order dated 17.10.2023 had specifically given directions to the PIO to provide information on record to the Appellant on point No. 4 of the RTI application.
There is nothing on record to show that any reply was given to the Appellant on his RTI application in compliance to the directions given by the First Appellate Authority. It shows mala fide intent of the PIO in obstructing the information under the RTI Act. Further, the concerned PIO is absent without giving reasons for his absence.
The Commission observes the FAA is an employee of Public Authority and he has passed the above order after due diligence and with application of mind.
In view of the above observations, the Commission directs the Respondent to provide reply/information on point No. 4 of the RTI application to the Appellant as per the directions given by the FAA. If the information sought pertains to some other PIO, then the Respondent is directed to take assistance under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act to collect information, from the concerned PIO, as sought in the RTI application and provide reply/information to the Appellant, failing which to show-cause within this period as to why maximum penalty should not be imposed under the RTI Act.
Notwithstanding the above order, since the PIO has not provided information to the Appellant under the RTI Act after the directions of the FAA and also remained absent during the hearing proceedings to present their case, Shri D P Bhardwaj, Executive Engineer, Maintenance (M-II), Rohini is directed to show- cause in writing the reasons for delay in providing information to the Appellant and for not appearing before the Commission. The written submissions of the PIO shall be sent to the Commission within four weeks of the receipt of this order.
The Respondent is further directed to treat the present RTI application as trigger for taking action against violators and forward the same to the STF for appropriate action in the matter, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which to show-cause within this period as to why maximum penalty should not be imposed under the RTI Act.Page 4 of 5
The aforesaid directions shall be complied with by the PIO within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
The FAA is directed to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Office of the Superintending Engineer-II, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Rohini Zone, Sector V, Delhi - 110085 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)