Central Information Commission
Rishi Jindal vs Mcd on 27 August, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/MCDND/A/2023/651695
Rishi Jindal .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Executive Engineer,
Building-I, Municipal
Corporation of Delhi, Rohini
Zone, Sector 5, Rohini, Delhi - 110085 ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 14.08.2024
Date of Decision : 23.08.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 15.08.2023
CPIO replied on : 06.10.2023
First appeal filed on : 21.09.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 12.11.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.08.2023 seeking the following information:
"I am the owner of Flat No:- 49A, Samay Vihar Apartments, Plot No:33, Sector-13, Rohini, Delhi-85. That there is an illegally constructed Temple and Pujari Room in the Apartment, adjacent to my Flat which is the cause of continuous nuisance to me.
That in this regard an RTI vide ID No.2730 dated 30.05.2017 was filed, out of which a Second Appeal before Central Information Commission was instituted vide No. CIC/NDMCH/A/2017/153729 wherein an order was passed by the CIC dated Page 1 of 7 20.09.2018 wherein PIO/ EE (B-I)/ Rohini Zone was directed to obtain Action Taken Report from the Religious Committee and place the same on record before the Commission by or within 15.10.2018.
That however no such report was placed before the Commission by the PIO/ EE (B-I)/ Rohini Zone.
That previously steps were taken by myself to obtain the said ATR from the office of Religious Committee through LG Listening Post numerous times, details of which are enclosed in the table as follows:
S.No. Particulars of the LG Listening Post Particulars of the reply received Grievance from Religious Committee.
1. LG Listening Post vide Grievance No: Replied on 13/08/2019 that "no 2019008560 Dated: 04/08/2019 such case received".
2. LG Listening Post vide Grievance No: Replied on 18/09/2019 that "no 2019010543 Dated: 15/09/2019 such matter is pending".
3. LG Listening Post vide Grievance No: Replied on 20/07/2021 that "This 2021003029 Dated:25/02/2021 office has requested Executive Engineer (Bldg-I), North DMC to provide the information/ documents as mentioned in circulars dated 05.05.2014 and 19.08.2014. However, the information is still awaited from the North DMC."
4. LG Listening Post vide Grievance No: Replied on 14/09/2021 that "This 2021013155 Dated: 10/09/2021 department has sought the requisite information to the Executive Engineer (Bldg.)-I North DMC vide this department letter dated 17.06.2020 and subsequent reminder dated 04.08.2021.
However, the requisite
information is still awaited from
North DMC."
That further a series of documents sent to me by the North DMC, Rohini Zone are attached alongwith this letter as ENCLOSURE- 1 which records the referring the matter by your office to the Office of Religious Committee.
That further I, presented a Writ Petition Civil vide W.P.(C) 11997/2021 Titled as "RISHI JINDAL VS. CIC, THROUGH ITS CPIO & ANR." before the Hon'ble High Court at Delhi regarding the order dated 20.09.2018 of the CIC, wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has recorded the Statement on 20.07.2022 on behalf of your department that Page 2 of 7 subject to the decision of Religious Committee, the North DMC will be duty bound to proceed in accordance with law. The Copy of order dated 20.07.22 of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) 11997/2021 Titled as "RISHI JINDAL V. CIC, THROUGH ITS CPIO & ANR." is attached as ENCLOSURE-2.
That thus in furtherance of the Order dated 20.07.22 of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, I vide letter dated 15.06.2023 asked the office of the Religious Committee to take cognizance of the matter and proceed to take the final decision on urgent basis however vide letter dated 31.07.2023 from the Religious Committee (forwarded to your office as well) I was informed that the Committee "considers the proposal for removal of unauthorized religious structures from the public land, in case said proposal is received from the concerned land owing agency". Copy of my letter dated 15.06.2023 along with Reply from Religious Committee dated 31.07.2023 is attached as ENCLOSURE-3.
In the light of the above facts and circumstances, kindly provide me the following information:
1. Provide me the Action Taken Report with respect to the action taken by you in furtherance of the letter dated 31.07.2023 by the Religious Committee."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 06.10.2023 stating as under:
"Applicant has neither mentioned the specific addressee & diary No. etc. of the letter dated 31.07.2023 nor enclosed the copy of said letter therefore, it is not feasible to trace out the movement /ATR of the letter under reference. Applicant may either provide the specific addressee/diary no etc. if any or provide the photocopy of said letter so that reply as per available record could be provided, as per provisions of RTI Act-2005."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.09.2023. The FAA order is not on record.
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 Ghanshyam Meena, Assistant Engineer-cum-PIO, attended the hearing in person.
The Appellant did not participate in the hearing despite being served the hearing notice in advance.Page 3 of 7
The Respondent submitted that the averred representation dated 31.07.2023 on which the Appellant is seeking action taken report is not traceable in the record files. However, a letter bearing No. 11/07/RC/2020/HP- 11/2973-2974 dated 22.05.2023 was received from Religious Committee seeking certain clarifications and accordingly, after obtaining the clarification from the President/Secretary, Plot No. 33, Samay Vihar Apartment, CGHS Sector 13, the Religious Committee was apprised on 27.12.2023. He further added that the said temple was in existence in the year 2001 as evident from the available material on record and accordingly protection has been accorded under National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act (as extended from time to time) and any action on the subject property may be taken after the above-mentioned act ceases to operate.
A written submission has been received from Assistant Engineer-IV(B)-I, vide letter dated 07.08.2024, wherein the Commission has been apprised as under: "The gist of the events are as under:-
The instant RTI application was received in this office on 14.09.2023 through Nodal Officer (RTI)/PIO/AC/AO/SO/Rohini Zone and accordingly ID bearing EE(B)- I/PIO/RZ/RTI/ID/2023- 24/319 was generated.
➤ PIO furnished the reply on 06.10.2023, mentioning therein that copy of letter dated 31.07.2023, as explained by the applicant in his RTI application (forwarded to your office as well) is not found received in this office. Further, applicant was asked either to provide the specific addressee/diary No. etc. if any or provide the copy of said letter so that sought information could be furnished. But, sorry to say that applicant didn't bother so.
➤ As per record of FAA office no such First Appeal Application was found received in the office of FAA.
➤ Now, it is again submitted that letter under reference has not been found received in the office of Ex. Engineer (B)-I/RZ. However, a letter bearing No. 11/07/RC/2020/HP- 11/2973-2974 dated 22.05.2023 was received from Religious Committee (copy enclosed as Annexure-A) seeking certain clarifications. Accordingly, after obtaining the clarification from the President/Secretary, Plot No. 33, Samay Vihar Apartment, CGHS Sector 13, the Religious Committee was apprised on 27.12.2023 (Annexure-B).
➤ It is also pertinent to mention here that same nature of WP (C) 11997/2021, Rishi Jindal V/s.
CIC has already disposed off by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi dated 29.07.2024. The above facts shows that there is no slip on the part of PIO/EE(B)-I/RZ in furnishing the reply of said RTI application. However, with due honour, it is submitted that orders of Hon'ble Commission shall be abided in earnest manner, if any issued in this matter."
Page 4 of 7Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of the records, observes that a suitable reply based on available records has been given to the Appellant. The Respondent further apprised the bench of the fact that the averred temple was in existence in the year 2001 and accordingly protection has been accorded under National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act (as extended from time to time) and any action on the subject property may be taken after the above- mentioned act ceases to operate.
No action is required in the instant case.
A pertinent issue emanating from the instant case and similar cases dealt by this bench in the recent past is that while replying to the RTI applications and disposing First Appeals, the designated PIO's and FAA's of almost all Public Authorities under GNCTD, are only scribbling their signatures and are not giving their names, official designations and their official telephone numbers and email ID's which is violation of instructions on the subject. In this regard, the Commission finds it pertinent to refer its own judgment dated 02.07.2012, passed in Second Appeal No. CIC/DS/A/2012/000971, wherein it has been held as under:
"9. CPIO is directed to provide full and complete information regarding expenditure incurred on all types of gifts including coats at the above-mentioned conference to the appellant within 2 weeks of receipt of the order. Furthermore, commission notes that while replying to the applicant vide letter dated 31 March 2011 the former CPIO has not given his name and has only scribbled his signature which is eligible and does not give out the identity of the CPIO.
10. CPIO is directed to ensure that his name is clearly written below the signature in future."
The Commission would also like to refer an Office Memorandum dated 06.10.2015, bearing Ref. No. 10/1/2013-IR, issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, regarding format of giving information to the applicants under the RTI Act, wherein following observations have been made which are as under:
"It has been observed that different public authorities provide information to RTI applicants in different formats. Though there cannot be a standard format for providing information, the reply should however essentially contain the following information:Page 5 of 7
(i) RTI application number, date and date of its receipt in the public authority.
(ii) The name, designation, official telephone number and email ID of the CPIO.
(iii) In case the information requested for is denied, detailed reasons for denial quoting the relevant sections of the RTI Act should be clearly mentioned.
(iv) In case the information pertains to other public authority and the application is transferred under section 6(3) of the RTI Act, details of the public authority to whom the application is transferred should be given.
(v) In the concluding para of the reply, it should be clearly mentioned that the First Appeal, if any, against the reply of the CPIO may be made to the First Appellate Authority within 30 days of receipt of reply of CPIO.
(vi) The name, designation, address, official telephone number and e-mail ID of the First Appellate Authority should also be clearly mentioned."
Advisory under Section 25 (5) of the RTI Act In view of above, an advisory, is issued to Commissioner, MCD, to take note of the aberration of RTI Act being manifested in the Respondent public authority's office and issue a direction to their PIO's and FAA's to write their names, designations, official telephone numbers along with email id, while replying to the RTI Applications and First Appeal in future, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005. The Commissioner, MCD, is also directed to sensitize their officials regarding the provisions of RTI Act by way of training workshops etc. and putting in place a coherent system of checks and balances. In pursuance of the aforesaid advisory, the PIO is directed to place a copy of this order before their competent authority for taking appropriate action.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 6 of 7 Copy To:
1.The FAA, SE-1, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Rohini Zone, Sector 5, Rohini, Delhi - 110085
2. Commissioner, MCD, Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Civic Center, JLN Marg, New Delhi-110002 Page 7 of 7 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)