Central Information Commission
Mr.Santlal Gupta vs Registrar Cooperative Society, Gnct, ... on 26 May, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000448/12115Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000448
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Santlal Gupta
14-A, Ashok Park Extn.
New Delhi- 110026.
Respondent (1) : PIO & Assistant Registrar (NW)
Registrar Cooperative Society, GNCTD, Parliament Street, New Delhi- 110001 (2) : Mr. Ajay Kumar Gupta, Administrator & the then Deemed PIO Modern CGHS Ltd., Vyapar Bhawan, I. P. Estate, New Delhi (3) : Mr. Krishan Kumar, Administrator & Deemed PIO, Modern CGHS Ltd., Plot No. 5, Sector- 15, Rohini, New Delhi- 110085 RTI application filed on : 01/11/2010, 22/11/2010 PIO replied : 30/11/2010, 13/12/2010 First appeal filed on : --------------
First Appellate Authority order : 10/01/2011, 10/01/2011 Second Appeal received on : 10/02/2011
Appellant has appeal for two RTI simultaneously, First RTI is regarding of information of Modern Co-op GH Society Ltd. Plot No.5, sec.15, rohini, New Delhi-85 on 01/11/2010 as follows:
Sl. Information Sought for : PIO Reply
1. What is the status of Flat No. 14, 23, 217, 324, 325, 418, The information is not available on 421, 426, 513, 516, 619, 623, 726 of Category "B" and record, Information pertains to Flat No.737 of Category 'A' of Modern Co-op GH society. Accordingly application is Society Ltd. whether these flies are allotted to the being transferred to Administrator members or Un-allotted till date? for reply.
2. Whether RCS send any recommendation of any flat to DDA No such information is available as per (Lessor of Land) after last allotment of 13 members available record. You may inspect draw held on 06-01-99? If yes then give me the copy of the file on 22.12.2010 at 4:00 PM.
the same. Documents identified will be
supplied.
3. Provide the certified copy of details of payment deposited As on (1) above.
by these 13 members along with the charging of interest Page 1 of 3 or Equivalent amount, at the time or their allotment of flats/ draw/ possession of their flats.
4. Provide the details on which date these 13 members have As on (1) above.
been enrolled in the society alongwith date of their application/date of resolution/date of payment of their dues in the society.
The Second RTI is regarding of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In which the Hon'ble court directed the society to adjustment with 13 other members in un-allotted f1ats in category 'B' and 737 Category 'A'.
Sl. Information Sought by RTI PIO Reply
1. What is the intent position of giving the demand letter 1 2 3 and 4. The information pertains to raising the dues by administrator of the society? the society. The applicant is being transferred to the Administrator for reply.
2. Please issue the attested photocopy of noting sheet on As on (1) above.
which action in this specific matter has been taken by the department or the administrator of the society.
3. What is the physical position of these above mentioned As on (1) above.
flats? Whether these are occupied or un-occupied?
4. If these specific flats are occupied by the society or by As on (1) above.
any other persons then please specify their names with address by these specific flats are occupied. Specify the capacity of concerned person have occupied the flats?
Grounds of the First Appeal:
Appellant is not satisfied.
Order of the FAA for First RTI :
"The APIO/AR(NW) has given a proper reply on 30.11.2010 and since the information in respect of Point No. 1, 3 & 4 pertained to the society, the same was forwarded by APIO/AR(NW) to the Administrator of the Society for providing the information. The Administrator of the Society is directed to provide the information directly to the Applicant in respect of Point No. 1, 3 & 4 within two weeks positively."
Order of the FAA for Second RTI :
"Since the information pertained to the society the APIO forwarded the same to the Administrator of the society for producing information to the Applicant. The Administrator of the Society is directed to provide the information directly to the Applicant. The APIO/AR(NW) may also look into the genuine grievances of the Applicant and dispose of the same as per DCS Act and Rules".
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The appellant was not satisfied.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing held on April 25, 2011:
"Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a perusal of the papers it appears that the information as directed by the FAA has not been provided to the Appellant. The First Appellate Authority had directed the Administrators of the Modern CGHS Ltd. to provide the information to the Appellant. It appears that both the Administrators have not provided any information to the Appellant despite the clear order of the FAA."
Decision dated April 25, 2011:
Page 2 of 3The appeal was allowed.
"The Commission directs Administrators of the Modern CGHS Ltd. to provide the information as directed by the First Appellate Authority to the Appellant before 20 May 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the Deemed PIOs/Administrators of Modern CGHS Ltd. within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIOs are guilty of not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the deemed PIOs actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to them, and they are directed give their reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on them.
Both the Administrators of Modern CGHS Ltd. i.e. Rohini and I.P. Estate will present themselves before the Commission at the above address on 26 May 2011 at 03.00PM alongwith their written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on them as mandated under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.
They will also bring the information sent to the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the information to the appellant."
Relevant facts emerging at the show cause hearing held on May 26, 2011:
The following were present:
Respondent: Mr. Krishan Kumar, Deemed PIO & Administrator.
The Respondent stated that he took charge as Administrator only on 04/03/2011. He further stated that the instant matter came to his knowledge only on receipt of the Commission's order dated 25/04/2011 two days prior to the show cause hearing. The Respondent produced the complete information in relation to both RTI applications before the Commission. A copy of the said information is being attached along with this order for the Appellant's perusal. The Respondent also stated that Mr. Ajay Kumar Gupta, the then Deemed PIO & Administrator was responsible for not complying with the order of the FAA.
Adjunct Decision:
In view of the aforesaid, the Commission hereby directs Mr. Ajay Kumar Gupta, the then Deemed PIO & Administrator to present himself before the Commission on June 15, 2011 at 11:00 am along with his written explanations to show cause why penalty should not be imposed and disciplinary action not be recommended against him for defying the orders of the FAA and failing to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act. If there are other persons responsible for this delay in compliance of the FAA's order, he may direct such person to appear before the Commission along with him.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner May 26, 2011 Enclosed: Copy of information provided by Deemed PIO.
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RJ) Page 3 of 3 Page 4 of 3