Central Information Commission
Jai Prakash Bhardwaj vs Mcd on 14 May, 2026
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/2023/147906
Jai Prakash Bhardwaj .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Office of the Executive
Engineer (EMS) WZ, MCD,
Zonal Building, Near Shivaji
College, Raja Garden, New Delhi - 110027 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.03.2025
Date of Decision : 21.03.2025
Date of SCN Hearing : 11.05.2026
Date of SCN Decision : 14.05.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 31.07.2023
CPIO replied on : 20.09.2023
First appeal filed on : 26.09.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 13.10.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 12.12.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.07.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
"आरट आई अ ध नयम 2005 के ावधान का उपयोग करते हुए, MCD वे ट जोन के कूड़े के स ब"ध म# मझ ु े न न%ल'खत जानकार क) आव*यकता है।CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 1 of 8
1. MCD वे ट जोन कूड़ा उठाने का ठे का .कस एज#सी के पास है बताए ।
2. िजस भी एज#सी को कूड़े उठाने का ठे का 2दया गया है उसके Agreement व नयम और शत6 क) स2ट7 फाइड कॉपी द जाए ।
3. MCD वे ट जोन म# कुल .कतने ड ट<बन/डलाव/ opensite है =येक क) लोकेशन बताए ।
4. MCD वे ट जोन के DEMS >वभाग म# बायोमे2?क अट# ड #स कब से लागु हुई बताए ।
5. MCD वे ट जोन म# .कतने शौचालय है सबक) लोकेशन स2हत परू ा >ववरण बताए ।
6. MCD वे ट जोन कूड़ा समय पर न उठाने पर एज#सी पर 01/04/2022 से अब तक .कतना जुमा7ना लगया गया है बताए और .कतना वसल ू ा गया है =येक वसल ू े गए जुमा7ने क) रशीद द जाए ।
7. MCD वे ट जोन म# सभी डलाव/ ड ट<बन/open site का Zero Garbage का समय बताए ।"
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 20.09.2023 stating as under:
"1. MCD वे ट जॉन कूड़ा उठाने का ठे का मै. इकोCीन इनवायरोटे क सोलुशन %ल%मटे ड (इ.इ.एस.एल.) एज#सी को 2दया ग या है ।
2. यह सच ु ना RTI Act 2005, Rule No. 8, Clause No. (j) के तहत आती है एवंउFत जानकार >वभाग दे ने म# असमथ7 है ।
3. MCD वे ट जोन म# कुल 34 ढलाव, एवं39 FCTS (ड ट<बन) हI, इसके अ तJरFत वे ट जोन म# कोई open site नह ंहै ।
4. यह जानकार इस >वभाग से स बंधत नह ंहै । यह जानकार AO(DEMS)/WZ >वभाग संस बंधत है ।
5. यह जानकार इस >वभाग से स बंधत नह ंहै । यह जानकार सै नटे शन >वभाग से स बंधत है ।CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 2 of 8
6. यह सच ु ना RTI Act 2005, Rule No: 8, Clause No. (j) के तहत आती है एवं उFत जानकार >वभाग दे ने म# असमथ7 है ।
7. MCD वे ट जोन म# सभी ड ट<बन एवं ढलाव के जीरो गाबKज समय का >ववरण क) त सलLन है।"
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 13.10.2023, held as under:
"The case was taken up on 13.10.2023. Appellant was present. Sh. Bharat AE(EMS)/WZ was present on behalf of PIO/EE(EMS)/WZ. PIO informed that the reply has already been given to appellant vide letter No. D/EE(EMS)/WZ/2023-24/260 dated 20.09.2023. The appellant was not satisfied with the reply given by PIO. PIO is directed to provide the modified reply to the appellant within 10 Days.
The appeal is accordingly disposed off."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 12.03.2025:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Kanojia, Assistant Engineer, attended the hearing in person.
The Commission has heard the matter and passed the following observations/directions on 21.03.2025:
"The Commission, after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and on perusal of the records, observes that the reply provided by the PIO vide letter dated 20.09.2023 is not satisfactory. The issues raised by the Appellant involve larger public interest involving violation of Swatch Bharat Abhiyaan also. None of the information sought falls under exempted category. It is further observed that the then PIO Shri Anil Kumar, EE, has not complied with the directions CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 3 of 8 of the First Appellate Authority. Action of the PIO at initial reply and later non-compliance of FAA order seems deliberate, which amounts to blocking the information. Such a conduct of the PIO causes unwarranted obstruction to the free flow of information to the information seeker under the RTI Act. This conduct is not appreciated. The act of the PIO concerned tramples upon the citizen's right under the RTI Act as well as shows lack of respect towards the Commission. In view of the above, inaction on his part is prima facie established and therefore, the Commission deems it expedient to direct the Registry of this Bench to issue Show Cause Notice to Shri Anil Kumar, EE-cum-then PIO. He shall explain in writing as to why action should not be initiated against him under Section 20 (1) and 20 (2) of the RTI Act for the foregoing reasons, written explanation of the then PIO should reach the Commission within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. A copy of this order shall be served upon the then PIO by the present PIO.
In the meantime, the Commission directs Shri Manoj Kumar Kanojia, Assistant Engineer, to re-examine the instant RTI Application and provide revised replies in respect of point No. 2 to 7 of the RTI Application by furnishing legible and certified true copy of information, to the Appellant, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. If the Respondent requires assistance from any other office/officer for compliance with the above directions, the same shall be sought by invoking Section 5 (4) of RTI Act.
The First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of the directions."
Relevant Facts emerged during Show-Cause proceedings held on 11.05.2026: The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Executive Engineer/PIO and Shri Rajesh Sharma, Assistant Engineer, appeared in person.
1. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that point-wise reply has been provided to the Appellant as per the records available with them vide letter dated 06.05.2025 and thus, above order of the Commission is complied with. For the sake of clarity, the contents of the reply are reproduced as under:CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 4 of 8
2. "एCीम# ट क) स=या>पत कॉपी संलLन है । (अनुलाCक-A).
3. MCD वै ट जोन के ड ट>वन / ढलाव / open site क) स=या>पत कॉपी संलLन है । (अनल ु ाCक-B)
4. इस Pडवीज़न के Jरकॉड7 म# इससे समबि"धत कोई भी जानकार उपलRध नह ं है।
5. MCD बे ट जोन के अंतग7त सभी शौचालय क) स=या>पत सू च संलLन है । (अनल ु ाCक-C)-
6. MCD वे ट जोन कूड़ा समय पर न उठाने पर एज#सी पर 01/04/2022 से अब तक Rs. 150904361/- जुमा7ना लगाया गया है (स=या>पत कॉपी संलLन है ), िजसको एज#सी के हर माह के <बल ते काटा जाता है ।(अनल ु ाCक-D)
7. MCD बे ट जोन म# सभी सभी डलाव / ड ट<बन /open site का Zero Garbage के समय क) स=या>पत कॉपी संलLन है । (अनुलाCक-E)."
2. In addition to the above, the PIO has filed written submissions dated 00.05.2026 disclosing relevant facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same on record. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:
"With reference to File No. CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 received in this office, it is respectfully submitted that the information sought vide RTI Application filed by Sh. Jai Prakash Bhardwaj, R/o WZ-259/A, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110059, was duly provided by the EMS Department. However, the present show cause notice pertains to the alleged delay in furnishing the modified reply/information.
In this regard, it is submitted that the RTI Application vide ID No. 403, dated 31.07.2023 filed by Sh. Jai Prakash Bhardwaj, R/o WZ-259/A, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059 Sh. Shahzad Ahmad Ansari was posted and working as Executive Engineer (EMS) West Zone instead of the undersigned. During the proceedings of the First Appeal dated 13.10.2023 before the First Appellate Authority (FAA), Sh. Bharat Singh, the then AE (EMS)West Zone appeared on behalf of the PIO/EE (EMS)/West Zone and informed the FAA that the reply had already been furnished to the appellant vide letter No. CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 5 of 8 D/EE(EMS)/WZ/2023-24/260 dated 20.09.2023. However, the appellant expressed dissatisfaction with the reply provided.
Thereafter, the FAA directed that a modified reply be furnished to the appellant within 10 days. It is pertinent to mention that Sh. Shahzad Ahmad Ansari continued to working as Executive Engineer (EMS)/West Zone till 29.02.2024 and subsequently retired from MCD service on 29.02.2024.
Thereafter, I, Anil Kumar assumed charge as Executive Engineer (EMS)/West Zone on 08.03.2024. After assuming the charge, necessary action was taken in compliance with the directions/orders of the Hon'ble CIC, and the requisite modified reply/information was furnished to the appellant within the period granted by the Hon'ble Commission. The matter was also discussed telephonically with the appellant, and thereafter the case was disposed off by the Hon'ble CIC.
It is further respectfully submitted that I, Anil Kumar, Executive Engineer (EMS)West Zone, has neither disobeyed nor disregarded any order passed by the Hon'ble Commission. The compliance was carried out diligently, and no intentional or deliberate delay attributable the period of posting of the undersigned.
In view of the facts stated above, it is humbly requested that the present show cause proceedings against the undersigned may kindly be withdrawn, as there has been no wilful negligence, mala fide intention, or deliberate delay on my part in compliance of the directions of the Hon'ble Commission."
Decision in respect of Show-Cause proceedings:
3. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records, notes that pursuant to the directions of the Commission, revised point-wise reply along with legible and certified copies of the relevant documents has been furnished to the Appellant vide letter dated 06.05.2025. The Respondent has also filed detailed written submissions explaining the factual background of the matter.
4. The Commission further notes the submission of Shri Anil Kumar, Executive Engineer/PIO, that during the relevant period when the RTI application and First Appeal were processed, the then Executive Engineer namely Shri Shahzad Ahmad Ansari (now retired) was functioning as PIO and the directions of the First Appellate Authority were not complied with during CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 6 of 8 his tenure. It has also been submitted that the present PIO assumed charge only on 08.03.2024 and thereafter necessary action was taken for compliance of the Commission's directions and revised information was furnished to the Appellant.
5. The Commission observes that the information sought has since been provided to the Appellant and there appears no deliberate or mala fide intention on the part of the present Respondent PIO in non-compliance of the provisions of the RTI Act or directions of the Commission. The explanation tendered by the Respondent PIO appears reasonable and satisfactory.
6. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the Commission is of the considered opinion that no further penal action is warranted in the matter. Accordingly, the show-cause notice issued to Shri Anil Kumar, Executive Engineer-cum-PIO is hereby dropped.
The matter stands dismissed accordingly.
Sd/-
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कु मार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूच ना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) Sd/-
(S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Office of the FAA (SE-II), West Zone, Dr. Sahib Singh Verma Nigam Bhawan, Near West Gate Mall, Raja Garden, New Delhi - 110027 CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 7 of 8 CIC/MCDND/A/2023/147906 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)