Central Information Commission
Mr. R.D. Misra vs Muncipal Corporation Of Delhi on 8 July, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi 110067.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001319/4028
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001319
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. R.D. Misra,
251-D, J& K, Dilshad Garden,
Delhi-110095
Respondent : Mr. Devendar Kumar
PIO/Chief Engineer,
Muncipal Corporation Of Delhi, Office of the
Assistant Commissioner (DEMS), DEMS(H.Q.)
Town Hall, Delhi
RTI application filed on : 15.12.2008
PIO replied : 29.12.2008
First appeal filed on : 12.03.2009
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 21/05/2009
Information sought:
1. Compliance reports of MCD commissioner circular no. PSC/851/2008 date 1/11/08 by all the zones.
2. Names of daily wagers and substitute Safai Karmcharies working presently in Courts of Special Municipal Magistrates in all zones.
3. Names of employees presently posted and working in Zones in Courts of Special Municipal Magistrates as reader (UDC), Ahlmad (LDC), process server, Peon/orderly.
4. Is it correct that MCD commissioner vide his above said circular has not permitted to depute staff in courts from other in addition to their assent duties/work of their existing departments. why the zonal heads in zones(including assistant commissioner/Central Zone) has deputed staff in addition to their assigned duties.
5. Names of employees who are deputed with Special Municipal Magistrates of zones from general branch/licensing.
6. Names of employees of general branch who are deputed in the Municipal Courts in central zone. Why not?
7. Provide inspection and photocopies of file containing the proposal for deputing staff in Municipal courts in central zone in compliance of above said circular of the commissioner.
8. Photocopies of the document after inspection of records.
9. Names of those UDC who are deputed as LDC in Central Zone by the order of Zonal Assistant Commissioner in Municipal Courts.
10. Provide copy of duties and powers of Zonal Assistant Commissioner, names of those Zonal Assistant Commissioner who were working as AO in the same. Is it correct that Assistant Commissioner/Central Zone Mr. R.K. Parashar was a clerk in DDA.
Provide all his posting places since recruitments. Did he work as AO in Central Zone, provide his residence address.
11. Is the order no.PA/DC/CNZ/1232/2008 dt 6/11/08 issued by Assistant Commissioner/Central Zone lawful. If no what action is taken against Assistant Commissioner. In the same order why Ram Niwas LDC is deputed in addition in Municipal Courts When he is already working in Account section and also in who was already running on medical leave from Accounts section. Why Prabhat who is running absent from Education Dept. is posted in Municipal Courts.
12. All previous posting places of the employees of Building Department Central Zone according to their service file. Also mention which of them are drawing salary from other departments. Mention the wards and officials with who they are attached.
13. Is it correct that the Spl. Municipal Magistrate of Central Zone have written to MCD Commissioner regarding deputing staff to such courts? Provide copy of letter sent by Sol. Municipal Magistrate of Central Zone to MCD/HQ or DC Central zone after 6/11/08 regarding posting of staff/shortage of staff.
14. If any employee in the enclosed list is transferred, provide date of transfer order, date of reliving order and date of joining in next department. Provide copy of all these orders.
15. Copy of Compliance of reports received from ones regarding MCD Commissioner circular no. PSC/522/2008 dated 11/07/08.
16. A.) Names of those LDC, UDC class D employees/ server who have joined in Municipal Courts in Zones. Names of those who have not joined there inspite of orders and what action is taken in this regard.
B). Copies of letters/ notes received in Commissioner Office regarding non compliance of above said circular for shortage of staff. C). How many employees are posted in Municipal Courts on additional work/department, mention names of those employees. D) Names of those who are relieved from building department, general branch and joined in Municipal Courts.
E) How many posting orders in the above context are modified any why.
17. Names of employees working on diverted capacity in Zones in building department, general branch/ licensing. Why they are not relived inspite of order of Addition Commissioner and Commissioner of MCD from time to time.
18. Copy of compliance reports received in MCD/HQ regarding compliance of office order no.D/47/Adl. Cm(E)/07 dated 23/08/07. Names of those DC Zonal heads who have not complied this order.
Reply of PIO:
PIO informed the Appellant that information was pertaining to different PIOs. It was not possible for this office to reply to the Appellant's application. Office Memorandum along with the list of the PIOs of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide letter No.33/PSC/2008 dated 17.012008 was enclosed.
Grounds for first appeal:
Information had not been received by the Appellant.
Order of First Appellate Authority:
Not ordered.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant : Absent Respondent: Mr. A.K.Saxena on behalf of PIO Mr. Devendar Kumar The PIO has taken an erroneous position stating that since the information related to 15 different PIOs of MCD it amounted to getting information from 15 public authorities. Public Authority under Section 2 (h) of the RTI Act is not the same as the public information officers and the PIO had made a mistake in taking this position. Very clearly MCD is one public authority and therefore strictly speaking any PIO within MCD is duty bound to obtain information from other PIOs or Officers within MCD under Section 5(4) and provide it to the appellant.
The PIO has also presented a copy of the FAA's order dated 02/07/2009 issued by Mr. Anil Prakash Director-in-Chief (DEMS). Whereas the first appeal had been filed by the appellant on 12/03/2009. The FAA had held a hearing first on 30/04/2009 it is unfortunate that the FAA has first not discharged his duty within the time specified under the RTI Act and even in the order provided very late he states that the appellant should ideally apply to 15 different PIOs and to 'satisfy the appellant' the PIO is directed to transfer the application to various PIOs. This order has no basis in law and the FAA is also warned to ensure that he gives his orders atleast within the time mandated by the Act.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO Mr. Devendar Kumar is directed to obtain the information under Section 5(4) from the various PIOs or other officers and give it to the appellant before 5 August 2009.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this order will be provided free of cost as per section 7(6) of RTI, Act, 2005.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 8 July 2009 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (Rnj)