Central Information Commission
Mr. V. K Sharma vs Mcd on 29 December, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2009/002855/6111
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002855
Appellant : Mr. V. K Sharma
GD-151, Pitampura,
New Delhi-110088
Respondent : Public Information Officer
O/o The Superintending Engineer
/PR-III,
MCD Primary School,
H-Block, Ashok Vihar,
New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 16/06/2009
PIO replied : 07/07/2009
First Appeal filed on : 20/07/2009
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned
Second Appeal Received on : 07/11/2009
Information sought:
1. Intimate the roads with names & sketch comes under MCD and PWD in Pitampura and Shalimar Bagh area (ward no. 53-54 & 55-56)
2. Inform the date & year when these roads where densely carpeted.
3. What is the cut off period of carpeting/making these roads?
4. Inform if any scheme is under hand for making these roads & when it is going to be implemented, specify the time/period.
5. Inform if any scheme of making zebra crossing or yellow lines in the mid of the road or white line is under hand if not as to when it will be done?
PIO's Reply:
Application was transferred on 08/07/2009 to Respondent mentioned above by the PIO, MCD, Rohini Zone, New Delhi Appellant was informed vide letter dated 24/07/2009 by PIO, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi that sought information not pertain to that division (mentioned in enclosure dated 15/07/2009) Grounds for First Appeal:
Information not provided.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
Not enclosed.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Information not provided.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Badhwa the then APIO; Mr. M.K.Gupta, Executive Engineer;
The PIO has refused to give the information on the ground that the RTI application used the letter head of an individual. Very clearly Mr. V.K.Sharma has signed the RTI application and his name is mentioned below. Whereas it is true that Section 3 provides that information would be made available to the citizens of India merely using the letter head of any organization does not mean that individual signing it is not the applicant. This has been settled long back and the PIO has been guided by his desire to create unnecessary work.
The deemed PIO who refused to give the reply was Mr.M.K.Gupta.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information to the Appellant before 15 January 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the deemed PIO Mr. M.K.Gupta within 30 days as required by the law. From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIO Mr. M.K. Gupta is 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 PIO's actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
He will give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1) before 20 January, 2010. He will also submit proof of having given the information to the appellant.
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.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 29 December 2009 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)