Central Information Commission
Sitaram Mishra vs Home Department Gnctd on 21 September, 2022
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
के न्द्रीयसच
ू नाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/HMDPG/A/2022/101023-UM
Mr. Sitaram Mishra
....अपीलकताा/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Nodal Officer (RTI)
Urban Development Department
Govt of N.C.T. of Delhi, 10 th Level,
Delhi Secretariat, New Delhi. - 110001
प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 15.09.2022
Date of Decision : 21.09.2022
Date of RTI application 02.09.2021
CPIO's response 08.11.2021
Date of the First Appeal 25.11.2021
First Appellate Authority's response 24.12.2021
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission 07.01.2022
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information regarding action taken on the complaint / application for the allotment of flat.
The CPIO vide letter dated 08.11.2021, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. The FAA vide order dated 24.12.2021, also furnished a reply to the Appellant.
Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.
Page 1 of 3HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. Jagdish Prasad Meena, Dy. Secretary, Mr. Bijender Rawat, ASO and others presented in the hearing.
The Appellant remained absent during the hearing. The Respondent while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application stated that the Appellant had sought information regarding action taken report on his complaints/application w.r.t allotment of flat etc. He stated that they had received the RTI application from Chief Secretary Office on 08.11.2021, as the information sought is pertaining to the DDA department and therefore the RTI application was transferred to Vice Chairmen, DDA, on 29.11.2021, to provide the information but no reply has been received till date.
The Commission was in receipt of a written submission by the Respondent dated 14.09.2022 which is taken on record.
The Appellant was not present to contest the submissions of the Respondent.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Respondent, the Commission observes that an appropriate reply has not been furnished by the CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the Commission directs the CPIO to collect the information from the Vice Chairmen, DDA, and furnish a correct and detailed revised reply to the Appellant, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
The Commission directs the Vice Chairmen, DDA, to cooperate with the CPIO to furnish the requisite information. For the redressal of his grievance, if any, the Appellant may approach an appropriate forum.
The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनाक ं / Date: 21.09.2022 Page 2 of 3 Copy to Vice Chairmen, DDA, D- Block, 1st floor, Vikas Sadan, Near INA Market, New Delhi-110023 Page 3 of 3