Central Information Commission
Gurvinder Singh vs Delhi Development Authority on 28 August, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/DDATY/A/2023/119030
Gurvinder Singh .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Asst. Director - LAB
(RO-I) Delhi Development
Authority, Land Sales
Branch, C-3, Ist Floor, Vikas
Sadan, New Delhi -110023 ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.08.2024
Date of Decision : 23.08.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 09.10.2022
CPIO replied on : 09.09.2022
First appeal filed on : 21.12.2022
First Appellate Authority's order : 03.02.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 30.03.2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.10.2022 seeking the following information:Page 1 of 9
"This RTI Application is being filed on behalf of Authority Letter (Attached) given by my father S. Darshan Singh Monga (Mutatee) to persuade his case, applications further. Earlier also he had expressed his willingness to deposit the demand money and wrote to you a RTI Application dt-23.06.2021 but was not answered, a reminder mail was sent at [email protected] and finally First Appeal was lodged with you dt-12.08.2021 and was disposed with dis- satisfactory reply. Then a second appeal was filed on 13.09.2021 and was disposed on 13.09.2022. The commission observed that PIO had not replied to my RTI Application dt-23.06.2022 and had sought written submission from him through present PIO. Despite the order of the commission specific information was not provided.
Anyhow, in between a fresh letter was sent to the Dy. Director, L.S.B. Rohini, dt- 11.07.2022 (Attached), by my father S. Darshan Singh Monga (Mutatee) and had clearly expressed his willingness to deposit the demand money against his allotment of Plot No.21, Pocket No.8-1, Sector-37, vide application No.80989, Priority No.11243 under Rohini Res Scheme 1981 and had also requested to come forward along with present demand with interest or relief if any, but had received No Reply from the department.
Therefore, this application under RTI is being written, and You are being requested to reply under RTI ACT 2005 and provide the information for the following:
1. Why the letter written to Dy. Director dt-11.07.2022 was not replied, despite its confirmed delivery through speed post dt-15.07.2022?
2. Why information on Status of mentioned Plot is being hidden and not disclosed?
3. Why present demand money with interest or relief if any, is being not disclosed despite of willingness to deposit the demand money by the Mutatee S. Darshan Singh Monga through his letter dt-11.07.2022."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 09.09.2022 stating as under:
"1. The total demand issued by DDA under MIG category depends upon the pre-determined rates notified by DDA for the year of the issuance of Demand cum Allotment Letter.
2. No, relief has been provided to allottees who could no pay the demand money in time due to pandemic Corona Virus.Page 2 of 9
3. No payment of premium for the plots is being accepted after 31.12.2019.
4. The information on how to deposit the demand money under MIG category for 60 sq mtrs plot under Rohini Residential Scheme can be checked on the Demand cum Allotment letter. issued by DDA against the allotted plot. The possession letter shall be issued once payment on premium is deposited and all codal formalities have been complies with xxxxxx."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.12.2022. The FAA vide its order dated 03.02.2023, upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person Respondent: Shri Parvinder Kumar, PIO & Assistant Director and Shri Manish Kumar, Senior Assistant, appeared in person.
The appellant inter alia submitted that he was not satisfied with the reply given by the respondent as desired information was not provided.
The respondent apologised for not appearing before the Commission on time and assured that no such incident would recur in future. They stated that in compliance of the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the FAA has passed the detailed and speaking order vide letter dated 09.07.2024 covering the issue of the appellant and requested the same to be placed on record. The relevant paras of the speaking order dated 09.07.2024 is reproduced as under:
"Shri Gurvinder Singh S/o Late Sardar Darshan Singh Monga filed the writ petition bearing no. 15367/2023 & 3649/2024. The title of the both writ petition were Gurvinder Singh Vs DDA.
The Hon'ble High Court has disposed off the WPC-3649/2024 titled Gurvinder Singh Vs DDA, vide order dt.12/03/2024 and directed DDA to:-Page 3 of 9
"1. The Petitioner has approached this Court stating that the Order dated 20.12.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 15367/2023 has not yet been complied with.
2. Mr. Sanjay Katyal, learned Standing Counsel for the DDA, states that let the Petitioner appear before the Deputy Director, LAB, Vikas Sadan, Rohini on 18.03.2024 at 11:00 AM for compliance of the Order dated 22.12.2023 passed by this Court. The statement is taken on record.
The Hon'ble High Court has disposed off the WPC-15367/2023 titled Gurvinder Singh Vs DDA, vide order dt.20/12/2023 and directed DDA to:-
"Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In view of the innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and no objection on behalf of the respondent, learned counsel for petitioner is granted liberty as prayed with direction to file an appropriate representation/application along with the copy of this order before the competent authority within a period of two weeks. The competent authority after receiving the application is directed to dispose of the representation and pass a detailed and reasoned order in accordance with law expeditiously i.e. preferably within a period of six weeks."
Sh. Gurvinder Singh filed the above writ petition bearing no. 15367/2023& 3649/2024 with the following reliefs:-
(a)Issue a writ of mandamus and/or may pass and issue appropriate direction/order in favour of the petitioner against the respondents DDA allotting a corner plot of 90 sq. mtr. to the petitioner in Rohini Residential Scheme-1981 alongwith demand letter in a time xxxxx 1981 scheme as registered by the petitioner on 15.04.81 in the interest of justice;
(b) Issue a writ of mandamus and/or may pass and issue appropriate rection/order in favour of the petitioner against the respondents DDA for ransfer/Mutation of registration/allotment in death case under MIG category of 'lot No.521, Pkt./Blk, C-2, Sector-37, measuring 60 sq.mtr. in Rohini Pesidential Scheme 1981 vide application No.80989, Priority No. 11243, on the iginal writ as registered on 15.04.81 under the Rohini MIG Scheme, only if the DA fails to allot a 90 sq. mtr. corner plot as original sought alongwith demand etter, in the interest of justice, and Page 4 of 9
(c) Direct order in favour of the petitioner awarding suitable cost and compensation against the respondents DDA, in the interest of justice, and
d) Pass any such other further order(s), direction(s) which this Hon'ble Court may eem fit and proper in the facts of the case.
Brief facts:-
1. That Shri Paramjit Singh S/o Sardar Darshan Singh got himself registered for allotment of MIG residential plot in RRS-1981, vide application no. 80989 dated 15.04.1981 and deposited Rs. 5,000/-, vide FDR No. 19810 dt. 15.04.1981. He was assigned priority no. 11243.
2. That after the death of registrant on 20.08.1981 and compliance of all the codal formalities, his mother Smt. Avtar Kaur W/o Sardar Darshan Singh Monga was recognized as registrant in place of the late Paramjit Singh, vide letter bearing no. F1(1)89/331/LSB(R)/ 624 dt. 05.07.1991.
3. That Smt. Avtar Kaur was allotted the Plot No. 521 Pkt. C-2, Sec. 37 measuring 60 Sq. Mtr. Rohini, after computerized draw, held on 12.06.2012. Since, the certain acquisition/compensation issues was raised by the Villagers of Barwala, the works of providing basis amenities/services in Sec. 34(Pt.), 35, 36, 37 and 38 were held up and subject matter of litigation in the deferent Court of Law, which was also intimated to the mutatee vide letter dt. 15.03.2017. Therefore, the Demand cum Allotment Letter was not issued to the mutatee.
4. That again after the death of 1st mutatee i.e. Smt. Avtar Kaur on 16.08.2017 and compliance of all the codal formalities, her husband Sh.
Sardar Darshan Singh Monga S/o Late Sh. Mangal Singh Monga was recognized as registrant/allottee in place of the late Smt. Avtar Kaur, vide letter bearing no. F1(M)80989/LSB(Rohini)/ DDA/67 dt. 16.02.2018.
5. That earlier allotted plot was covered in the acquisition/ compensation matter before the Hon'ble Court, therefore the mutate was allotted new/alternative Plot No. 21 Pkt. B-1, Sec. 37 measuring 60 Sq. Mtr. Rohini, after computerized draw, held on 05.10.2018 and the Demand cum Allotment Letter bearing no. F16(547)/2018/ RHN/26 dt. 07.02.2019 was issued to her, with direction to deposit the premium of the plot within stipulated period.
Page 5 of 96. That the demanded amount was required to be paid pay by allottee/mutatee 35%, 50% & 15% within 60 days, 120 days & 180 days (respectively) from the date of issuing the Demand Cum Allotment letter. The DAL also mentioned a condition, in Clause No. 9 of the demand- cum-allotment letter that:-
"In case you fail to deposit the above amount and furnish copy of counterfoil and the required documents within the specified period, the allotment will be treated as cancelled and the amount already deposited by you will be refunded on your request after deducting a sum of 10% of the earnest money in addition to the interest payable. Please note that no further request for restoration would be entertained in this respect."
7. That the allottee has failed to deposit the total premium of the plot within the stipulated time. However, vide Circular bearing no. f1 (Misc.) 2015/EOT/LSB(R)/379 dt. 15/07/2019, the answering defendant extended the last date upto 31/12/2019 for payment of premium of plot for the allottees to whom demand-cum-allotment letter were issued from 2014 onwards, subject to the payment of interest and restoration charges, as applicable, but they have to again failed to deposit the premium of Plot within extended period upto 31.12.2019.
8. That no further extension of time was allowed/granted to any allottee for depositing the premium of Plot, till now.
9. That as per terms and conditions of Brochure of Rohini Residential Scheme, DDA reserved the right to allot a different size of plot in the same category. In order to cover all the waiting registrants for allotment of plots under Rohini Residential Scheme-1981, The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) reduced the plot size of the Rohini Residential Scheme 1981 from 90 sq. meters to 60 sq. meters in MIG category, from 48 sq. meters to 32 sq. meters in LIG category and from 90 sq. meters to 60 sq. meters in Janta/EWS category. This change was based on a decision made by the Central Government to satisfy the claims of all pending applicants within the available land and question of harassment to the applicants does not arise.
10. That as per the clause 9 of the DAL, the allotment has been treated as cancelled and the amount already deposited by mutatee will be refunded on his/her request, after deducting a sum of 10% of the earnest money in addition to the interest payable.
Page 6 of 911. That a notice bearing no. CIC/DDATY/A/2021/642085 dt. 02.09.2022 was received, which was duly replied by the DDA, vide letter bearing no. F16(547)/2018/2492 dt. 09.09.2022.
12. That the mutatee neither paid the Plot Premium within the stipulated time mentioned in the DAL nor within the extended time upto 31.12.2019, therefore as per the clause 9 of the DAL; the allotment has been treated as cancelled.
13. That the representation is decided accordingly."
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, noted that information sought by the appellant was in the form of query which did not fall within the definition of "information" as defined under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. However, point-wise reply has been given by the respondent vide letter dated 09.09.2022. Besides, the respondent submitted that in compliance of the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the FAA has passed the detailed and speaking order vide letter dated 09.07.2024 covering all the issues of the appellant.
In view of the above, the Commission finds that appropriate reply has been given by the respondent and intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matter.
A pertinent issue emanating from the instant case and similar cases dealt by this bench in the recent past is that while replying to the RTI applications and disposing First Appeals, the designated PIO's and FAA's of almost all Public Authorities under DDA, are only scribbling their signatures and are not giving their names, official designations and their official telephone numbers and email ID's which is violation of instructions on the subject. In this regard, the Commission finds it pertinent to refer its own judgment dated 02.07.2012, passed in Second Appeal No. CIC/DS/A/2012/000971, wherein it has been held as under:
Page 7 of 9"9. CPIO is directed to provide full and complete information regarding expenditure incurred on all types of gifts including coats at the above-mentioned conference to the appellant within 2 weeks of receipt of the order. Furthermore, commission notes that while replying to the applicant vide letter dated 31 March 2011 the former CPIO has not given his name and has only scribbled his signature which is eligible and does not give out the identity of the CPIO.
10. CPIO is directed to ensure that his name is clearly written below the signature in future."
The Commission would also like to refer an Office Memorandum dated 06.10.2015, bearing Ref. No. 10/1/2013-IR, issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, regarding format of giving information to the applicants under the RTI Act, wherein following observations have been made which are as under:
"It has been observed that different public authorities provide information to RTI applicants in different formats. Though there cannot be a standard format for providing information, the reply should however essentially contain the following information:
(i) RTI application number, date and date of its receipt in the public authority.
(ii) The name, designation, official telephone number and email ID of the CPIO.
(iii) In case the information requested for is denied, detailed reasons for denial quoting the relevant sections of the RTI Act should be clearly mentioned.
(iv) In case the information pertains to other public authority and the application is transferred under section 6(3) of the RTI Act, details of the public authority to whom the application is transferred should be given.
(v) In the concluding para of the reply, it should be clearly mentioned that the First Appeal, if any, against the reply of the CPIO may be made to the First Appellate Authority within 30 days of receipt of reply of CPIO.
(vi) The name, designation, address, official telephone number and e-mail ID of the First Appellate Authority should also be clearly mentioned."
Advisory under Section 25 (5) of the RTI Act In view of above, an advisory, is issued to Principal Secretary, Administrative Reforms Department, Government of NCT Delhi, to take note of the aberration of RTI Act being manifested in the Respondent public authority's office and issue a direction to their PIO's and FAA's to write their names, designations, official telephone numbers along with email id, while replying to the RTI Page 8 of 9 Applications and First Appeal in future, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005.
Shri Vineet Jain (IRPS) Commissioner, DDA New Delhi, is also directed to sensitize their officials regarding the provisions of RTI Act by way of training workshops etc. and putting in place a coherent system of checks and balances. In pursuance of the aforesaid advisory, the PIO is directed to place a copy of this order before their competent authority for taking appropriate action.
The FAA to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA Deputy Director - LAB (RO-I) Delhi Development Authority, Land Sales Branch C-3, 1st Floor, Vikas Sadan, New Delhi -110023 Shri Vineet Jain (IRPS) Commissioner DDA, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi - 110023 Page 9 of 9 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)