Central Information Commission
Rekha Mago vs Delhi Development Authority on 23 February, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/DDATY/A/2024/647076
Rekha Mago अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
.... ितवादीगण /Respondent
The CPIO Asst. Director (OSB), DDA,
A-Block, 2nd Floor, INA, New Delhi-
110023
Date of Hearing : 18.02.2026
Date of Decision : 20.02.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : SANJEEV KUMAR JINDAL
Relevant facts emerging from second appeal:
RTI application filed on : 05.09.2024
CPIO replied on : 01.10.2024
First appeal filed on : 03.10.2024
First Appellate Authority's : 16.10.2024
order
Second Appeal dated : 24.10.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.09.2024 seeking following information:
"1. Certified copy of original perpetual lease/allotment letter issued by DDA in favour of my grandmother (Smt. Parvati Mukjeja).
2. Certified copies of Will of my grandmother (Smt. Parvati Mukjeja) by Sh. Bhim Sain Mukheja to DDA.
3. Certified copies of NOC of all legal heirs including my mother (Smt. Kanta W/o Late Sh. Jagish Chander Mukheja) submitted to DDA.
4. Mutation letter and copy of conveyance deed issued in favour of Sh. Bhim Sain Mukheja by DDA.
5. All certified copies of file noting orders related to file no. L7 1674/83/OSB.
6. Name, Designation and other staff who are in custody of the said file/records."
2. CPIO vide letter dated 01.10.2024 denied the information u/s 8(1)(j).
3. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 03.10.2024.
4. FAA vide order dated 16.10.2024 stated as under :
"From perusal of the record available it is observed that the property was made freehold on the basis of registered Will executed by the allottee in favour of Sh. Bhim Sain Mukheja. Therefore other legal heirs were left with no rights in the property. Thus the stand of PIO to reject the RTI under section 8(1)(j) and section 11 is upheld and the appeal is here by disposed of."
5. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Rekha Moga Respondent: Mr. Laxman, PIO/LD, DDA, Mr. Alok Mishra, APIO/LD, DDA
6. Proof of having served a copy of second appeal on respondents, while filing the same in CIC, is not available on record
7. The Appellant inter alia submitted that the denial of information by DDA officials on the ground of "third party" and "personal information" is unjustified and contrary to the facts of the case. She stated that the property in question belongs to her grandmother Smt. Parvati Mukheja and that the mutation/transfer was carried out by DDA in favour of Sh. Bhim Sain Mukheja (her paternal uncle) allegedly in connivance with DDA officials on the basis of an invalid Will and false NOCs. The Appellant further submitted that a false NOC was shown to have been submitted on behalf of her mother Smt. Kanta (wife of Late Sh. Jagdish Chander Mukheja), wherein her mother was projected as the sole legal heir, whereas in reality there were three legal heirs, namely the Appellant herself, her brother Sh. Bitto Mukheja, and her sister Ms. Sonia Mukheja, who were not reflected in the affidavit submitted to DDA. The Appellant emphasized that she is not a third party but a direct legal heir.
8. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the information sought pertains to third-party personal information and was denied under Sections 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The Respondent further submitted that the legal heirs of Late Bhim Sain Mukheja/current occupants were informed and requested to appear before the Commission to present their case, however they did not come to present their view point.
9. Written submissions dated 16.02.2026 filed by the respondent is taken on record which states that the information was denied under Sections 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act as it relates to third-party personal information. It is also states that legal heirs of Late Bhim Sain Mukheja/current occupants were informed and requested to appear before the Commission vide letter dated 09.02.2026.
Decision:
10.The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, notes that the primary issue for determination is whether the Appellant is a "third party" or a claimant having a direct legal interest in the information sought.
The Commission is of the view that where an applicant claims to be a legal heir of the original owner and seeks documents concerning mutation of property by a public authority, the matter cannot be dismissed outright as third-party personal information without verifying such claim. At the same time, disclosure of documents like Will and NOCs requires due diligence and verification of relationship of the appellant.
During the hearing, the respondents agreed to provide copies of the original perpetual lease, Will and NOC of her mother provided that the appellant submit proper proof of her blood relationship to Late Smt. Parvati Mukheja.
In view of the above, the appellant agreed to submit documentary proof establishing her relationship as a legal heir of Smt. Parvati Mukheja to the Respondent within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The Respondent is, therefore, directed that within 15 days from the date of receipt and due verification of such proof as submitted by the Appellant, to provide the information as has been agreed to be disclosed as above to the Appellant, under intimation to the Commission.
With the above observations and directions, the Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
SANJEEV KUMAR JINDAL (सं जीव कुमार िजं दल) Information Commissioner (सू चना आयु ) date: 20.02.2026 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) (Col. Prabhat Kumar) Dy Registrar 011- 26107051 Addresses of the Parties:
1.PIO Asst. Director (OSB), DDA, A-Block, 2nd Floor, INA, New Delhi-110023
2. Rekha Mago Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)