Central Information Commission
Smt.Shakuntla Devi vs Delhi Development Authority on 18 July, 2013
Central Information Commission
Room No.4, Club Building,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi 110 067.
Tel No: 011 26106140
Decision No.CIC/VS/A/2012/001047/04072
Appeal No. CIC/VS/A/2012/001047
Dated: 18.07.2013
Appellant: Smt. Shakuntla Devi
R/o. F1/206, Sector 16
Rohini
Delhi110085
Respondent: Public Information Officer
Delhi Development Authority
Dy. Director, Old Scheme Branch
ABlock, 2nd Floor
Vikas Sadan, INA
New Delhi110023
Date of Hearing: 18.07.2013
ORDER
Facts
1. The appellant filed an application dated 02.04.2012 under the RTI Act, seeking information regarding the details about the demolition of a particular property and reallocation. Respondent responded on 02.05.2012. Appellant filed appeal before the first appellate authority (FAA) on 09.05.2012. FAA allowed for inspection. Appellant filed this present second appeal on 26.07.2012.
Hearing
2. Appellant's representative and respondent were present before the Commission.
3. Appellant's representative referred to the RTI application of the appellant and stated that the appellant was seeking information regarding the details about the demolition of a particular property, reallocation and copies of complete files.
4. Appellant's representative stated that the appellant's father in law was a displaced person and the government had allotted her a quarter. Appellant's representative stated that the quarter was demolished and in lieu of that an alternative plot was allotted to the appellant's father in law.
5. Appellant's representative stated that the main of the appellant was on the following :
(a) to verify whether the quarter was demolished by any government agency;
(b) whether surrender certificate pursuant to the demolition was issued; if yes, what is the name, date and number; and
(c) particulars of the plot allotted to the appellant's father in law in lieu of the quarter which was demolished.
6. Appellant's representative stated that the appellant also wanted to have the copies of the files.
7. Respondent stated that the CPIO in their reply dated 02.05.2012 had informed the appellant that the file was not traceable, though later the relevant documents were located. The respondent said that they had made very significant effort to locate the files and subsequently the FAA asked the appellant to inspect the files as it ran into hundreds of pages.
8. Respondent stated that a recent development is that the files have been seized by the Vigilance Department for certain investigations. Respondent said that the facility for inspection will be provided immediately on availability of the files.
9. It emerged from the hearing that the file is voluminous and contains information about the other parties as well. Respondent is expected to provide the information in the context of para 5 above and enable the appellant to inspect the files once the files become available.
Decision
10. Respondent is directed to provide photocopies of the relevant papers after inspection of the pertinent files within 30 days of the availability of the files.
The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Vijai Sharma) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(V.K. Sharma) DO & Deputy Registrar