Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Sanjeev Batra vs Ndmc on 5 July, 2019

                                  के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                               बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                          नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

 नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal Nos. CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/162264
                                       CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/174785
                                       CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/175079
                                       CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/175872

Shri Sanjeev Batra                                           ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
Sh. Ashish Verma, Sh. Vipin Chawla, Sh.
ParamjeetThareja
                               VERSUS/ बनाम

PIO, Joint Director (Estate-I), NDMC,                   ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondents
Palika Kendra, Parliament Street, New Delhi

PIO, Exe. Engineer (P-II), NDMC,
Palika Kendra, Parliament Street, New Delhi

PIO, Exe. Engineer (WS), NDMC,
Shaheed Bhagat Singh Place, New Delhi

FAA, O/o Director (Projects), NDMC,
Palika Kendra, Parliament Street, New Delhi

PIO, Asst, Director (NDMC), Palika Kendra
Parliament Street, New Delhi
Through: Sh. S K Jha - AE; Sh. S K Soni- Estate ;
Sh. S K Joshi

Date of Hearing                       :   30.05.2019&
                                          04.07.2019
Date of Decision Interim Decision     :   30.05.2019
Date of Final Decision                    05.07.2019

Information Commissioner              :   Shri Y. K. Sinha

 Since both the parties are same, the above mentioned cases are clubbed
 together for hearing and disposal.

    Case No.      RTI Filed on   CPIO reply   First appeal      FAO
    162264        17.05.2016     20.06.2016   13.07.2016         Nil

                                                                        Page 1 of 5
    174785      03.05.2016          Nil        05.09.2017          Nil
   175872      21.06.2016          Nil        07.09.2017          Nil
   175079      06.05.2016          Nil        06.09.2017          Nil

Information sought

and background of the case:

CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/162264 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.05.2016, seeking informationregarding copy of the entire file of Musical Fountain, Netaji Nagar, New Delhi with all notings and papers including all remarks, Note Sheets & Documents.
PIO/Jt. Director (Estate-I), vide letter dated 20.06.2016 replied as under:
"... the certified copy of desired unit file had already been provided to the appellant vide no. 52/SO(Estate-I)/2016 dated 08.03.2016 and desired unit file is under submission. As and when the same is available it will be provided to the appellant."

Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 13.07.2016 which was not adjudicated, therefore appellant filed Second Appeal in the Commission.

CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/174785 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.05.2016, seeking informationregarding copy of papers, letters, drafts, notes, documents and note sheet & correspondence exchanged between officials of NDMC, esp. ER. Ajay Gupta and Director(Estate-I), in response of appellant's letters No. 101/Y dated 25.09.2011, 26.09.2011 & 27.09.2011 addressed to Exe. Engineer (WS)/Project ER. Ajay Gupta, in respect of reduction of concession fee.

PIO/Exe. Engineer (WS), letter dated 26.05.2016 transferred his application to the Project & Estate Dept. NDMC u/s (6/3) stating that currently the job of musical fountain at Netaji Nagar has no link with EE(WS).

FAA/Director (Project), vide his letter dated 14.06.2016 & 06.07.2016 transferred his application to the Estate Dept. NDMC u/s (6/3).

Having not received any response from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 05.09.2017 which was not adjudicated, therefore appellant filed Second Appeal in the Commission.

CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/175872 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.06.2016, seeking information regarding copy of papers, letters, drafts, notes, documents and note sheet Page 2 of 5 &correspondence exchanged between officials of NDMC, esp. ER. Ajay Gupta and Director(Estate-I), in response of appellant's letters No. 101/Y dated 25.09.2011, 26.09.2011 & 27.09.2011 addressed to Exe. Engineer (WS)/Project ER. Ajay Gupta, in respect of reduction of concession fee. APIO/(PH)/EE(P-II), vide his letter dated 28.06.2016 transferred his application to Exe. Engineer (WS), NDMC and PIO/Dy. Director (Estate-I), NDMC, New Delhi.

Having not received any response from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 07.09.2017 which was not adjudicated, therefore appellant filed Second Appeal in the Commission.

CIC/NDMCN/A/2017/175079 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.05.2016, seeking information regarding letter no. D/1852/EE(WS) dated 05.10.2011, ER Ajay Gupta, Exe. Engineer (WS)/Projects. He sought copy of papers, letters, drafts, notes, documents and note sheet & correspondence exchanged between official of NDMC ER. Ajay Gupta and Director, Estate-Iin response to his letters No. 101/Y dated 25.09.2011, 26.09.2011 & 27.09.2011.

APIO/(PH)/EE(P-II), vide his letter dated 11.05.2016 transferred his application to Exe. Engineer (WS), NDMC and PIO/Dy. Director (Estate-I), NDMC, New Delhi.

Having not received any response from the PIO, appellant filed First Appeal dated 06.09.2017 which was not adjudicated, therefore appellant filed Second Appeal in the Commission.

Facts emerging in the course of hearing: 30.05.2019 A letter dated 13.05.2019 has been received from Smt. HolikaTigga-PIO/Asst. Director, RTI Cell, NDMC which did not deal with any factual input. The aforementioned appeals arose out of a dispute of the appellant with the respondent on account of some alleged commercial irregularity by the respondent. The appellant explained that the project of Musical Fountain at Netaji Nagar was given to their company on B-O-T(Build-Operate-Transfer) basis. The project was given for a specific area of land initially but subsequently the area was reduced on account of some part having been taken over for construction of Delhi Metro route. But the concession fee continued to be the same, without being reduced proportionately to the area. The appellant had been corresponding with the respondent in this regard and vide a letter dated 05.10.2011, the Executive Engineer(W/S)/Projects -ER. Ajay Gupta had communicated to the appellant that the case for extension of concession period and reconsideration of payment schedule has already been processed and outcome shall be intimated to the appellant in due course. However, thereafter, the appellant has been left in the lurch and no communication in this regard received. The respondents have been avoiding disclosure of any information Page 3 of 5 with respect to the file which contained the said communication [letter dated 05.10.2011 from the Executive Engineer(W/S)/Projects -ER. Ajay Gupta] and have been passing the onus of holding the information, from one department to another.

Respondents from Water supply and Estate Depts of NDMC present for hearing fail to provide any cogentresponse or explain the whereabouts of the file containing the specific letter mentioned by the appellant and the file containing the same. The respondents have also failed to explain the reason behind the deliberate dilatory tactics and unnecessary transfer of the RTI application from one department to the other.

Interim Decision: 30.05.2019 Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the cases at hand, it is imperative to examine the file containing correspondence exchanged between officials of NDMC, viz. ER. Ajay Gupta and Director(Estate-I), in response to the Appellant's letters regarding reduction of concession fee. The said file is likely to hold the abovementioned letter dated 05.10.2011 from the Executive Engineer(W/S)/Projects -ER. Ajay Gupta whereby the appellant had been informed that the issue about extension of concession period and reconsideration of payment schedule has already been processed. However, as is evident from perusal of records and the unsatisfactory responses of the respondent, the Commission deems it expedient that the concerned file containing correspondence regarding reduction of concession fee with respect to the Musical fountain project is produced before the Commission, for proper appreciation of facts.

Accordingly, it is directed that the concerned PIO shall trace and submit the original file containing the relevant documents and correspondence about the reduction of concession fee with respect to the Musical Fountain project. The PIO, Estate-I, shall remain present during the next date of hearing alongwith the summoned file in original. Cases are hereby adjourned to 04.07.2019.

Facts emerging during the course of hearing: 04.07.2019 Both parties are present and the respondent states that information pertaining to the said project file is not available with the Estate Dept. A letter dated 03.07.2019 by the Executive Engineer (WS) Sh. Harkesh Meena has been placed on record stating that the record file related to extension of concession period and reconsideration of payment schedule for Concession Agreement dated 28.10.2009 for Redevelopment of Netaji Nagar Musical Fountain Park on BOT basis is not available in Water Supply Division of NDMC. Respondents have produced notings of Dy. Director Estate-I stating:- "There is no project department now, perhaps. Please contact the concerned person having keys of almirah and see if something is available".

Decision In view of the facts which have emerged during the course of hearing, it seems that the consistent attempt of the respondent has been to avert the disclosure Page 4 of 5 of information in this case. In this regard, the recent averment is that the concerned file is not traceable, for reasons best known to the respondent,despite the fact that it pertains to an important redevelopment project undertaken by the Delhi Government. The handling of the case at hand, clearly reflects poor record management and lack of transparency, at the very least. The Commission refrains from making any further comment on the merits of the case but suffice to say that it is quite astonishing to find that a complete file is lost without any reasonable cause, particularly one which pertains to a recent project, and which has run into dispute on account of payments to be made, and even an arbitration case is pending in this regard.

Under the given circumstances, the Commission hereby directs the Director, Estate-I to submit a duly notarised affidavit on a non-judicial stamp paper affirming the fact that the specific file containing information relating toextension of concession period and reconsideration of payment scheduleand the letter dated 05.10.2011 from the Executive Engineer (W/S)/Projects -ER. Ajay Gupta etc. has been misplaced, reasonable cause of such misplacement of the file and action taken/FIR lodged with respect to such loss of file, with substantiating evidence about the action taken in this regard. This affidavit shall be submitted before the Commission by 20.07.2019, with a copy served upon the appellant in advance.

The appeals are disposed off accordingly.

Y. K. Sinha(वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणतसत्यानपतप्रनत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/011-26180514 Page 5 of 5