Central Information Commission
Amit Kumar vs Mcd on 25 May, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MCDND/A/2024/644749
Amit Kumar .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
O/o Executive Engineer
(Building), Municipal
Corporation of Delhi, Karol
Bagh Zone, Nigam Bhawan,
D.B. Gupta Road, Anand Parbat,
New Delhi - 110005 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 21.05.2026
Date of Decision : 21.05.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 09.07.2024
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 14.08.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01.10.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.07.2024 (online) seeking the following information:CIC/MCDND/A/2024/644749 Page 1 of 6
"Information required from EE/KBZ and DC/KBZ for the period 01/04/2022 to 07/07/2024
1. Certified copy of CWR of all wards in Karol Bagh Zone.
2. Certified copy of ward wise handover and takeover of All JEs and AEs in Karol Bagh Zone.
3. Certified copy of missal band register.
4. Certified copy of demolition register.
5. Certified copy of dispatch register of sealing show cause notice and sealing order.
6. Certified copy of all water disconnection and electric disconnection letters issued.
7. Certified copy of prosecution filed in above period."
2. Not having received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.08.2024. The FAA order is not on record.
3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent despite notice.
Respondent: Shri Dharmraj Meena, Assistant Engineer (B), Karol Bagh Zone, MCD, appeared in person.
4. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 01.10.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirmed non-service. Thus, Regulation No. 10 of the Central Information Commission Management Regulations 2007 has not been complied with by the Appellant.
5. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had filed detailed written submissions dated 20.05.2026 disclosing complete facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same CIC/MCDND/A/2024/644749 Page 2 of 6 on record, copy of the same was sent to the Appellant. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:
1. "It is submitted that the applicant, Sh. Amit Kumar, had filed an online RTI application dated 09.07.2024. However, since the online RTI ID of the PIO/Building Department was not functional/active at the relevant time, the said RTI application could not be accessed or replied to by this office.
Subsequently, the applicant filed a First Appeal and the same also remained unattended, as no communication or order from the First Appellate Authority was received in this office in this regard.
2. It is submitted that the online ID for filing and processing RTI applications is now functional. The office of the Executive Engineer (Building), Karol Bagh Zone, is making all efforts to clear the pending matters on the online RTI portal at the earliest.
3. RTI application attached with Notice of Hearing has been taken on record.
The available records of the Building Department, Karol Bagh Zone reveal the following:
1. Building Department, Karol Bagh Zone is regulatory body to ensure the compliance of UBBL 2016 and disclosure of information viz building plan as well as construction watch register of any private property shall be contravention of the secrecy of the individual property holders who having the permission to construct his house from the competent authority. Being related to secrecy concern of the private property owners the same could not be disclosed under RTI Act.
2. The information sought regarding handover and takeover of ward-wise charge between Assistant Engineers (AEs) and Junior Engineers (JEs) in Karol Bagh Zone pertains to internal administrative arrangements relating to distribution of official work and allocation of duties within the department.
The same does not directly concern any public activity or public interest. Accordingly, disclosure of such internal administrative matters is exempted under Section 8(1)(0) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, as the information sought is in the nature of personal/service-related administrative records, disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy, unless larger public interest justifies disclosure.
CIC/MCDND/A/2024/644749 Page 3 of 63. The sought information is in public domain, as details of booked properties are regularly uploaded on the official website of the MCD i.e. www.mcdonline.nic.in applicant may please refer the same.
4. Since the requested demolition register contains consolidated records of private properties including third party details, indiscriminate disclosure of the complete register is not permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. However, information already available in the public domain may be accessed through the official website of MCD.
5. Since the requested dispatch register of sealing show cause notice and sealing order contains consolidated records of private properties including third party details, indiscriminate disclosure of the complete dispatch register is not permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
6. Since the requested water disconnection and electric disconnection letters issued contains. consolidated records of private properties including third party details, indiscriminate disclosure of the complete records is not permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
7. Since the requested prosecution files contains consolidated records of private properties including third party details, indiscriminate disclosure of the complete records is not permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
In view of the above submissions, it is respectfully requested that the reply furnished by this office may kindly be taken on record for compliance with the notice of the Hon'ble Commission."
6. The Respondent further submitted that point-wise reply has been given to the Appellant vide letter dated 20.05.2026. The contents of the reply are reproduced in the above paras. The Respondent further apprised the Bench that Honourable High Court of Delhi has penalised a few individuals who obtained similar information and abused the same by blackmailing those facing action for alleged violation of building bylaws.
Decision:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records, notes that the Appellant remained absent during the hearing despite due notice and has not contested the submissions made by the Respondent. The Commission further CIC/MCDND/A/2024/644749 Page 4 of 6 notes that the Respondent has explained the reasons for non-receipt and non- processing of the RTI application at the relevant point of time due to the online RTI ID of the concerned office being non-functional. The Respondent has also placed on record detailed written submissions along with a point-wise reply dated 20.05.2026.
8. The Commission observes that a substantial part of the information sought by the Appellant pertains to records containing details of private properties, demolition proceedings, sealing proceedings, prosecution records and other third-party related information. The Respondent has claimed exemption under the provisions of the RTI Act on the ground that indiscriminate disclosure of such consolidated records would involve third- party information and may result in unwarranted invasion of privacy. Further, certain information has been stated to be available in the public domain on the official website of MCD.
9. In view of the foregoing observations and considering that an appropriate reply has now been furnished by the Respondent, intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matter. However, the Commission advises the Respondent Public Authority to ensure that the RTI online portal remains functional and that RTI applications are attended to within the stipulated time frame under the RTI Act, 2005 so as to avoid recurrence of such instances in future.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कु मार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूच ना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) Sd/-
(S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date CIC/MCDND/A/2024/644749 Page 5 of 6 Copy To:
The FAA, O/o Superintending Engineer, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Karol Bagh Zone, Nigam Bhawan, D.B. Gupta Road, Anand Parbat, New Delhi - 110005 CIC/MCDND/A/2024/644749 Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)