Central Information Commission
Satya Narayan vs Mcd on 27 March, 2026
के ीय सू चना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167
Satya Narayan .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
City SP Zone, 2nd Floor, Nigam Bhawan,
Old Hindu College Building,
Kashmere Gate, Delhi - 110006 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 06.01.2025
Date of Decision : 09.01.2025
Date of SCN Hearing : 23.02.2026
Date of SCN Decision : 27.03.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 24.03.2023
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 24.05.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 05.09.2023
CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 1 of 13
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.03.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
" नवेदन यह है क New F-25 शा ी नगर, द ल 110052 पतल गल के संबंध मे मने न न ल खत शकायत कर हुई है। िजसके बारे मे कुछ जानकार चाहता हूँ।
शकायत का ववरण
14-12-2022 No. 1200 23-01-2023 No 1326
21-12-2022 No. 3695 07-02-2023 No 1393
28-12-2022 No. 3804 31-01-2023 No. 1350
15.02.2023 No. 1420 22-02-2023 No 4328
(1) उपरो त शकायत के कौन कौन (JE) और (AE) building आए और शकायत वाले पते पर कनती बार गए।
(2) उपरो त शकायत क (JE) और (AE) मे अभी तक क या कायवाह कर है।
(3) या पा कग खर दने वाले और misuse करने वाल के कागज दे खे गए और अगर दे खे गए है तो उन कागजो क त ल प मुझे भेजी जाए।
(4) या पा कग क गोदाम या रयाश मे इ तेमाल कया जा सकता है।
(5) या (JE) और (AE) building ward-70 वारा अभी तक या या क गई उसक जानकार भी मुझे भेजे िजनको मने समय समय पर शकायत के ववरणो सूचना के अ धकार अ ध नयम 2005 के मा णत।"
2. Having not received any response from the PIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 24.05.2023. 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 on 06.01.2025:
The following were present:-
Appellant: He, along with Shri Deepak Sharma present in person.CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 2 of 13
Respondent: Shri Hanumant Trivedi, AE (B) along with Shri Anil Kumar, ASO, MCD, City SP Zone, Kashmere Gate, Delhi present in person.
The Commission has made following the observations and directions on 19.01.2025:
"The Commission, at the outset, is unhappy with the fact that no reply has ever been provided by the concerned Respondent at the relevant time to the Appellant. No cogent explanation for such violation /delay has been tendered by the Respondent during the hearing in writing despite receipt of hearing notice in advance. Further, the reasons accorded by the Respondent is rather irksome to note as it was incumbent upon the Public Authority to proactively maintain/access the RTI database and ensure that RTI Applications (online/offline) are dealt with in a time bound manner. Failure to dispose the RTI Application for the simple reason that it could not be disposed owing to its non- traceability/ oversight is reflective of the disregard for the RTI Act, the Respondent organization has.
In view of the above, the Commission directs Registry of this bench to issue show cause notice to then PIO, and the present PIO, Executive Engineer (B), MCD, City Sadar Pahar Ganj Zone, Delhi as to why action should not be initiated against him under Section 20 of RTI Act for not giving any timely response to the Appellant. The written explanation of the then PIO concerned and the present PIO along with supportive documents, if any, should reach the Commission within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Shri Hanumant Trivedi, AE (B), MCD, City SP Zone, Delhi should ensure service of this order at the address for correspondence of the then PIO and the present PIO for timely compliance of the above-mentioned directions.
Now, as far as relief of information in concerned, the Commission advises the appellant to give a copy of his complaint under reference in writing to the Respondent within one week of the date of receipt of this order and the respondent, to intimate the broad outcome of the said CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 3 of 13 complaints to the appellant, free of charge within three weeks, thereafter. A compliance report to this effect be uploaded with the Commission through the link given in the hearing notice.
Further, considering the gravity of issue flagged by the appellant regarding unauthorized usage of basement area, the Commission by virtue of the powers vested under Section 19(8) of the RTI Act, directs Superintendent Engineer of Municipal Corporation of Delhi, City SP Zone, Delhi to investigate this matter with a view to resolving the issue raised by the Appellant. In doing so, the Appellant be associated in the investigation, and he be allowed to present documents/photographs for the relevant period. If lapse is found in the matter, the Superintendent Engineer is to fix responsibility on delinquents, as may be found in the inquiry. Report of the inquiry along with supporting documents shall be shared with the appellant, free of cost, and also uploaded on the link provided in the Commission's hearing notice within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
FAA to ensure compliance of the directions."
Show Cause Proceedings Relevant Facts emerged during Show-Cause proceedings held on 23.02.2026:
The following were present:-
Appellant: He along with Shri Deepak Shamra appeared in person. Respondent: Shri Ramesh Prasad Gupta, the then PIO/Executive Engineer (B-I); Shri Hanumant Trivedi, the then APIO/Assistant Engineer and Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, PIO/Executive Engineer (B-I) and Shri Anil Chamoli, Assistant Section Officer, appeared in person.
1. The Appellant inter alia submitted that complete and correct information has not been provided by the Respondent PIO till the date of hearing. He stated that the reply dated 07.02.2025 was not received by him and a copy of the same was furnished to him only during the course of the CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 4 of 13 hearing. He further contended that the information sought pertained specifically to Property No. New F-25, whereas the Respondent had provided a reply relating to Property No. F-25, which is an entirely different property. He emphasized that this discrepancy had been repeatedly brought to the notice of the Respondent Authority, including through his letter dated 13.02.2025, a copy of which along with the acknowledgment of receipt by the Respondent Department was placed on record.
2. The Appellant alleged that despite being aware of the distinction, the Respondent deliberately furnished incorrect and misleading information.
Accordingly, he urged the Commission to impose maximum penalty on the concerned PIO under the provisions of the RTI Act and also sought appropriate directions for furnishing correct and complete information.
3. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that in compliance of the CIC's order, point-wise reply has been given to the Appellant vide letter dated 07.02.2025 stating as under:
1. All the complaints which have been received in this office are diarised in the diary register of this office and marked to the concerned area JE for necessary action if any. However, no action taken report regarding Property No. F-25, Shastri Nagar, Delhi-110052 is available in the records.
2. Inspections were carried out on 21.01.2025 & 03.02.2025 & no commercial activity found at Property no. F-25, Shastri Nagar, Delhi-110052.
3. No such information is available in the records.
4. In this regard, you may consult with the MPD-2021 and UBBL-2016 book which is available in the open market.
5. Same as S. No. 1 above.
6. The details of booking of unauthorized construction is available on MCD website i.e.www.mcdonline.nic.in.
7. Same as S. No. 6 above.
8. In this regard, you may consult with the DMC Act book which is available in the open market.
9. Same as S. No. 1 above.
10. Same as S. No. 3 above."CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 5 of 13
4. Shri Ramesh Prasad Gupta, the then PIO, Executive Engineer (B-I), vide letter dated 18.02.2026 provided written submission to the Commission, contents of the same are reproduced as under:
That vide order 09.01.2025, this Hon'ble Commission was pleased to direct as under:-
"In view of the above, the Commission directs Registry of this bench to issue show cause notice to then PIO, and the present PIO, Executive Engineer (B), MCD, City Sadar Pahar Ganj Zone, Delhi as to why action should not be initiated against him under Section 20 of RTI Act for not giving any timely response to the Appellant. The written explanation of the then PIO concerned and the present PIO along with supportive documents, if any, should reach the Commission within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order."
2. That undersigned was the PIO in the office of E.Ε.(Β-Ι) CSP Zone in March- 2023 when the appellant had submitted the application under RTI Act-2005. It is submitted that I have retired from service on 31.01.2024 after attaining the age of superannuation. It is submitted that the order dated 09.01.2025 was not conveyed to the undersigned by any official of EE(B-I) CSP Zone as directed by this Hon'ble Commission vide order dated 09.01.2025.
3. That vide order dated 30.01.2026, this Hon'ble Commission was pleased to direct as under:-
"the PIO to show Cause as to why penalty should not be imposed upon him for not providing information to the appellant within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order."
It is submitted that the instant order dated 30.01.2026 has been conveyed to the undersigned through Whatsapp on my mobile no. 9717788194 by Sh. Hanumant Trivedi, AE and as such I am submitting the reply.
4. At the outset, it is submitted that the officials of the MCD have the highest regards for the orders passed by this Hon'ble Commission and can never think of disobeying or violating any orders passed by this Hon'ble Commission willfully. The officials of the MCD have the utmost respect for the orders passed by this Hon'ble Commission which have been duly complied with time and again. It is submitted that if any act of omission or commission on behalf of the officials of the MCD have given any such CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 6 of 13 impression, I hereby tender unqualified and unconditional apology at the very outset, with the assurance of being more vigilant in future. The officials of the MCD are duty bound to follow the orders passed by this Hon'ble Commission and have always scrupulously obeyed the orders of this Hon'ble Commission.
5. That as submitted herein above that I have retired from service on 31.01.2024 after attaining the age of superannuation. However, as per record, the RTI application was sent by the appellant through Speed Post. It is submitted that the envelope did not specifically indicate about the RTI application and therefore the same was diarized by the diary clerk considering the same as general application in a general register instead of registering the same in RTI register. It is the possibility that the said application might have been placed before the undersigned in a bundle of various complaints and the same was marked in oversight to AE and subsequently, to the JE. It is submitted that due to this, the said application could not further be placed before the undersigned and the information could not be supplied in a time bound manner by the AΡΙΟ. As per record, the said application still stands in the name of the then J.E. The sald J.E has since been transferred and is working somewhere else.
6. That due to not diarizing the said application in RTI register, the said RTI application did not come in review of pending RTI applications made by the undersigned time to time.
7. That since I have retired from service on 31.01.2024 after attaining the age of superannuation, I cannot comply the order dated 09.01.2025 and the present PIO will comply the order dated 09.01.2025.
8. That in view of the facts and circumstances enumerated hereinabove, it is submitted that there has been no malice, on the part of officials of the undersigned /MCD. However, if at any stage, this Hon'ble Court is of the view that there is any lapse on the part of undersigned /MCD, the same is neither intentional nor deliberate.
9. That the inconvenience caused to the Hon'ble Commission is highly regretted and the undersigned /MCD tenders' unconditional apology for the same and undertakes that it will remain more prompt and vigilant in filing the reports before this Hon'ble Commission in future."
CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 7 of 135. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Executive Engineer (B)-I/Present PIO, CSPZ, vide letter dated Nil gave written submission to the Commission, contents of the same are reproduced as under:
"1. That the present reply is being submitted in compliance with the Show Cause Notice issued under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act 2005 pursuant to the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Commission.
2. At the outset, it is most respectfully submitted that there was no deliberate, intentional, or mala fide delay in furnishing the information sought by the applicant. The delay, if any, occurred due to inadvertent administrative circumstances, as elaborated herein. The Respondent tenders an unconditional apology for the procedural lapse and assures the Hon'ble Commission that greater diligence shall be exercised in future to ensure strict compliance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
3. It is submitted that in compliance with the directions contained in the order dated 09.01.2025, the amended/revised information was duly furnished to the applicant on 07.02.2025.
4. Thereafter, compliance of the Hon'ble Commission's order was uploaded on the CIC online portal on 10.02.2025 vide Diary No. 607295 through the prescribed "Link Paper/Compliance" mechanism.
5. Accordingly, the directions of the Hon'ble Commission stood complied with within the prescribed framework and there remains no subsisting or continuing non-compliance on the part of the Respondent.
6. It is respectfully submitted that upon receipt of the CIC order dated 09.01.2025 in the office, the same was marked to the Dealing Assistant (RTI) for necessary action in the ordinary course of administrative functioning. However, due to an inadvertent administrative oversight, the matter remained pending at the level of the Dealing Assistant and did not immediately come to the notice of the undersigned or other concerned supervisory officials.
7. It is submitted that the delay was purely procedural and unintentional in nature. Immediately upon the matter being brought to the notice of the undersigned, prompt corrective steps were undertaken
8. It is further submitted that immediately upon receipt of the Hon'ble Commission's order, necessary corrective institutional measures were CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 8 of 13 promptly undertaken. The requisite information was supplied to the applicant free of cost in compliance with the directions issued. Additionally, steps were taken to ensure proper authentication and vetting of replies prior to dispatch so as to maintain accuracy and procedural propriety. The internal mechanism for handling and monitoring RTI matters has also been streamlined and strengthened to prevent recurrence of any such inadvertent procedural lapses in future"
9. It is respectfully submitted that the delay, if any, in the present case was purely procedural in nature. There was no deliberate or mala fide intention, and therefore the imposition of penalty under Section 20(1) may kindly be reconsidered and dropped.
10. That immediately upon receipt of the Commission's order, corrective steps have been taken, including supplying information free of cost, ensuring proper authentication of replies, and streamlining internal RTI handling mechanisms to avoid recurrence.
11 That the undersigned is a senior officer entrusted with extensive statutory responsibilities concerning public safety, regulation of unauthorized construction, and enforcement of municipal laws, and there has never been any prior adverse finding or penalty under the RTI Act against the undersigned, further reinforcing the bona fide conduct.
PRAYER In view of the facts, circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Commission may be pleased to accept the explanation submitted by the undersigned and drop the show cause proceedings under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, holding that no penalty is warranted in the present case."
6. Upon being queried by the Commission, the Respondents have replied that Shri Ramesh Prasad Gupta was holding the charge of PIO from 01.01.2023 to 31.01.2024 and thereafter, Shri Sanjeev Kumar, PIO was holding charge of PIO from June 2024 onwards till date.
Decision in respect of Show-Cause proceedings:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, noted that the RTI CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 9 of 13 application dated 24.03.2023 remained unattended within the stipulated time frame, in clear violation of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The then PIO, Shri Ramesh Prasad Gupta, Executive Engineer (B-I), has failed to furnish any response to the Appellant within the statutory period. The explanation tendered by him, attributing the lapse to improper diarization of the RTI application as a general application, is not found satisfactory. It is the bounden duty of the PIO to ensure proper receipt, registration, and disposal of RTI applications. Administrative lapses or internal procedural deficiencies cannot be a ground to escape liability under the RTI Act.
8. Further, the Commission observes that even after the directions issued vide order dated 09.01.2025, the present PIO, Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Executive Engineer (B)-I, CSPZ, failed to ensure compliance in letter and spirit. The reply furnished to the Appellant pertains to Property No. F-25, whereas the information was specifically sought for Property No. New F-25, which the Appellant has consistently maintained to be a distinctly different property. The Appellant has also placed a letter dated 13.02.2025 on record wherein he specifically informed the Respondent Public Authority that reply was provided about the incorrect property number. However, despite that no cognizance was taken by the present PIO. This clearly establishes mala fide intent of the PIOs for having provided incorrect and misleading information was provided.
9. The plea of "inadvertent error" raised subsequently by the present PIO, stating that Property No. F-25 was mentioned instead of New F-25, appears to be an afterthought and lacks credibility, without documentary support to substantiate the averments by the Respondent and also when there are repeated representations by the Appellant highlighting the discrepancy. The conduct of the present PIO reflects a casual and insensitive approach towards compliance of the Commission's directions.
10. Moreover, the Commission takes serious note of the fact that the action taken report on the complaints filed by the Appellant has not been provided till date. The directions issued under Section 19(8) of the RTI Act, regarding investigation by the Superintendent Engineer, have not been complied with, nor has any report been placed on record.
11. The present PIO failed to provide mandatory details such as his name, official email address, and contact particulars in the reply, which is in CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 10 of 13 contravention of DoPT guidelines and settled principles laid down in various decisions of the Commission. The cumulative effect of the above clearly establishes non-compliance, negligence, and disregard towards the provisions of the RTI Act as well as the directions of the Commission.
12. In view of the foregoing, the Commission holds that this is a fit case for imposition of penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act. Accordingly, a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) is imposed upon Shri Ramesh Prasad Gupta, the then PIO-cum-Executive Engineer (B-I), for failure to provide any response within the prescribed time limit. A penalty of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) is imposed upon Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Executive Engineer (B)-I-cum-present PIO, CSPZ, for providing incorrect and misleading information, non-compliance of the Commission's directions, and failure to furnish complete and accurate information. The said penalty amount shall be recovered from the salaries of the concerned delinquent officers, by the Public Authority and remit by way of demand draft drawn in favour of "PAO, CAT", New Delhi and forward the demand drafts addressed to the Deputy Registrar (CR-II), email: [email protected] Room No. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110067. A penalty of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) is to be recovered from the salary of Shri Ramesh Prasad Gupta, the then PIO, Executive Engineer (B-I), in single instalment and same should reach the Commission by 28.05.2026. Further, penalty of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) is to be recovered from salary of Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Executive Engineer (B)-I / Present PIO, CSPZ by the Public Authority, in three equal instalments. The first installment of penalty amount should reach to the Commission by 28.05.2026, second installment by 28.06.2026 and the final or last installment should reach the Commission by 28.07.2026. Proof of payment shall be submitted to the Commission.
13. Further, the Commission directs the present PIO to provide a revised, complete and correct reply to the Appellant strictly with respect to Property No. New F-25, Shastri Nagar, Delhi and furnish the action taken report on all complaints mentioned in the RTI application within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The First Appellate Authority is directed to ensure compliance of the Commission's earlier directions issued under Section 19(8) CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 11 of 13 of the RTI Act and place the investigation report of the Superintendent Engineer on record, within six weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
14. The First Appellate Authority is directed to ensure compliance of this order.
The matter stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) Sd/-
(S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, City SP Zone, 2nd Floor, Nigam Bhawan, Old Hindu College Building, Kashmere Gate, Delhi - 110006 Shri Ramesh Prasad Gupta, Executive Engineer (B-I)/ then PIO, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, CSP Zone, 2nd Floor, Nigam Bhawan, Old Hindu College Building, Kashmere Gate, Delhi-110006 Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Executive Engineer (B-I)/ PIO, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, CSP Zone, 2nd Floor, Nigam Bhawan, Old Hindu College Building, Kashmere Gate, Delhi-110006 CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 12 of 13 CIC/MCDND/A/2023/643167 Page 13 of 13 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)