Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Hasan Khurshid vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation Hq on 20 March, 2020

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

निकायतसंख्या / Complaint No.                   CIC/NDMCH/C/2018/121732

Shri Hasan Khurshid                                       ... निकायतकताग/Complainant
                                   VERSUS/बनाम

PIO/Asst. Commissioner (Remunerative                      ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondent
Project), NDMC, Minto Road, New Delhi
Through: Sh. Ashok Kumar, Asstt. S.O.
Sh. Sanjay Rai

PIO/Asst. Commissioner/City SP Zone,
NDMC, Sadar Pahar Ganj, Old Hindu
College, Delhi
Through:
Sh. Amitabh K. Srivastava, Asstt. Commissioner
Shri Ashok Kumar, ASO; Sh. Suresh Kumar
Sharma, LI

Date   of   Hearing                     :   02.01.2020
Date   of   Decision                    :   03.01.2020
Date   of   Show cause Hearing          :   19.03.2020
Date   of   Decision                    :   20.03.2020

Information Commissioner                :   Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on               :    07.02.2018
PIO replied on                         :    21.02.2018
                                            (transferred RTI application )
First Appeal filed on                  :    Nil
First Appellate Order on               :    Nil
2ndAppeal/complaint received on        :    31.03.2018

Information sought

and background of the case:

Complainant filed RTI application dated 07.02.2018 seeking information regarding email dated 20.12.2017 addressing to Ms. Ruchika Katyal, IAS on [email protected]. He sought information on 5 points, inter alia:

1. What action was taken on that email application?

2. Will some action be taken by removing the undesired obstacles in the smooth flow of traffic?

3. Does the wrong decision not constitute the act of deficient service?

4. Will the RP Cell inform me on or before February 20, 2018 about the action taken? Etc PIO/Administrative officer (NDMC), vide letter dated 21.02.2018 transferred his RTI application to PIO, City SP Zone, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi.

Having not received any reply from the PIO, Complainant filed a Complaint in the Commission.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Communication letter dated 26.12.2019 has been received from RP Cell/North DMC it is stated that the RTI application was transferred from their office to PIO, City SP Zone, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi on 21.02.2018.

The Complainant is absent despite advance notice of hearing. The Respondent is present and heard. The Respondent states that the complainant sought information in reference to his email wherein the issue of parade ground parking was raised. The Respondent further submits that RTI application was wrongly transferred by the RP Cell to PIO/C-SPZ whereas the RTI belongs to RP Cell itself. The Respondent further submits that he joined as Assistant Commissioner in City SP Zone on 11.11.2019 and was not in charge during the period under question.

Decision:

Upon perusal of records and as orally submitted by the Respondent, the Commission finds that a reply was given to the complainant informing that the matter pertains to R.P. Cell at North DMC Headquarter but the same was not transferred to the concerned PIO/R.P. Cell. Therefore, the Commission hereby directs the Registry of this Bench to issue SHOW CAUSE NOTICE to i) the then PIO/RP Cell, North DMC(designated at the time RTI application was filed i.e. 07.02.2018) through present PIO, Sh. S.K.Sharma, S.O.,RP Cell, North DMC and ii) the then PIO/City SPZ (designated during the period 7.2.2018 to 16.04.2018) through the present PIO- Shri Amitabh K. Srivastava, Asstt. Commissioner, City SPZfor not providing information to the Appellant without any reasonable cause,not transferring the application to the appropriate custodian of information thereby causing obstruction in the flow of information and violating the RTI Act. Noticees must provide a reasonable response explaining the omissions on their part, and why no penal action should be initiated against them for the same. This response from PIOs must reach the Commission atleast one week prior to the date of hearing of the Show Cause hearing.

Show Cause Hearing: 19.03.2020 Noticees are present for hearing and have submitted their respective contentions, which are as follows:

Noticee No. 1, Sh. Parmanand, the then PIO, RP Cell has submitted the reply dated 03.03.2020, relevant excerpt whereof is as follows: "In this regard, it is submitted that the RP Cell Department deals only in allotment of parking sites to the contractors through e- tender/e-auction. The enforcement of parking sites is dealt by Zonal Authorities of concern zones. The circulars/letters issued in this regard time to time are enclosed. The matter of constructions/closing of gates by breaks of the parking sites pertains to Engineering Department of concerned zone and not to RP Cell.

Since the requisite information was not available in the department and the enforcement as well construction work was introduced with the zone, the RTI application transferred to AC/City SP Zone vide No. PIO/RP Cell/NDMC/2018/D-155 dated 21.02.2018 and AC/City SP Zone was liable to reply to transfer the RTI application to concerned PIO of the Zone.

Keeping in view of the above mentioned facts, it is submitted that RP Cell is not causing any obstructions in the flow of information and not violating the RTI Act. Therefore, it is humbly requested that the Show Cause notice dated 10.02.2020 may kindly be withdrawn please."

Noticee No. 2, Sh. R B Tomar, the then PIO, CSP Cell has submitted the reply dated 03.03.2020, relevant excerpt whereof is as follows: "That in this respect, I have to submit that the RTI application was transferred to the R.P. Cell through id ([email protected]) as the information sought for did not relate to the department of AC/CSPZ. Accordingly a reply/information was also sent on 16.04.2018 to the applicant. This fact has been corroborated by the present 345AC/PIO/CSPZ. Shri Amitabh K. Srivastava in his letter No.03/AC/CSPZ/2019 dated 01/01/2020 addressed to the Hon'ble Information Commissioner.

That on attaining superannuation I retired from Municipal Services on 31.01.2019 as Additional Deputy Commissioner/City SP Zone/NDMC."

Combined reading of the relevant records and averments of the Noticees present during hearing of the Show Cause case therefore reveal that the appellant had sought information about action taken on an email sent to [email protected]. Therefore, the transfer of the application to the City S P Zone was incorrect ab initio. The Noticee No. 2, representing the Page 3 of 4 City SP Zone Sh. R B Tomar has submitted a self explanatory submission and has also informed this Bench that he has retired from his service. The Commission is satisfied with the explanation of the Noticee No. 2 and finds no reason to proceed with any further adjudication against Sh. R B Tomar. The penal proceedings initiated against him are thus waived and he is exonerated.

The submissions of the Noticee No. 1, on the other hand are not found convincing. One more opportunity is given to the Noticee No. 1, Sh. Parmanand, the then PIO, RP Cell to: i) explain the lapse for such irresponsible conduct and also ii) to trace the email dated 20.12.2017 sent by the applicant to Ms. Ruchika Katyal and provide an action taken report with respect to the same to the applicant, within four weeks of receipt of this order.

The Show cause case with respect to Sh. Parmanand is thus re-scheduled to 23.04.2020. The Noticee is directed to remain present on the said date of hearing.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner(सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाि ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 4 of 4