Central Information Commission
Raghunandan Bansal vs National Highways Authority Of India ... on 25 March, 2021
CIC/NHAIN/A/2019/117518
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या/ Second Appeal No. CIC/NHAIN/A/2019/117518
In the matter of:
Raghunandan Bansal ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
/Project Director,
National Highways Authority of India,
Project Implementation Unit-Shimla,
Himachal Pradesh.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI Application filed on : 03.01.2019
CPIO replied on : 25.01.2019
First Appeal filed on : 31.01.2019
First Appellate Authority order : 14.03.2019
Second Appeal Received on : 15.04.2019
Date of Hearing : 23.03.2021
The following were present:
Appellant: Appellant participated in the hearing through video conferencing from
NIC Solan.
Respondent: Adv Naveen Pathania and Shri Rakesh Kumar Yadav, Dy. Manager/
CPIO participated in the hearing through video conferencing from NIC Shimla.
Page 1 of 5
CIC/NHAIN/A/2019/117518
ORDER
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 03.01.2019 seeking information on the following seven points:
1) "िजस authority, CALA या NHAI, ने रा ीय राजमाग-22 को चार माग य करने के िलए भूिम अिधि हण क कया दौरान सड़क क जद म आने वाले भवन का मू यांकन करने के िलए ी बी.सी.शमा जी को अिधकृ त कया है, उस का नाम व पता।
2) मू यांकन अिधकारी ी बी.सी.शमा जी िजस authority, CALA या NHAI, के under काम करते ह, उस का नाम व पता।
3) जो अिधकारी या authority मू यांकन अिधकारी को सड़क क जद म आने वाले भवन का मू यांकन करने के िलए आदेश, िनदश देती है, उस का नाम, पद व पता।
4) जो authority मू यांकन अिधकारी को उनक सेवा के िलए payment करती है उस का नाम व पता।
5) सड़क क जद म आने वाले भवन का मू यांकन करने के िलए ी बी.सी.शमा जी को जारी दशा िनदश क ितिलिप।
6) मू यांकन क कया को अंजाम देते समय मू यांकन अिधकारी ारा भवन से स बंिधत िजन द तावेज क जांच करनी ज री है, उन क सूिच।
7) भवन के मू यांकन क इस कया म मू यांकन का िनणय लेने से लेकर मुआवजा रािश िववरण करने तक क कया को जैसे जैसे व िजन िजन अिधका रय ारा अंजाम दया जाता है, उस सारी कया क िसलिसलेवार detail जानकारी।"
The CPIO vide letter dated 25.01.2019, provided point-wise information to the Appellant. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 31.01.2019. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 14.03.2019, informed as under:
"The appellant vide letter dated 31.01.2019 has filed First Appeal before the appellate authority under section 19 (1) of RTI Act, 2005. Accordingly, both the parties i.e. the appellant and the Public Implementation Officer, PD PIU-Shimla Page 2 of 5 CIC/NHAIN/A/2019/117518 were called for hearing at Regional Office-Shimla vide letter no. NHAI/RO/HP/11011/2/RTI/2016/2660 dated 28.02.2019 on 07.03.2019 at 02:30 p.m. which was later on postponed to dated 14.03.2019. Accordingly, Sh. Raghunundan Bansal and Project Director NHAI, PIU Shimla attended the hearing. The query of the applicant and the decision taken by the authority is stated below:
Para (ii): It is submitted by Project Director, NHAI PIU Shimla that Sh. B.C. Sharma works for M/s Haripriya Associate Pvt. Ltd. Para(iii): It is submitted by Project Director, NHAI PIU Shimla that SDM Solan has been appointed as competent authority of land acquisition by Govt. of India and compensation of structures has been paid by CALA as per section 29 of Land Acquisition Act 2013.
Para(iv): It is submitted by Project Director, NHAL PIU Shimla that payment to M/S Haripriya Aşsociate Pvt. Ltd. is made by NHAI after verification from SDM (C)-cum CALA Solan.
Para (v): It is submitted by Project Director, NHAI PIU Shimla that Sh. B.C. Sharma works for M/s Haripriya Associate Pvt. Ltd, which is Independent professional expert in the field of valuation. The valuators perform valuation as per their professional knowledge in the field of valuation and as per contract agreement.
Para (vi), (vii): It is submitted by Project Director, NHAI PIU Shimla that valuator is an Independent professional expert in the field of valuation. It is also submitted that SDM (C) Solan expedite the process of land Acquisition and any information related to Acquisition process may directly be asked from CALA Solan."
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. He requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for and take appropriate legal action against the Respondent.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The Appellant stated that the reply provided by the Respondent with respect to the point no. 5 to 7 of the RTI Application is not appropriate. He further stated that he has been seeking information for last 3 years, however an appropriate reply has not been provided by the Respondent.Page 3 of 5
CIC/NHAIN/A/2019/117518 The Respondent submitted that an appropriate reply as per available records have already been provided vide their office letter dated 25.01.2019. He further submitted that the First Appellate Authority also upheld the CPIO's reply.
At the instance of the Commission, the Respondent replied that Haripriya Associates is an independent body who has appointed Mr. B. C. Sharma. He added that relevant documents as per available records can be provided to the Appellant.
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that the appellant has not received desired information with respect to point no. 5 to 7 of the RTI Application. In view of the above, the Commission directs the CPIO that point-wise revised- reply, from point no. 5 to 7 of the RTI Application, should be provided to the Appellant. Copy of the relevant documents should be provided to the Appellant free of cost up to 25 pages and beyond that after the payment of prescribed fees as per the RTI Rules, 2012. The said direction should be complied by the CPIO within 15 days of receipt of this order and a compliance report of the same be duly sent to the Commission enumerating the details of the revised reply sent and copy of documents provided.
With the above observations, the instant Second Appeal is disposed of.Page 4 of 5
CIC/NHAIN/A/2019/117518 Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
The Appeal, hereby, stands disposed of.
Amita Pandove (अिमतापांडव) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date: 23.03.2021 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) National Highways Authority of India, Regional Office, Himachal Pradesh, House No 1, Rishikesh Sadan, Shanti Kutia, Chakkar Shimla, Himachal Pradesh-171005
2. The Central Public Information Officer, /Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, Project Implementation Unit-Shimla, House No 1, Rishikesh Sadan, Shanti Kutia, Chakkar Shimla, Himachal Pradesh-171005
3. Shri Raghunandan Bansal Page 5 of 5