Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: structural changes in Rupendra Singh vs Delhi Development Authority on 24 September, 2024Matching Fragments
1) Condonable: These are minor addition/alteration(s) which do not require structural changes and can be carried out by the owner(s) without any intimation/permission of DDA/MCD Condonable items:-
1. To convert existing barsati into room provided the wall is made of only 115 mm thick.
2. Grills and glazing in verandah with proper fixing arrangement.
3. Raising height of front and rear courtyard wall upto 7' height by putting jail/fencing.
4. Providing door in courtyard wherever not provided.
5. Providing sunshades on doors and windows wherever not provided with proper fixing arrangements.
Request to get the proper information of policy of Condonable: These are minor addition/alteration(s) which do not require structural changes and can be carried out by the owner(s) without any intimation/permission of DDA/MCD Condonable point number 5 which was mentioned by the DDA on my first appeal should give full information that should not be wrongly interpreted by any other department like MCD."
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observes that the Respondent has provided the relevant information regarding the floor's layout plans to the Appellant. Further the Respondent has also provided the existing policy on additions and alterations and roof rights to the Appellant as available in their records and under the provisions of the RTI Act only such information as is available and in the form held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided. The PIO is neither supposed to create information that is not a part of the record, nor is he required to interpret information nor provide clarification. Therefore, no intervention of the Commission is required in the instant case for further adjudication.