The CIC directed the PIO of urban development dept at GNCTD to corrected certificate about block D and D1 and D1 Extension at Mansa Ram Park. This is the 198th in a series of important RTI judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi
The Central Information Commission (CIC), while allowing an appeal, directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) of Department of Urban Development (UD) at Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) to provide a certificate stating that information provided about block D includes D1 and D1 Extension at Mansa Ram Park.
While giving the judgement on 14 September 2009, under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central Information Commissioner, said, "The PIO will give a certificate to the Appellant before 30 September 2009 certifying that D includes D1 and D1 Extension."
New Delhi resident, Jageram Yadav, on 6 March 2009, sought from the PIO information regarding certificate for regularisation of an unauthorised colony at Mansa Ram Park A, B, C, D, D1 and D1 extension. Here is the information he sought and the reply provided by the PIO...
1. Reason for not amending/issuing new Provision Certificate by HK Bharti, Chief Town Planner and Mr Anil Kumar Singh, Dealing Assistant of UD Department (UC Cell)
PIO's Reply- As per application submitted in 2007-08 against Regd. No. 993 and 789, separately there were two layout plans namely i/e/ for Mansa Ram Park, Block - C, D, & D - I and for Mansa Ram Park Block, A & B. In this regard, some representations were received for issue/rectification of Provisional Regularisation Certificates to the Department. Matter was under examination. Scrutiny by the MCD/DDA and Revenue Dept was also being conducted. Provisional Regularisation Certificate will be issued after the verification of the case.
No Provisional Regularisation Certificate could be issued before examining the truth of the representation. The rectification and issuance of new Provisional Regularisation Certificate was under process for other colonies for which Provisional Regularisation Certificate were not issued.
2. Reason for not taking any action against Anil Kumar Singh, Dealing Assistant for demanding bribe from the Appellant.
PIO's Reply- The case was under process for examining the authenticity and truth of representation/case.
3. Following information regarding 1539 unauthorised colonies -
a) Number of colonies which have submitted its documents and maps and vice-versa.
b) Number of colonies which have been issued correct/ incorrect acknowledgement slips.
c) Number of colonies whose documents had been rejected?
d) Number of colonies to which correct eligibility/incorrect eligibility slips had been issued?
e) Number of colonies to which correct/incorrect provisional certificate had been issued?
f) Number of provisional certificates which had been amended/ rectified/ corrected as on date and vice versa.
a) Around 1639 application had been received for regularisation of the Unauthorised Colonies.
b) to f) No such list had been prepared.
4. Details of action taken against dealing assistant and concerned officials who had issued wrong certificate.
PIO's Reply- There were a few cases where such inadvertently Provisional Regularisation Certificate has been issued. After examining the documents the correct Provisional Regularisation Certificate was to be issued case to case.
5. Whether there is any nexus between Mr Anil Kumar Singh, Dealing Asst. and Mr HK Bharti.
PIO's Reply- Till then, no such corrected version and/or rectified Provisional Regularisation Certificate had been issued to any Unauthorised Colonies for which the incorrect Provisional Regularisation Certificate was issued.
6. Request to amend the existing provisional certificate of the Appellant or issue a new one.
PIO's Reply- The observation raised by the Appellant was baseless.
Citing the PIO provided an incomplete and unsatisfactory reply, Yadav filed his first appeal.
The First Appellate Authority (FAA), on several occasions asked the PIO and deputy secretary (UC) to file the counter reply against the appeal, but there was no reply. The FAA then directed the PIO to prepare and provide point-wise clear, complete and relevant information to the appellant within 15 days from the date of its order. The FAA also suggested the PIO to see whether the information is clear, relevant and complete in all respects as intended by the Yadav before sending the information.
Yadav, citing incomplete information received from the PIO even after the order of the FAA then approached the CIC with his second appeal.
During the hearing, Mr Gandhi, the then CIC, observed that the appellant had for a certificate for regularisation of an unauthorised colony at Mansa Ram Park A, B, C, D, D1 and D1 extension, however, the provisional certificate give to him did not mention D1 and D1 extension.
Yadav also alleged in writing that Anil Kumar Singh, dealing assistant, had demanded a bribe from him (for providing the certificate) and since he did not give it, the correction was not done and for the past one year, he had been subjected to harassment for not giving the bribe.
Mr Gandhi noted that the Department has clearly absolved Anil Kumar Singh of having demanded a bribe but so far has not given the corrected certificate to Yadav. The PIO stated that the Department will give a certificate to the appellant before 30 September 2009 certifying that D includes D1 and D1 Extension.
The Bench, while allowing the appeal directed the PIO to give a certificate before 30 September 2009.
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001759/4781
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001759
Appellant : Jageram Yadav
Joint Colony Progressive Society,
Mansa Ram Park, Shop No. 6, Shanti Mkt.,
Near Charidiwari, Gulab Bagh,
Main Najafgadh Road, Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi - 110059
Respondent 1 : Public Information Officer
Joint Secretary (UD)
Department of Urban Development
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
10th Level 'C' Wing, Delhi Secretariat,
IP Estate, New Delhi - 110002
Respondent 2 : JG Arora
Dy. Secretary (UC)
Empirical research on how the tone of a news article can affect stock prices
As the fertiliser subsidy is reaching Himalayan heights at Rs67,970 crore, the New Investment Policy should expedite planned growth of Urea plants and availability of natural gas
It is too early even for India Meteorological Department (IMD), to predict the type of monsoon that we may have this year. What is certain is the continued and increasing usage of fertilizers to grow more foodgrains, not only to meet our own needs, but also have enough for export, as we have now a number of established markets for these.
Over the past 13 years, there have been no developments in this industry; no expansion plans as manufacturers have been saddled with lower or inadequate supplies of fuel, resulting in the short fall of about 8 million tonnes, against our annual requirement of 29-30 million tonnes, with the domestic production almost static at 22 million tonnes. These 8 million tonnes have been imported so far.
The international price of urea has been ruling around $350-$360 a tonne and has now dipped down to a $300 level; other nutrient prices have also come down. Our first move, therefore, should be to ensure that serious and immediate steps are taken to negotiate better prices with our established suppliers to plan shipments in time so that we are ready before the monsoon arrives.
The New Investment Policy was notified in January 2013 to boost urea production in country, whose manufacturers have not expanded their production capacities in the last 13 years. A Group of Ministers, who studied the issue of the industry, have recommended increasing the fixed production cost of Urea plants that are 30 years old or more by Rs150 per tonne and for all others by Rs350 per tonne. Consequently, the fixed cost would be uniformly at Rs2,300 per tonne.
For easy reference, it may be mentioned that "fixed cost" refers to the salary and wages paid, contract labour cost, repair and maintenance and selling expenses. The new policy also eliminates the expression of "guaranteed
buy-back" of the urea produced, as, in the true sense of the term, the
Government does not buy back the production
In so far as the increase in gas price, effective from 1st April is concerned, the policy has already a prescribed formula of a flexible floor and ceiling price of gas based on $6.5 to $14 per mmbtu. The floor price has been determined at a return on equity of 12% and the ceiling price at a ROE of 20%.
Beyond delivered gas price of $14 per mmbtu only the floor price will be increased.
By 2017, the demand for Urea is expected to reach 34 million tonnes, as against the current requirement of 30 million tonnes (indigenous production is now 22 mt), and instead of continuing to import, the new investment policy has brought keen interest for development of brownfield projects by existing makers like Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd (IFFCO), Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd (RCF), Chambal Fertilisers and Tata Chemicals, with two new players to start greenfield projects of 1.3 million tonnes each. If all these projects go through without hiccups, the total output is envisaged at 41.5 million tonnes, more than what we might need. As much as Rs25,000 crore may thus be invested in these expansions and new projects in the next few years. One of the most important conditions that the government wants to make is to provide a bank guarantee that they will complete the projects on schedule.
To support this, the government plans to give subsidy at a certain percentage for a period of eight years, for those projects that comes up after the amended policy comes into force. It may be noted that the fertiliser subsidy has grown to a staggering Rs67,971 crore (revised) for 2013-14 from Rs18,460 crore in 2005-06 and the budget estimate for 2014-15 remains practically unchanged at Rs67,970 crore.
The only one thing that the Government can consider seriously is if and when increased gas production is available from Reliance Industries Ltd and ONGC can they allocate some for the Urea plants? One option is to decontrol urea prices to assess the impact that it may have?
(AK Ramdas has worked with the Engineering Export Promotion Council of the ministry of commerce. He was also associated with various committees of the Council. His international career took him to places like Beirut, Kuwait and Dubai at a time when these were small trading outposts; and later to the US.)