RTI Judgement Series: PIO asked to get information under Section 5(4) from principal secretary
Moneylife Digital Team 10 October 2013

The CIC directed the PIO of MCD to get information from principal secretary, urban development at GNCTD and provide it to the appellant. This is the 182nd in a series of important judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi that can be used or quoted in an RTI application

The Central Information Commission (CIC), while allowing a complaint, directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) at Slum and Jhuggi Jhopri Department in Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), to seek information from principal secretary of urban development at Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act and provide to the appellant. The PIO was seeking clarification from the principal secretary of urban development at GNCTD, which was not forthcoming.

 

While giving the judgement on 7 July 2009, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central Information Commissioner said, "The Bench directs the PIO of MCD to seek assistance of the principal secretary, urban development at GNCTD under Section 5(4) to obtain the information and supply it to the Appellant. In case the information is not supplied to the Appellant before 30th July 2009 the Commission will consider ordering the compensation to the Appellant."

 

Delhi resident Amit Kumar Sinha, on 12 February 2009, sought from the PIO information regarding non-receipt of money deposited by him with the MCD. He also complained that his name has not been included in draw for allotment of plot.

 

In his reply, the PIO said Sinha's name was not in the survey list and hence the appellant was eligible for allotment of plot in draw and his case for refund of Rs7,000 is under consideration before the GNCTD.

 

Sinha, citing unsatisfactory and false information provided by the PIO filed his first appeal. There was no mention of any order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA).

 

Sinha then approached the CIC with his second appeal.

 

During the hearing, Mr Gandhi, the then CIC, noted that Sinha had sought information about allotment of plot for relocation. However, the PIO stated that Sinha was not eligible for the allotment of plot.

 

Sinha also paid Rs7000 in 2002 and wanted to know when his money will be refunded.

 

The PIO stated that Department had been writing to the principal secretary, Urban Development from 1 July 2008 and sent subsequent reminders to get clarification on the same.

 

While allowing the appeal, Mr Gandhi directed the PIO of MCD to seek assistance of the principal secretary of urban development at GNCTD, under Section 5(4) to obtain the information and supply it to Sinha. "In case the information is not supplied to the Appellant before 30th July 2009 the Bench will consider ordering the compensation to the Appellant," he said.

 

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

 

Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001305/4012

http://ciconline.nic.in/cic_decisions/SG-07072009-01.pdf

Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001305

 

Appellant                                            : Amit Kumar Sinha

                                                            Narela, Delhi-110040

 

Respondent                                        : Public Information Officer &

                                                            Assistant Director (SUR)

                                                            Municipal Corporation of Delhi

                                                            Slum and JJ Department

                                                            New Delhi

Comments
ArrayArray
Free Helpline
Legal Credit
Feedback