CENT RAL IN FORMATI ON COMMI SSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2006/00557 dated 14.8.2006
Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19
Appellant - Ms. Gita Dewan Verma (Planner)
Respondent - Ministry of Urban Development.
By Email dated 28.4.06 addressed to CPIO PMO Ms. Gita Dewan Verma, Planner sought the following information:
“a) a list of any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, contracts, reports, papers, models etc. and
(b) on CD all material in electronic form that is held by the PMO apropos private sector participation in Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission in general and in particular, housing / re-housing pilot- projects announced by Delhi Govt. under the Mission and prepared pursuant to Urban Development Ministry directions by DDA for a site at Tehkhand that has been auctioned on 26.4.06 to JV of Indiabulls and DLF.”
Through a letter of 6.5.06 post marked 9.5.06 Sh. Kamal Dayani, Director PMO and CPIO transferred this application to CPIO, MoUD u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act. In a letter of 2.6.06 Shri T.R. Prasad Under Secretary in the Ministry of Urban Development responded as follows:
“You may visit our web-site for necessary information (http://urbanindia.nic.in/moud/programme/ud/jnnurm.htm)
One of the admissible components under JNNURM is Parking lots / spaces on Public Private Partnership basis.
A budget provision of Rs. 2287.15 crore has been provided for 2006-07.”
In response appellant Ms. Verma moved her first appeal before Shri O.P. Agarwal, Incharge J.S. (DL), Ministry of Urban Development with the following prayer:
“(A) Confirmation that no ‘material in any form’ is held by PMO/MoUD apropos private sector participation in (i.e. for financing the 100,000 cr) Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission other than that which is available in the JNNURM section on MoUD website (as requested list of information has not been furnished and requested copy on CD of information held in electronic form has not been offered to the Appellant).
(B) Precise indication of the topics / pages in the MoUD website section on JNNURM containing the requested information.”
On not receiving an order on her first appeal Ms. Verma moved her second appeal before us on 14.8.06. Subsequently by letter of 2.1.07 appellant Ms. Gita Dewan Verma moved an application before us for expeditious hearing and decision. In the meantime by Office Memorandum dated 22.1.07 Shri N. Venugopalan, Dy. Secy. and CPIO has conveyed to us that the necessary information in CD form along with order of the Appellate Authority dated 21.7.06 were sent to appellant through a letter dated 22.8.06 by special messenger. In a rejoinder to this Ms. Gita Dewan Verma by a letter of 12.3.07 has confirmed receiving these comments and further stated as follows:
“I state there is no dispute on facts or grounds of First Appeal that was allowed by the subsequently received First Appeal order. As such, the present rejoinder seeks only to modify the prayer in this Appeal. I request –
- List of materials held, which was not furnished with First Appeal Order and CD.
- Confirmation that no further confirmation (beyond First Appeal order requiring confirmation) is needed that no other material on the subject was then held by MoUD.
- Confirmation that no other material on the subject was held by PMO (the question in my request that was transferred by PMO to MoUD) – preferably with PMO, CIO’s concurrence on the list that is now requested”
The appeal was heard on 19.3.07. The following are present:
- Ms. Gita Dewan Verma, appellant
- Shri N.Venugopalan Dy. Secy., MoUD
- Shri Sanjay Sharma, Section Officer, MoUD
It was clarified in the hearing by Shri Venugopalan, Dy. Secy and PIO that the information sought at ‘(a)’ of appellant’s rejoinder i.e. list of materials held and not furnished, the first order and CD is likely to be with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation (HUPA). Both MoUD and MoHUPA have JNNURM Mission Directors. He further confirmed in response to the Point (b) of the rejoinder that no other material on the subject was then held by MoUD, than was provided to appellant Ms. Gita Dewan Verma.
In her rejoinder mentioned above Ms. Gita Dewan Verma has withdrawn her prayer for penalties in appreciation of the non adversarial tenor of first appeal order and comments of 22.1.07. The only remaining point therefore, is a confirmation that no other material on the subject was held by PMO which appellant suggested could be obtained through CPIO, MoUD.
Having heard arguments and perused the file we have decided as follows:
CPIO, MoUD Shri Venugopalan is directed to transfer the request under ‘a’ in appellant’s rejoinder to CPIO, MoHUPA immediately who in turn will supply to appellant Ms. Gita Dewan Verma the information she has sought at ‘(a)’ as described within ten working days of the date of receipt of the letter from CPIO, MoUD. Since CPIO MoUD was himself personally present at the hearing, to avoid confusion on the information to be provided he may personally explain to the CPIO, MoHUPA the precise nature of the information sought.
CPIO Shri Venugopalan has confirmed the confirmation sought by appellant, as requested at b) of her rejoinder as recorded above, no further action is required with regard to this item.
Since CPIO PMO is not a party to the second appeal, a copy of rejoinder with respondent’s comments dated 22.1.07 received from Ms. Gita Dewan
Verma will be forwarded by the Registry to CPIO PMO for confirmation as sought by her at ‘c’ above to be provided within ten working days of the date of receipt of this Decision Notice.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Chief Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(L.C.Singhi) Addl. Registrar