Mr AK Jain
Commissioner (Planning), DDA

Dear Mr Jain,

I am writing this hurried note to make a request that
I urge you respond to with utmost urgency. I can add
many more reasons and hope I do not have to do so in
other kinds of circumstances. Please refer to my RTI
request dated 20.01.2006.
In this I have sought information about all relevant
facts about and reasons for clearance decision
conveyed by DDA in Pushta on 19.01.06. I have invoked
under s.4(1)(d) r/w s.4(1)(c) of RTI Act in view of my
pending matters for enforcement of Master Plan
solutions for riverbed, including by complete and
lawful compliance of orders since 2003. My request was
copied to you, as AA, with reference to an RTI Appeal
dated 18.01.06 and to Sectt of LG / DDA Chairman and
DDA VC with reference to my RTI transfer dated
13.01.06. The latter is for status of compliance of 3
High Court orders (Sep 2002, Dec 2004, Nov 2005)
connected to my own pending writ petition pertaining,
inter alia, to unauthorised construction on the
riverbed (April 2005). I have also referred to MoUD
affidavit about Yamuna / Pushta in Supreme Court (Sep
2005) and latest order for unauthorised constructions
(18 Jan 2006), etc.

I have received no reply. While there is no stipulated
time-frame for requests under s.4(1)(c) and/or
s.4(1)(d), I assume that if I have sought under
s.4(1)(d) information that is anyway liable to be
disclosed also under s.4(1)(c) and you are in
possession of it, you will provide it to me at least
before disclosing it to others unofficially.

I learn that on 23.01.06 one Mr Jai Bhagwan Jatav
(known to some as aide of former PM Mr VP Singh and
associate of former Addnl commissioner (Slums) Mr
Manjit Singh and sundry NGOs) visited you and that you
provided him copy of High Court order dated 08.12.05
and some other documents and advised him/them to move
court against DDA in the matter of Pushta slums.

You have, in effect, advised Mr Jai Bhagwan Jatav &
associates to move court against my pending matters
(in support of lawful compliance of court orders in
consonance with the statutory mandate of the DDA) and
provided Mr Jai Bhagwan Jatav for this information
that you have not disclosed to me.

This is even as Mr Jai Bhagwan Jatav had no
discernable cause to approach you for information or
advice, as you are not a designated PIO and DDA
Planning Wing is not coordinating action in Pushta. I,
on the other hand, am liable to be told also about
your disclosure to Mr Jai Bhagwan Jatav, in view not
only of my RTI request but also of the fact that I
have repeatedly raised the issue of such interferences
in due processes, including in my responses to s.11A
Public Notices and application u/s.41(3) of DD Act, at
MPD-2021 hearing on 03.10.05 (with you on the Board)
and while giving evidence before Lok Sabha Standing
Committee on 30.05.05 (where you were present for
DDA). I am not aware of what other information you
have disclosed to Mr Jai Bhagwan Jatav, but order of
08.12.05 that he has given to some in Pushta who have
kindly conveyed its content to me on phone, was liable
to be disclosed under s.4(1)(d) by you:

* as Secretary-Convenor of MPD-2021 Board, to all who
have relied on riverbed matters in their responses, at
least to extent of fact of a committee for
implementing orders since 2003 having been appointed
by order of 08.12.05 with MPD-2021 Public Notice Board
Chairman (DDA VC) and Member (MCD Commissioner) on it,
with details of how the two quasi-judicial proceedings
are being harmonised.

* as Appellate Authority to whom I was advised to move
my RTI request dated 05.12.05 about reconstitution of
DMP-2021 Board, to me

* as Secretary-Convenor of Board for MPD-2021, in view
of my RTI appeal, also to Mr Nizamudin and Mr Rajinder
Singh, who were invited for hearing on their MPD-2021
responses (on, respectively, riverbed and slum issues)
on 03.10.05 and sought re-scheduling since Board
quorum was not complete

* as Commissioner (Planning), to me in view of my
pending writ petition (and RTI requests referring to
it) in which the orders since 2003 are amongst the
grounds and in which counter-affidavits on behalf of
DDA have been sworn by a Director in Planning Wing who
has disputed my interpretation of their wide scope  

* as member of Board for IT Park Public Notice and
Secretary-Convener of MPD-2021 Board, to Mr Manoj
Chaudhry & Mr Balbir Singh when RTI Appeal in
applications no.485 & 486 was made to you on 18.01.06,
at least to extent of imminent displacement of Pushta

* as SSB member for IT Park and Board chairman for
industries Public Notices and Secretary-Convener of
MPD-2021 Board, to those who have responded to and not
been heard on riverbed issues under those s.11A
proceedings, at least to extent of fact of committee /
options for making representations    

* after my RTI request of 20.01.06, in particular,
with promptitude in above and also, in view of order
of 18.01.06 for publication of lists and pasting of
notices in ongoing demolitions, under s.4(1)(d) r/w
s.4(1)(c), in Pushta since the order was available
with your in Vikas Minar, from where Mr Jai Bhagwan
Jatav & associates have procured it by unknown process
for their purposes.

As Commissioner (Planning), you are custodian of
Master Plan solutions for our riverbed and its
occupants. Since order of 03.03.03 I have consistently
urged lawful compliance consonant with the Plan. You
are seized of this through numerous letters as well as
responses to s.11A Public Notices. Especially since
DDA VC and MCD Commissioner, who are on the
court-appointed committee as well as on Board for
MPD-2021 Public Notice in duration of which it was
appointed, are both recent incumbents and because you
are Secretary-cum-Convener of the Board,
responsibility for harmonising the two quasi-judicial
proceedings, also with quasi-judicial RTI proceedings
in related matters, appears to fall on you.

I request you to arrange a presentation by all
concerned officials to disclose full information about
how various quasi-judicial proceedings related to
Pushta clearance are in harmony, under s.4(1)(d) to
all and only affected persons, ie, persons who are
party in any of these proceedings, and with full
transparency (Please note that all, including Mr Jai
Bhagwan Jatav & associates, have had ample opportunity
to resort to due processes since order of 03.03.03).

I suggest / request this s.4(1)(d) mechanism in view
of the circumstances (including demolition date of 30
January) and offer support for it. I have basis to
invoke the 48 hr proviso of s.7(1) because of deaths,
including of babies, in the course of Pushta clearance
& resettlement in 2004 that I had taken up later with
authorities. I also invoke s.4(1)(d), being affected
person in view of your decision to disclose to Mr Jai
Bhagwan Jatav what you have not disclosed to me
and/after decisions of all to deny me the hearings
that I begged throughout the course of Pushta
clearance in 2004 about wilful violations forcibly
perpetrated in name of court and your subsequent
decisions to deny me the Public Notices hearings I was
entitled to and the debates that I sought, etc, etc.  

Yours sincerely
Gita Dewan Verma, Planner