SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Del) 1910

High Court Of Delhi
S. Ravindra Bhat
RAM AVTAR SINGH YADAV - Appellant
Versus
M.C.D.SLUM AND JJ DEPARTMENT - Respondents
W. P. (C) 2588 Of 2006
Decided On : 10/17/2006

Advocates Appeared:
M.K.SINGH, O.P.SAXENA, RAJIV DAWAR, Ramkishor Singh Yadav, VIKAS DUDEJA

The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of public agencies to provide accurate and timely information under the Delhi Right to Information Act, emphasizing transparency, accountability, and the consequences of failing to fulfill these obligations.

Headnote:

Right to Information - Public Accountability - Delhi Right to Information Act - Section 7, Section 9 - The judgment discusses the petitioner's right to information under the Delhi Right to Information Act and the duty of public agencies to provide accurate and timely information. It highlights the importance of transparency, accountability, and the consequences of public officials failing to fulfill their obligations under the Act.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought information under the Delhi Right to Information Act regarding unauthorized constructions on public lands. The MCD and DDA provided evasive and misleading responses, leading the petitioner to approach the Court.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the MCD and DDA failed to provide accurate information, and their actions obstructed the petitioner's right to information. The Court emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in public agencies.

Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's right to information, the duty of public agencies to provide accurate information, and the consequences of failing to fulfill obligations under the Delhi Right to Information Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The judgment establishes the importance of transparency, accountability, and timely provision of information by public agencies under the Delhi Right to Information Act. It emphasizes that public officials must diligently fulfill their duties and that lack of ill will does not excuse carelessness in providing information.

Final Decision: The Court directed the MCD to bear the costs, fix departmental responsibility in accordance with Section 9(2) of the Act, and recover the costs from the erring officials. The MCD was also instructed to ensure timely payment of costs to the petitioner.


S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.

( 1 ) ISSUE Rule. With consent of Counsel for the parties, the matter was heard for disposal.

( 2 ) THE petitioner claims to be driven to initiate these proceedings under article 226; he has sought for a direction to the respondents, namely, the MCD slum and JJ Department, the Deputy Commissioner, Shahadra Zone of the MCD and the DDA to furnish information in respect of structures which were alleged to be unauthorised constructions on the public lands. The other relief claimed is for a direction to demolish the structure in question. Before approaching the Court, the petitioner had filed an application to the competent authority designated in terms of the Delhi Right to Information Act, of the MCD Slum and JJ Department eliciting information as to whether the lands were allotted either by the DDA or the mcd; the unauthorised encroachment supposed to have been regularised and unauthorised encroachment requiring to be demolished. The competent officer of the MCD Slum and JJ Department, replied to the query in the following terms:

"ref: ID No. 155/05 sh. Ram Avtar Singh Yadav: The plot in question measuring 16m x 43m (688 S. qm. plot) had been allotted for Dairy purpose in 1975 by DDA. As per present report, the occupant have changed land use and converted some part into residential and commercial unauthorisedly as shown in the copy of the survey plan. The services of Gazipur and Madan Pur Khadar Dairy farms already stands transferred from DDA to MCD vide Office Order No. 2474 dated 28. 7. 92. Regarding unauthorised encroachment it may be mentioned here that as per order dated 15. 7. 97 the control activities vest with general Wing MCD. "

( 3 ) IN view of the above information that there was unauthorised construction and that the control activities vested with the General Wing MCD, the petitioner applied for the same information from the General Wing, MCD by an application dated 27. 6. 2005. The competent officer of the Shahadra, South Zone of the General wing, responded to the query on 25. 7. 2005 as follows:

"sir, please refer to your application. D. No. 99 dated 30. 6. 2005 regarding unauthorized construction adjacent to shop No. B-1 in a DDA flat, gazipur. The information asked is given in the enclosed annexure. e. copy of the note dt. 22. 7. 2005 duly forwarded by E. E. (XI)/shah. (S) to the deptt. the question pertains. The survey of the area has been carried out by our officials. The area in question falls in the jurisdiction of the DDA. The applicant may kindly be advised to contact accordingly. By order e. E. "

( 4 ) IN view of the stand of the MCD, the petitioner approached the DDA which by its letter dated 5. 12. 2005 declined any involvement in the matter in the following terms:

"sir, this has the reference to your O. O. No. RTIA/05/rn12296 dated 8. 11. 2005 on the subject cited above. In this regard, I am directed to inform that above mentioned site has been inspected by the Executive engineer/ed-10 and reported that Shop No. B-1, Gazipur Dairy Farm was allotted by J. J. Slum. The area is still being looked after by J. J. Slum wing. It has been confirmed from the allottee of Shop No. B-1, Gazipur dairy Farm that maintenance of Roads and drains are being done by mcd. "

( 5 ) THE petitioner purporting to be aggrieved filed an appeal under Section 7 of the Delhi Right to Information Act to the Public Grievances Commission. That appeal, preferred in a composite manner, was declined on the ground that a single appeal was not maintainable and that the appeals had to be preferred within 30 days of the issuance of the impugned orders and were therefore time-barred.

( 6 ) THE MCD filed a status report in these proceedings on 14th July, 2006 in answer to the show cause notice, indicating that the encroachment of the four unauthorised shops in the area, namely, near Plot No. B-1, Shopping Complex, gazipur Dairy Farm were demolished by action dated 26. 6. 2006. It is evident from the status report that the u







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top