O R D E R

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-

Dissatisfied due to non-receipt of any reply from the CPIO, the appellant approached the FAA.The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present: Appellant: Present in Person Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Kumar NG 2 A & C dpt. Mr Sunil AZI NG 2, Present in Person The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that Flat No. A-702 in Rajasva CGHS, Plot No. 33, Sector 4, Dwarka was booked by his late brother Maj Jagtar Singh Sangha, Sena Medal in 1997 and added that the possession of the flat was given in year 2001. He said he paid a total sum of Rs 11,69,315/-, for the flat and added that his brother expired on 04 March 2001.

Explaining his case he said that in 2002 the SDMC raised a tax bill of Rs 1,65,000/- for 5 years on the flat based on a rateable value of Rs 1,70,000/-, which was totally based on arbitrary calculations. This was challenged by the RWA of Rajasva CGHS, he said and added that according to the details given by them, the rateable value of the flat should have been Rs 56,533/- and the annual house tax Rs 9422/- before rebate. Based on this the Appellant said he represented to the SDMC vide letter dt 22/08/2002 disclosing that since his late brother was a gallantry award winner, he was eligible for concession in the house tax but no reply was received from the SDMC.

In 2004, another tax bill was received by the SDMC which was still very different from the value worked out by the Rajasve, although it had been reduced to a rateable value of Rs 89,420/- and annual bill of Rs 16,880/-. Now he said the total demand on the flat came to a total of Rs 63312/-. As no concession for the gallantry award was given the Appellant wrote vide letter dt 18 May

2004, pointing out this was a flaw but no reply was received again. After this, regular annual property tax bills were received and the value worked out was Rs 2408/- before rebate, he said adding that in that bill there was a column of previous arrears and it was shown as Zero. He informed that he paid all the bills on time.

Narrating further he said in January 2016, the SDMC once again raised the arrears of Rs 63312/- and imposed an interest of Rs 94968/-. But he said to his astonishment the previous arrears were shown as Zero in all the bills which made him assume that there were no arrears left. Further, he informed that When this year the Appellant decided to sell the flat and approached the the SDMC for clearance , they raised the issue of the arrears of 2004 once again and imposed a penalty of 226% amounting to Rs 1,17,400/- raising the total demand Rs 1,69,347/- . He said he was now fed up after running from pillar to post to seek redressal and met Mr B P Bhardwaj, Assistant Commissioner MCD , seeking justice. Mr Bharadwaj, he said, was sympathetic but said that he could do little in the matter. The appellant said had he got a reply to his letters then this situation would have been prevented and he would have been spared of the agony from knocking the door of one office after another.. The respondent said the problem of previous arrears was due to a faulty proforma and that now it has been removed. He further said that all the shortcomings of not answering the letters and faulty proforms were on account of faults of people who are no longer in service and therefore the present incumbents could not be held responsible. The appellant said since he had had no choice despite facing severe injustice , he paid the full sum of Rs 1,69.347/-

However, he said he took to RTI route because he felt he had received a totally unfair deal but lamented that the information provided to him was incomplete .

Contradicting the appellant, the Respondent said that point wise information has been furnished to the Appellant. Moreover, he