PIO liable for penalty under S.20(1) RTI Act for delayed, incorrect responses and non-compliance with directions.

Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.03.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:

2. Having not received any response from the PIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 24.05.2023. The FAA order is not on record.

3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 06.01.2025:

The following were present:-

Appellant: He, along with Shri Deepak Sharma present in person.

Respondent: Shri Hanumant Trivedi, AE (B) along with Shri Anil Kumar, ASO, MCD, City SP Zone, Kashmere Gate, Delhi present in person.

The Commission has made following the observations and directions on 19.01.2025:

“The Commission, at the outset, is unhappy with the fact that no reply has ever been provided by the concerned Respondent at the relevant time to the Appellant. No cogent explanation for such violation /delay has been tendered by the Respondent during the hearing in writing despite receipt of hearing notice in advance. Further, the reasons accorded by the Respondent is rather irksome to note as it was incumbent upon the Public Authority to proactively maintain/access the RTI database and ensure that RTI Applications (online/offline) are dealt with in a time bound manner. Failure to dispose the RTI Application for the simple reason that it could not be disposed owing to its non- traceability/ oversight is reflective of the disregard for the RTI Act, the Respondent organization has.

In view of the above, the Commission directs Registry of this bench to issue show cause notice to then PIO, and the present PIO, Executive Engineer (B), MCD, City Sadar Pahar Ganj Zone, Delhi as to why action should not be initiated against him under Section 20 of RTI Act for not giving any timely response to the Appellant. The written explanation of the then PIO concerned and the present PIO along with supportive documents, if any, should reach the Commission within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

Shri Hanumant Trivedi, AE (B), MCD, City SP Zone, Delhi should ensure service of this order at the address for correspondence of the then PIO and the present PIO for timely compliance of the above-mentioned directions.

Now, as far as relief of information in concerned, the Commission advises the appellant to give a copy of his complaint under reference in writing to the Respondent within one week of the date of receipt of this order and the respondent, to intimate the broad outcome of the said complaints to the appellant, free of charge within three weeks, thereafter. A compliance report to this effect be uploaded with the Commission through the link given in the hearing notice.

Further, considering the gravity of issue flagged by the appellant regarding unauthorized usage of basement area, the Commission by virtue of the powers vested under Section 19(8) of the RTI Act, directs Superintendent Engineer of Municipal Corporation of Delhi, City SP Zone, Delhi to investigate this matter with a view to resolving the issue raised by the Appellant. In doing so, the Appellant be associated in the investigation, and he be allowed to present documents/photographs for the relevant period. If lapse is found in the matter, the Superintendent Engineer is to fix responsibility on delinquents, as may be found in the inquiry. Report of the inquiry along with supporting documents shall be shared with the appellant, free of cost, and also uploaded on the link provided in the Commission’s hearing notice within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

FAA to ensure compliance of the directions.”

Show Cause Proceedings

Relevant Facts emerged during Show-Cause proceedings held on 23.02.2026:

The following were present:-

Ap