| Welcome to the RTI India: The complete Online Portal for Right to Information in India. Right to Information has an important economic dimension, as it embraces not only political freedom but also the freedom to lead a life with dignity, unfettered by domination and discrimination. Our aim is to provide authentic and analytical help regarding Right to Information in India to Officers, Lawyers, Citizens, RTI Activist, Associations, & NGO's. Our strength is in bringing them all at one platform. |
This is a discussion on DDA penalised by CIC within the RTI News & Discussion forums, part of the RTI News, Circulars and Decisions category; The Central Information Commission ( CIC ) has asked Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to pay Rs 1,750 as fine after its Public Information Officer ( PIO ) failed to respond ...
| New Thread |
| |||||||
104356 Webpages | Register | Tags | Meet Our Staff | Members List | Mark Forums Read |
| Notices |
|
#1
| |||||
| |||||
The Central Information Commission (CIC) has asked Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to pay Rs 1,750 as fine after its Public Information Officer (PIO) failed to respond to a petition filed under the Right to Information Act within the stipulated seven days. Holding DDA guilty of taking a ‘dismissive attitude’, the CIC Bench headed by Chief Information Commissioner ordered it to deduct the fine amount from the salary of the erring PIO who did not give information regarding transfer of lease hold rights to the allottees of certain plots. “This information could have been provided within days of the application, instead of the months that it has taken,” it said, asking DDA to provide information in a week to applicant Pawan Kumar Jain. Terming the information sought by Jain as specific and simple, the CIC said last week that “The supply of the information cannot be circumvented by supplying a copy of the file, which in itself may or may not contain the information sought”. Considering the apology of the PIO that delay was caused due to heavy work pressure, the Commission said that “The admission makes the PIO liable to penalty... as per provisions of RTI Act”. Jain had submitted the application to the PIO on October 24 last year seeking information on the stage at which DDA transfers the lease hold and ownership rights to an allottee. He approached the DDA chief when no response was forthcoming, but this did not help. Eventually, he wrote to the CIC, which not only allowed his appeal but also penalised DDA for the delay and asked it to provide information in a week’s time. (Source: The Tribune, Dec.11, 2006) (I observe a key ruling in this news report, that I have highlighted for the members of the RTI community--Ganpat) |
|
#3
| |||||
| |||||
| Thats a great news with correct emphasis which clearly brings out the spirit of RTI. Last edited by maneesh; 12-18-2006 at 12:43 PM. |
![]() |
| Tags |
| penalised, cic |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Railway officials penalised | ganpat1956 | RTI News & Discussion | 1 | 09-27-2007 02:55 PM |
| PWD officers penalised | karira | RTI News & Discussion | 0 | 07-05-2007 08:59 PM |
Copyrights | New to Site? | Need Help? |
|
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 Web Technologies by Dr. Kushal Pathak |