Plot restored by Improvement Trust after 15 years of struggle; Thanks to RTI

[R Madhok]

From the last 15 years I was running from pillar to post to get my plot restored as it has been resumed illegally by the department due to Non construction of said plot whereas I had paid all the dues including sale money and the Non construction Charges not in thousands but in lakhs the non construction charges had been paid even then the department by highhandedness resumed the plot by pick and choose policy. The plots of so many plot holders resumed and most of the plots had been restored by the department within days of resumption for the reason every body knows. As I refused to pay a single penny. So I struggled a lot.
The delay is not of days but of years to decide. Now the department has restored the plot on conditions. Let us see what conditions have been imposed regarding recovery of dues.
Ant how DER Aaye Durusat aaye. I got the reward through RTI. The success is due to the motivation of my friends those guided me time to time.
I am thankful to the Forum for providing guidance to me time to time.The suggestions on the matter provided by rtiindia.org's members, the details are as under:

http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/31189-...rs-orders.html
Regards,
Rajneesh Madhok
Today I appeared before Hon’ble Mrs Ravi Singh, the State Inforamtion Commission, Punjab. The PIO after all provided the copy of action taken report after the gap of more than one year to the applicant.
Rajneesh Madhok, Following are the reply and the copy of document attached
==============================================
The information provided and order is in Punjabi language. For the convenience of the members the matter is being posted in hindi and english language.

पंजाब सरकार
स्थानीय सरकार विभाग
(स्थानीय सरकार २ शाखा)
सेवा में
श्री रजनीश मधोक,
बी-xxx/ ६३, नेहरू नगर, स्ट्रीट न: २, रेलवे रोड,
फगवाडा
मीमो न: १०/१२४/१०-२स्स२/१०६९
तिथी चंडीगढ़ २८ अप्रैल २०११
विषय: ऐ सी ६६७/२०१० श्री रजनीश मधोक बनाम लोक सूचना अधिकारी स्थानीय सरकार, पंजाब, राईट टू इन्फर्माशन एक्ट, २००५ अधीन सूचना भेजने बारे !
-------
उपरोक्त विषय पर मान्यवर श्री दरबारा सिंह कहलों राज्य सूचना कमिश्नर पंजाब जी के आदेश तिथी २२-०२-२०११ के सन्दर्भ में
२. इस सम्बन्ध में बताया जाता है कि प्रार्थी के प्लाट न: ६८३ को बहल करने की परवानगी ( सहमती) दे दी गई है और इस सम्बन्ध में कार्यकारी अधिकारी नगर सुधर ट्रस्ट फगवाडा को सरकार कि मीमो न: ८/३३/२००५-२स्स२/१०३९ तिथी २१-०४-२०११ (कापी नत्थी) बारे सोचित कर दिया है,
सुपरडंट-कम-लोक सूचना अधिकारी
तिथी चंडीगढ़ अप्रैल २०११
इस की कापी मान्यवर राज्य सूचना कमीशन, पंजाब, एस.सी. ओ, न: ८४-८५, सेक्टर १७-सी चंडीगढ़ को उन के आदेश तिथी २२-०२-२०११ के सन्दर्भ में भेजा जाता है,
सुपरदंत-कम-लोक सूचना अधिकारी
==========================================================
पंजाब सरकार
स्थानीय सरकार विभाग,
(स.स.२-शाखा)
सेवा में
कार्यकारी अधिकारी,
नगर सुधर ट्रस्ट,
फगवाडा!
मीमो न: ८/३३/२००५-२स्स२/१०३९
तिथी: चंडीगढ़ २१/४/११
विषय: निर्माण न करने कारण जब्त किये गए प्लाटों को बहाल करने की परवानगी देने बारे !
उपरोक्त विषय बार आपके पत्र नो: १०९० तिथी १२.१०.२००९ के सन्दर्भ में !
२. विषय अंकित मामले में आप कि तजवीज (पेशकश) को विचारने उपरान्त सकीम न: १ में प्लाट न: ६८३, २७०-ऐ, ७४२ और सकीम न: ३ में शॉप कम फ्लैट न: ३१३ को बहाल करने की परवानगी इस शर्त पर दी जाती है कि बनते बकायाजात (dues ) वसूल किये जाएँ
सही/-
सुपरडंट

Punjab Government,
Local Government Department
(Local Government Branch 2)
To
Mr. Rajneesh Madhok,
B-xxx/63, Nehru Nagar, Street No. 2, Railway Road,
Phagwara
Memo No: 10/124/10-2SS2/1069
Dt: Chandigarh 28th April 2011,
Subject: Regarding A.C. 667/2010—Shri Rajneesh Madhok Vs Public Information Officer Local Governement, Panjab--- Right to information Act, 2005 to supply the information:
Regarding the above cited with respect to Hon’ble Mr. Darbara Singh Kahlon State Information Commissioner Punjab’s order dt. 22-02-2011
2. In this regard the applicant is being told that the approval to restore plot no. 683 of the applicant has been given. The information in this regard has been sent to the Executive officer, Improvement Trust Phagwara vide Memo No. 8/33/2005-2SS2/1039 dated 21-04-2011 (Copy enclosed).
Sd/-
Superintedent-cum-Assistant Public Information Officer,
Dt. Chandigarh April, 2011
The copy of the letter is being sent for information to the Hon’ble State Information Commission, Punjab S.C.O. No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh as per his order dt. 22-02-2011
Superintendent Cum Assistant Public Information Officer.
\========================================================
Enclosed Copy

Panjab Government

Local Government Department
(S.S. 2 Branch)
To
The Executive officer,
Improvement Trust,
Phagwara.
Memo No 8/33/2005-2SS2/1039
Dt: Chandigarh 21/4/11
Subject: Approval of Restoration of resumed plots.
With regard to your above cited letter no. 1090 dt. 12.10.2009
2. Regarding above cited matter the matter has been considered and in the above cited Scheme No. 1’s plot No. 683, 270-A, 742 and of Scheme No. 3’s Shop Cum Flat No. 313, the approval to restore the plots is being given on this condition that the dues should be collected.
Superintendent.
===========================================
The points of consideration are:
The plots had been resumed on illegal parameters and the said information had been collected by the applicant and Hon’ble State information Commissioner Mr. Surinder Singh had directed to take the lenient view to the Executive officer. The Local Government Department has been ligering on the matter and has not been restoring the plot even after several representations and by submitting the copy of the order in which the executive officer had specifically mentioned that when the purchase consideration amount has been paid by the applicant and he had deposited time to time non construction charges then the resumption of plot is illegal. So, the plot should be restored. But the department has not been restoring.
Now the question arise when the plot has been resumed then why the Improvement Trust will charge Non construction charges from the applicant, and if the department charges then how can we get the relief.
Regards,
Rajneesh Madhok

[R Madhok]

Sponsorer

Apr 28, 2011 In Chamber Mrs. Ravi Singh 12.00 Noon Download
http://www.infocommpunjab.com/Orders2011.aspx
http://www.infocommpunjab.com/htm/do...4.11%20(1).doc
STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
SCO NO. 32-33-34, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH

Sh. Rajneesh Madhok,
B- XXX/63, Nehru Nagar,
Street no- 2, Railway Road,
Phagwara- 144401,
Distt- Kapurthala …..Appellant
Vs
1. Public Information Officer,
O/o Director Local Government,
SCO – 131-132,
Sector- 17C, Chandigarh
2. Public Information Officer,
First Appellate Authority,
O/o Director Local Government,
SCO – 131-132,
Sector- 17C, Chandigarh …..Respondents

AC- 667/2010
Order

Present: Appellant Sh. Rajneesh Madhok, in person.
For the respondent: Sh. Ashok Kumar, Supdt.-APIO (LG II Branch) (96465-88003)

Respondent present submits a letter dated 28.04.2011 addressed to the appellant with a copy to the Commission. The letter reads: -

“Ref. order dated 22.02.2011 by Hon’ble SIC Sh. D.S. Kahlon.

Approval has been granted for restoration of plot no. 683 to the applicant and the Executive Officer, Improvement Trust, Phagwara has been advised vide Memo. No. 8/33/2005-2LG2/1039 dated 21.04.2011 (Copy enclosed).”

Sh. Rajneesh Madhok is satisfied with the response and submits that the matter be closed.

Seeing the merits of the case, therefore, it is hereby closed and disposed of.

Copies of order be sent to the parties.



Sd/-
Chandigarh Mrs. Ravi Singh
Dated: 28.04.2011 State Information Commissioner

[jetley]

Congratulations for your exemplary work. To help members understand and learn the very important aspect of how to use RTI (which is believed to have a limited scope of getting information) to get redressal of greivances, please post your complete set of RTI documents (original application, PIO's reply, 1st and 2nd appeal documents, complaint document (if any), orders on 1st appeal and other correspondence, if any).

I believe your case can become a very good learning tool for a lot of people. Please do the needful (you may post by blocking out personal details in the above documents, if you do not wish to share them)

[R Madhok]

Dear Mr. Jetley,
Government is bound by rules framed by the department. But if the Government is not following the rules framed then naturally there is a fault in our system. Though the rti don't provide decisions and not sort out grievances. But If we frame questionairy to get the on record reasons of pick and choose policies adopted by the department officials and reasons of overlooking the interests of one or two members and the same facilities provided to the others. To provide the reply of cumbersome questionaire is very difficult. As no reasons are according to rules to implement the decision with pick and choose policy. The PIO provided bundles of papers to the applicant those were irrelevant and having no connection with the application. Decision of Government suffered from vice of Wednesbury unreasonableness which is being proved. The reply of same was difficult to provide. The RTI application had been lingering on from more than one year in State information commission. 10-15 hearings attended by the applicant before the commission and on every hearing the PIO of Director's office provide the information saying that this information belongs to Executive officer, Phagwara and the show cause notice had been issued to the Executive officer, improvement trust, Phagwara. I objected to the said notice on the next hearing that the said information is available at Director's office as the file has been held up by the Director from years and he is not taking decision. The said wording has been furnished to me by the Public information officer, O/o Executive officer, Phagwara as per my RTI application filed a year back. On the next hearing the PIO of Director office extracted the new formula that the information is available with Principal Secretary. Then again I lodged complaint and sought clarifications of the points submitted by Executive officer and the Director. Then on the last hearing attended my plot was restored and no information was provided by me.
The details of the case can be had by searing on Google "Estimated Rs One hundred Crore Scam by Improvement Trust Phagwara ...", The scam is worth more than one hundred crores which is being made. All the residential plots of the locality on main road has been converted to commercial complexes. The main entrance of the plots are at interior side of the locality and the exterior side of the plots are on Main road. The allottees not one but one to all converted the residential plots to commercial, by not following any procedure laid by the department. The construction of those plots are not residential. No room has been constructed, No kitchen no bathroom. The buildings were converted to Commercial complexes by putting one RCC slab on purchase of say three residential plots. This is not an end of the story. The names of those commercial complexes are also given on those buildings. Like ***** Tower and ***** Complex. Almost 90% hospitals of the town are situated in this residential colony by converting residential plots to commercial hospitals. If we count the violations then every plot holder i.e. 100% violations have been made with construction of basement even. This is in the knowledge of department but every body has shut his eyes. No action has been taken so far whereas the matter has been reported with evidences to almost every authority from the Chief Minister to the Executive officer.
Rajneesh Madhok