- NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
- shows RTI
- RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
- 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
- The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
- Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
- Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
A perusal of Section 20 of the Act shows that it makes a provision to impose penalty either on Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer. However, there is no provision to initiate a departmental inquiry against the First Appellate Authority as per the Section 20 of the Act.
Sir, I have sent an appeal dated 3 August 2006 to CIC on matter pertaining to DDA. for seeking info which was not satisfactory that reached a dead end. Also for want of proper reply from the department.
1. Why no acknowledgement receive from CIC?
2. Is CIC bound to make the DDA give the proper reply?
3. There appears to have lots of irregularity with the functioning of DDA for the info requested from them.( The matter was about an uncroacher on approved layout plan for parking space and was only a parking space from the time of auction of plots in Jhandewalan Extension. A Pucca iron shed approx. 750 sq. ft. was constructed & encroached upon by greasing the palm of the department. This was demolish at one time. Up to this day, even with the knowledge of vice chairman; Dy.Dir. of Old Scheme Branch; Dy Dir. of Land; Asst.Dir.(damages); the estate Court Officer I.They have not initiated to demolish this iron shed which is so large, 60 sq.yrd was Charges for damages and yet the encroachment is beyond 60 sq. yrds also blatant disregard for the law of the land..
4. Would CIC delegate the vigilance dept. to investigate matters of this kind.
5. DDA control room: Tel. No. 23379444 complaint was registered No. 61 dated Aug.27, 2006 & Complaint No. 73 dt. 30th Aug. 2006. and also made Mr. H.S. Dharamsattu North Zone contact No. 23370778 Vikas Minar aware of the issue and why no action are being taken. Mr. Er. M.S. Nigam (Suptdg. Engineer, Civil was also approached who made a tel. call to the exc. Eng. Mr.
S.C Sharma of North Div. II of DDA to give his report on the matter, More than a month now had past, it seems not reaching its conclusion and no reply had been received.
Today am sending some RTI replys of DDA to the monitoring commitee Adv . Kirti Uppal appointed for area Sadar Pahar Ganj of which Jhandewalan Extention falls under for removal of the unauthorized irom shed beside Jhandewalan Ext. Metro Stations.
It is frustrating exercise, Any government dept. will put the onus to the person seeking action instead of departmental inquiry and in a time bound manner action be taken.
Could anyone tell me when, how to reach the conclusion of this matter I have taken?. Our place had become too congested and the parking space has to be brought back to use for what it was intended. How could an encroacher a thief be so rewarded that no action is taken.
Could some one enlighten me?
Thanks for any aid in how this matter can be expidited.
It seems the onus or blame are targetted on citizen who seek info & action instead of the dept. correcting its follies.