Before State Information Commission Haryana, Chandigarh

BEFORE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION HARYANA, CHANDIGARH.

APPEAL UNDER SECTION 19(3) OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

CASE NO.1307 OF 2007

Sh.Om Singh Punia, Manager Legal, B-52, Okhla Ind.Area-I, New Delhi - 110020 …… Appellant.

Versus

1. First Appellate Authority-cum-Administrator, HUDA, Faridabad. 2. SPIO-cum-Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad.

…… Respondents.

Present:

1. Sh.Om Singh Punia, appellant in person. 2. Sh.Amarjit Bajaj, ARO, Estate Office, HUDA, Faridabad on behalf of the respondents.

Sh.Om Singh Punia, appellant filed an application on 10.11.2006 with the SPIO- cum-Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad requesting for information pertaining to allotment of institutional plots in Sector-20A, Faridabad. In particular he wanted to know the reasons for non allotment of an institutional plot to his company, criteria followed by HUDA for allotment, details of allottees of institutional plots etc. The Estate Officer responded vide letter dated 1.12.2006, a copy of which is available on record. Vide letter dated 18.12.2006 the appellant asked for some additional information as well as additional documents in connection with this allotment. These in particular included recommendations of the Committee along with rating of the applicants, specific observation made by the Committee on his application, copies of viability reports of successful allottees as well as reasons for allotting institutional land to industrial units. Vide letter dated 28.12.2006 the EO asked the appellant to deposit a further amount of Rs.200/- and this was done vide letter dated 8.1.2007 by the appellant. The information was supplied by the SPIO vide letter dated 19.1.2007 along with some annexures. Vide communication dated 25.1.2007 the appellant filed an appeal with the First Appellate Authority-cum-Administrator, HUDA, Faridabad pointing out the defficiencies in the information supplied by the EO. He also objected to the additional demand made by the EO, HUDA for supplying documents in his letter dated 19.1.2007. The First Appellate Authority decided the appeal on 20.2.2007 and in accordance with these orders a further sum of Rs.500/- was deposited on 27.2.2007 and information was supplied by the SPIO vide letter dated 23.3.2007. Some more documents were also sent vide letter dated 12.4.2007 by the SPIO to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the total information supplied the present second appeal has been filed before the Commission.

In response to the notice issued by the Commission the SPIO-cum-EO, HUDA, Faridabad has sent a communication dated 28.6.2007 to the appellant with a copy to the Commission. It has been mentioned in this reply that earlier the appellant had never demanded attested copies and now attested copies have been supplied. Justification has also been given for demanding additional amount of Rs.500/- based on the documents which had to be supplied. It has been contended that all the information desired by the appellant has been supplied and an offer has also been made to him to inspect the record file and request for any other additional document after inspection which can be made available to him. The appellant has filed a rejoinder dated 10.7.2007 which is already available on record. He has pointed out that as a general rule the documents alleged to have been attached to communications are not received alongwith the replies.

The matter has been discussed at length with both the parties at the time of the hearing. Keeping in view the request for information made by the appellant vide letter dated 18.12.2006 and the information supplied at various points of time the following directions are hereby given in this case :- 1. A specific reply with regard to guidelines issued by HUDA with respect to allotment made in Sector-20A should be furnished to the appellant. In case there were no other guidelines apart from the advertisement/brochure issued in this regard this may be specifically confirmed. The reasons for allotting plots to industries if this is correct should also be communicated to the appellant. 2. Information on the above two points shall be communicated to the appellant by 31.7.2007 under intimation to the Commission. 3. The appellant has agreed to inspect the record file concerning these allotments on 23.7.2007 at 11.30 AM in the Estate Office, HUDA, Faridabad. The SPIO shall make arrangement to ensure that the relevant file is inspected by the appellant and attested copies of documents requested shall be furnished to him on payment of the requisite charges to the respondent department.

Announced. To be communicated.

(G. Madhavan) Place : Chandigarh Chief Information Commissioner, Dated : 18.7.2007 Haryana, Chandigarh