Dear members,
I made an application as under. For which the PIO had given mala fide denial of information for many of the questions (answers found in red colour are evasive). I am planing to proceed with 1st Appeal. The draft of which is also I am producing below the application. I entertain valuable suggestions from you.
Thanks,
Dr. Nirmal Joseph
Ref. No: KMC/RTI/N/1/09
APPLICATION U/S. 6(1) FOR SEEKING INFORMATION UNDER THE
RIGHTS TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005
(TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT)
From
Dr. J. Nirmal Joseph,
2B, Doctor’s Quarters, CSI Kalyani Multispecialty Hospital,
No. 14, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai 600004.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Kuzhithurai Municipality ,
Marthandam P.O., Kanyakumari Dt. PIN: 629165.
Sir,
Sub:
U/s 6(1) of RTI Act, 2005 certain information are required regarding the illegal construction against the approved plan LIR No: 22/2005 dated 23.02.2005 at the land belonging to Dr. W. H. Isaac Sundarsen which has the Re-Survey numbers C5/75-1B and C5/75-4B, Kuzhithurai Municipality, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District, and the door numbers 25-38/1 and 25-38/2.
A commercial/public building in the above location has been constructed by Dr. W. H. Isaac Sundarsen after getting approval from Kuzhithurai Municipality as LIR No.22/2005 dated 23/02/2005. The Kuzhithurai Municipality has confirmed the deviations and violations in the construction of the above building. Accordingly, the Municipality has issued two separate demolition notices (one on 23/05/2005 and the other on 27/07/2005). In addition to the above said notices the Municipality had filed a criminal suit against Dr. W. H. Isaac Sundarsen as S.T.C.No.1604/2005 before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai. The same is pending before the Court and there is no interim direction or order from the Court.
In the above matter, the Kuzhithurai Municipality has supplied various information under the RTI Act, 2005 in its letters dated, 01.04.2008, 06.05.2008, 24.06.2008, 05.08.2008, 13.09.2008, 13.09.2008, 11.11.2008, 22.12.2008, 28.01.2009, 05.02.2009 and 05.02.2009 which contain certain contradictory, incomplete, misleading, false and incorrect details and information. Moreover, at one stage the copy of the revised plan was supplied to me by masking the denial of approval which amounts to destroyed information.
Above all these, the approval for the building was obtained for the establishment of an experimental and testing laboratory, but the same is being utilized not for the purpose of an experimental and testing laboratory but as a patient’s ward.
Though there were deviations from the approved plan and violation of existing building rules which are not rectified, the above mentioned Dr. W. H. Isaac Sundarsen is now carrying out unauthorized additional construction of one more floor on the building to which the revised plan applied was also rejected by the Municipality. It is astonishing to note that the Kuzhithurai Municipality is silently watching and allowing the violator to continue with this flagrant violation. This situation necessitated to get the following information pertaining to the above matter U/s 6(1) of RTI Act, 2005.
1. Whether the Kuzhithurai Municipality is aware of the Tamil Nadu Government gazette notification of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2008 which came into force from December 10, 2008? If so, a copy of the above Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2008 may be supplied to me.
Yes. Copy available at Govt. Press, Chennai.
2. If the Municipality is not aware of the above Amendment Act, whether the Municipality has come across the matter published in almost all the newspapers in English and Tamil.
Yes. Aware of the above act.
3. Whether the section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 prohibits supply of information in the form of opinion, what was relied upon in taking a decision or questions raised on the transactions which led to some activities? If so, clearly specify such provisions in the above section to that effect along with a copy of the section and its explanatory note.
Interpretation of the act may be had from the Department of Law and Justice Government of India.
4. Whether the Municipality has come across a specific provision in the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2008 to the effect that the locking and sealing of the land and building cannot be done when the owner’s appeal against the Municipality’s notice in the court of law is settled or pending? If so a copy of the portion of the same may be supplied to me.
- No -
5. Was there any specific interim or regular direction or order issued in the criminal suit S.T.C.No.1604/2005 which is pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai? If so a copy of the order may be supplied to me.
No specific order issued in the criminal case STC No.1604/2005.
6. If there is any such of the above direction from the Court, please inform me the relevant provisions of any Act or Rule which prohibits the Municipality from proceeding with other actions such as demolishing, locking and sealing of the land and building etc., a copy of the same may be supplied to me.
Not applicable.
7. If there is no such provision in the Act or Rule prohibiting the Municipality to proceed with demolishing, locking and sealing of the land and building etc., what was the action taken by the Municipality on the above violation of the building other than the two notices issued to the offender and the pending suit (S.T.C.No.1604/2005 before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai). A copy of the relevant documents pertaining to the action taken may be supplied to me.
No action can be taken till the decision comes out from the court.
8. Have the Municipality obtained any legal opinion to the effects that the Municipality should not proceed with demolishing or locking and sealing of the land and building when the suit (S.T.C.No.1604/2005 before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai) is pending trial? If so a copy of the legal opinion obtained may be provided to me.
Not obtained any legal opinion.
9. Under the Tamil Nadu District Municipality Act, 1920 is there any bar to proceed with demolition or lock and seal of the land and building when a case is filed under section 205(3), 317, 339, 340 and 313 is pending trial? If so, a copy of the same may be sent to me.
Legal proceedings going on.
10. Is there any provision in the Tamil Nadu District Municipality Act to permit a very long and an indefinite duration to the person who violated the Building Rules and deviated from the approved plan to submit the explanation to the show cause notice? If so a copy of the same may be provided to me.
At this juncture without the permission of the court nothing can be done. Legal proceedings going on. Hence without the permission of the court no action can be taken.
11. In the absence of any such provision, who in the Municipality is responsible to proceed with the action of demolition or lock and seal of the land and building?
Not applicable.
12. Whether any action was initiated against the authority referred to in paragraph 11 above for not doing his/her duty of demolition or lock and seal of the land and building? If so a copy of the documents related to the action taken may be forwarded to me.
Not applicable.
13. Is the pending of the above mentioned suit (S.T.C.No.1604/2005 before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai) a bar to proceed with locking and sealing of the land and building of the premise as per Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2008? If so the relevant references may please be provided to me.
Legal proceedings going on. So not applicable.
14. What is the action taken against the offense by the Municipality after seeing the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2008? A copy of the notice or any other action taken based on this Act may please be supplied to me.
Criminal case pending in the Court. Legal proceedings going on.
15. If the Municipality has not taken any action to lock and seal the land and building under the provision of the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2008 so far, is there any bar to proceed with the process of locking and sealing the land and building at least now? If so a copy of the documents pertaining to this effect may please be forwarded to me.
Legal proceedings going on.
16. If the Municipality has not taken any action so far under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2008, when will it proceed with the process of locking and sealing the land and building?
Department will take action only after the decision comes from the Honorable Court.
17. When will the process of locking and sealing the land and building be completed? A probable date of the locking and sealing the land and building may be informed to me along with the reply to this.
As per the court decision.
18. What is the Rule which prevents the Municipality from stopping the now on-going construction on top of the building in question? Please provide a copy of the Rule.
Action taken by the Municipality as per the TNDM act.
19. If there is no such Rule, name, designation and the address of the Municipal official who is allowing the continuation of the unauthorized, illegal construction may be supplied to me.
No unauthorized construction is allowed.
20. Whether any action has been taken against the irresponsible official who has permitted the on-going illegal, unauthorized construction on top of the already illegally constructed building for which the Municipality had issued notice earlier? If so please send copies of the relevant documents to me.
No official has permitted such type of unauthorized construction. Already a criminal case STC No.1604/2005 filed before the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai, so there is no need for taking any action against the official.
21. If no action has been taken against the erring official mentioned in paragraph 20 above so far, when would the action be initiated against him/her and completed?
The question of action taken against any official does not arise.
22. How many days will it take for the Municipality to stop the present on-going construction in total violation and disregard to the Rules and regulations governing the construction of building in the jurisdiction of Kuzhithurai Municipality ?
Legal proceedings already taken.
23. What was the action taken by the Municipality for the utilization of the building as patient ward other than the purpose for which the approval was obtained by Dr. W. H. Isaac Sundarsen.
Already criminal action taken and pending in the court.
24. If no action has been taken for the violation mentioned in paragraph 23 above, when will it be carried out to stop the misuse of the building for the purpose other than what the approval was obtained for?
As per the provisions contained in section 205 of the TNDM act, the executive authority has taken proper legal action.
25. In the counter affidavit filed on 15.11.2006 by the commissioner of Kuzhithurai Municipality in W.P (MD) No.5239 of 2006 in paragraph 8 he has stated that as per Rule 11(4) Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Buildings Rules 1976, one has to follow the guideline stipulated therein, while any construction is put up in the land. Because the commissioner has said, the Municipality should be having these rules at hand. Kindly provide a copy of these rules (please be specific about the rule number, year, etc. as stated herein).
By clerical mistake it was stated as TNDM building rules 1976 instead of 1972. Copy available at Government press, Chennai.
26. In the same counter affidavit filed on 15.11.2006 by the commissioner of Kuzhithurai Municipality in W.P (MD) No.5239 of 2006 he agrees that the municipality had not received any reply for the two notices (one on 23/05/2005 and the other on 27/07/2005) served to Dr. W. H. Isaac Sundarsen. I also understand that the Kuzhithurai Municipality had appointed Mrs. T. Daisy, the Town Planning Inspector of the Municipality to handle the criminal suit S.T.C.No.1604/2005 filed before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Kuzhithurai, against Dr. W. H. Isaac Sundarsen on behalf of the Municipality under section 205(3), 317, 339, 340 and 313. Also in the above said counter affidavit the commissioner had stated that the municipality has initiated proper legal proceeding under section 205(3), 317, 339, 340 and 313. Please provide the copy of section 205(3) (be specific about the rule as stated herein).
Copy available at Government press, Chennai.
Dr. J. Nirmal Joseph
Chennai
23.02.2009
Ref. No: KMC/RTI/N/1ap1/09
From
Dr. J. Nirmal Joseph,
2B, Doctor’s Quarters, CSI Kalyani Multispecialty Hospital ,
No. 14, Dr. Radhakrishna Salai, Chennai 600004.
To
The Appellate Authority under Right to Information Act, 2005 (Commissioner)
Kuzhithurai Municipality,
Marthandam P.O. PIN: 629165
Respected Sir/Madam,
Sub: under the RTI Act 2005, Sec 19(1) 1st appeal submitted for not furnishing Information – Regarding
Ref: a. My Right to Information Application letter No: KMC/RTI/N/1/09 dated 23-02-2009, received by the Kuzhithurai Municipality on 26-02-2009 (copy enclosed).
b. Letter Roc.No.496/2008/TPI, dated: 24-03-2009 from the Public Information Officer, Kuzhithurai Municipality (copy enclosed).
I requested certain information vide reference cited to the Public Information Officer, Kuzhithurai Municipality . But even after lapse of more than 30 days, information is not furnished as per the RTI Act 2005.
1. For the query under serial number 1, as a proof that the Municipality is aware of the said Act, as requested by me they had to provide the copy to me. But the answer amounts to mala fide denial of the request for information.
2. For the query under serial number 3, the answer/information provided is incomplete and totally a mala fide denial of the request for information. No copy of the required document was provided to me.
3. For the query under serial number 6, the answer/information provided is totally misleading and a mala fide denial of the request for information.
4. For the query under serial number 7, the answer/information provided is evasive in nature. The PIO had knowingly given incorrect and misleading information. This amounts to mala fide denial of the request for information.
5. The answer/information provided for the question numbers 9 to 25 are evasive in nature and is totally misleading. And the misleading answers provided are nothing but denial of correct and true information.
6. As far as the query under serial number 26, as a proof that the Municipality is aware of the said section sited in the query, they had to provide the required copy to me. But the answer is incomplete and again amounts to mala fide denial of the request for information.
So I appeal to you sir/madam U/s 19(1) of RTI Act 2005. Kindly arrange to get the correct, bona fide and complete information and certified/attested copies of documents asked for at free of cost under U/s 7(6) of RTI Act 2005 at the earliest.
Thanking you
Yours faithfully,
Dr. J. Nirmal Joseph
Chennai
06-04-2009
