Whether occupation certificate and authorization of old building require for for new building ?
Sadanand B. Panchal
(Querist) 04 May 2014
This query is : Resolved
Respected Experts,
In my plot where I am residing, one old building was demolished in the year 2008 and a new building Tower is constructed in lieu of old building. I have strict proof that the XX Society of the old building is not owner of land and that no occupation certificate was held by the said Society. In spite of the building being unauthorized, the Executive Engineer, (Building & Proposal Department) had erroneously in corrupt way sanctioned plan and granted Commencement certificate for reconstruction of old building. (Obviously it was demolition C.C.), as such the illegal Tower is raised in the place of old building.
The order of Hon'ble Mumbai City Civil Court dated 19-7-1974 prohibiting construction activity in the Plot against the said Society. I obtained a certified copy in the year 2011.
Thereafter I made Application before the State Public Information officer of Building & Proposal Department under R.T.I. Act, 2005 requiring information about Occupation Certificate and other relevant documents(documents showing list of tenants of old building, area of flats of old building, authorization proof of old building) submitted by the said Society/ Architect before Executive Engineer at the time of application for reconstruction of old XX building which (It must be submitted in the file of building Permit IOD of new building). The executive Engineer knowing very well that such documents were not taken on record while sanctioning plan against the old building, did not replied my RTI Application within 30 days. So I filed First Appeal under RTI. The appellate Authority directed the SPIO to furnish me the desired information and that in case such documents not available in the file, directed SPIO to reply me accordingly. Thereafter SPIO did not furnish me the required information nor send me reply. Hence I filed Second Appeal before the CIC in the year 2012. Last week I received letter from CIC to attend hearing of the Second Appeal under RTI, 2005 on Monday 5th May, 2014.
The SPIO did not furnish me the desired information under RTI Act and thus would amount to deficiency in service by the public authority under the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
My query is as follows:
1)Can I straight away demand Compensation for not providing desired information by SPIO for deficiency in service by the public authority under the Consumer Protection Act 1986?
2)Whether my desired information under RTI is reasonable which relates to the old building which was demolished and new building proposal was sanctioned for new building without changing name of the old building?
3)Whether there is any provision in BMC ACT or MRTP ACT and Building regulations of Maharashtra to take documents like Occupation Certificate, documents showing list of tenants of old building, area of flats of old building, authorization proof of old building on record by Planning Authority while granting building permit for new building in lieu of old building? (There is corrupt practice going on by the Architects in Mumbai for not submitting old records before demolition of old building)
Kindly inform me.
Regards,
Sadanand Panchal
Uday Kumar
(Expert) 04 May 2014
RTI is not covered under consumer protection act for deficiency in the services, hence the remedy is to knock the door of high court under RTI Appeal of PIL
Regards
advudaykumar@gmail.com
Sadanand B. Panchal
(Querist) 05 May 2014
Today the matter was for hearing and argued Second Appeal and filed my Synopsis of arguments and without prejudice to my arguments, I submitted my inferences as under:
a)After decision of this Second Appeal, I have no remedy to file any Appeal against the order passed by this Authority if in case this Appeal dismissed.
b)Information seeker under RTI is a consumer of public authority under Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
c) Public authority under RTI is a service provider under Consumer Protection Act 1986.
d)Remedies under Consumer Protection Act 1986 are in addition to remedies available under Right to Information Acts.
e)Applicants under earlier RTI Acts of various States and of Right to Information Act 2005 can avail this additional remedy against public authority.
f)The Appellant has not filed any complaint before District Consumer Forum and State/National Consumer Commissions regarding the deficiency in service to furnish the required information by the public authority under the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
g) District Consumer Forum and State/National Consumer Commissions have jurisdiction to try complaints relating to deficiency in service concerning RTI. Likewise this Appellate Authority has jurisdiction to try this Second Appeal under Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
h) Non-supply of information or supply of defective, incomplete, misleading information, would amount to deficiency in service by the public authority under the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
i)Supply of information beyond time limit fixed by RTI Acts would also amount to deficiency in service by the public authority.
j)Information seeker have paid fee while seeking information under RTI.
k) Information seeker under RTI can claim compensation and damages under the Consumer Protection Act.
l)Information seeker under RTI can obtain appropriate directions to the public authority from Consumer Forum/ Commissions under the Consumer Protection Act 1986, for removing deficiency in service.
m) Provisions of Consumer Protection Act 1986 can reasonably be extended to first appeal since appeal is an extension of RTI application.
n)Payment of compensation, damages, and expenses to information seeker is rarity under RTI Acts, while it is normally allowed under Consumer Protection Act 1986.
o)CIC and all SICs can be proceeded against under Consumer Protection Act 1986 for deficiency in supply of office Record file information maintained by the concerned Department of State Public Information Officer.
p) Consumer District Fora at Nagpur [in Dec 2010], Vijaynagaram [AP] on 21-01-2011 and Coimbatore [TN] on 07-04-2011 have ordered supply of information and compensation to applicant under RTI Act 2005. Guntur A.P. Dist Consumer Forum ordered release of information and granted compensation and expenses on 07-01-2011 and when PIO and FAA did not comply with its orders Forum issued warrants to arrest these two officers of State Govt.
q)Verbatim judgment of NCDRC in the matter of RTI Act 2005 is also applicable to Consumer Forums, State and National Commissions.
r)Recently the state chief information commissioner (CEC) has directed the BMC to pay Rs 50,000 compensation to south Mumbai resident Nandu P Kapadia who had sought information under an RTI application, but did not get it within the 30-day stipulated period resulting his house on Princess Street being demolished.
I most respectfully pray,
a) that this Hon'ble Authority be order the State Public Information officer for release of desired information;
b)that this Hon'ble Authority may be pleased to order for grant of compensation and expenses in favor of the appellant in view of the State Public Information officer caused day to day damages to the Appellant for not providing the desired information.
c)that this Hon'ble Authority may pass any appropriate order in favor of appellant as may deem fit.
The the SIC had received my original of Synopsis of arguments but no receipt signature given to me. What can I do if the same is not taken on record? should I post the copy of the same for receipt?
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 07 May 2014
