Appellant: Consolidation is going on for the last 20 years in Delhi - CIC: Divisional Commissioner to initiate steps to appoint a Consolidation officer specifically for the village Alipur & also pursue with the MCD to implement the building byelaws
2. Complainant through his RTI application dated 07.10.2013 had sought information with respect to sale of land allotted to the allottee in Ext. Lal Dora viz
i) action taken on the letter dated 19.03.2013 & 25.06.2013
ii) copy of norms formed in regard to the sale of land in Ext. Lal dora. In Case, this has not been done earlier, will the Revenue Dept now move to frame the policy in this regard, etc.
3. Having received no reply within the prescribed period, the complainant preferred First Appeal.
4. Claiming non furnishing of information sought, the Complainant has approached the Commission U/s 18 of RTI Act.
5. Both the parties made their submissions. The complainant submitted that he is seeking information on the consolidation of his Village Alipur in Delhi. The consolidation process has been going on for the past 20 years and there is no end in sight and people are suffering for not having any status/title on the land allotted to them in lieu of surrendering their agricultural land.
6. On the other hand, the respondent officer, Mr. Lalit Mohan, SDM (Hq) submitted that the consolidation process was started in 1996 in Delhi and still it has not been completed and record has not been consigned. The consolidation process also includes checkbandi, abadi, etc by which the farmers who have surrendered their agricultural land will be allotted residential plot in the ratio of 2:1. There is a scheme framed by the consolidation officer as per the East Punjab Consolidation and Holding Act. The complainant’s main interest is regarding his Alipur village and about the ‘rastha’. The scheme prescribed 17 ft width road of abadi. But encroachments are going on and the ‘rastha’ is getting narrowed as a result of the encroachments. The encroachments are the main responsibility of MCD which has to take action against the encroachments. The appellant’s contention that the Registrar should not do registration of the encroachments, cannot be prevented, as registrations cannot be stopped on the basis of encroachments, as per the court judgements. As per the respondent officer’s submissions, the complainant’s problem will be solved if a special consolidation officer is appointed for his Alipur village alone. As long as the consolidation process is not complete, the land will be under the Chief Consolidation Officer. The appellant complained that the people are building the superstructures beyond two and half floors which has to be stopped. In this connection, the respondent officer submitted, once the consolidation process is over, the MCD will demolish all the encroachments, and therefore, the people who are constructing the structures, are only doing so at their own risk. The complainant complained that even though there are several meetings on this subject by the Government, no decision has been implemented in this regard.
5. The Commission heard the submissions. The Commission recommends the Divisional Commissioner, Department of Revenue to look into the complex issue of this consolidation process and initiate steps to appoint a Consolidation officer specifically for the village Alipur to complete the process of consolidation which is going on for the last 20 years and also pursue with the MCD to implement the building byelaws and take action against the unauthorised construction of multiple floors, restricting the floors to 2 and half. The appellant brought to the notice of the Commission another complex problem of Gram sabha land which is in scattered pieces and the same is of no use for the Government unless the scattered pieces are consolidated at one place. The Commission considers that due to the noncompletion of the consolidation, development is not taking place in Delhi. If a dedicated officer is appointed, the consolidation can be completed within six months.
6. With the above observations, the Commission disposes of the complaint.
Citation: Sh. Gian Chand v. SDM(HQII) GNCTD in File No.CIC/SA/C/2014/000226