के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
                      Central Information Commission
                             बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                      Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नईददल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

 नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/DPCCM/A/2017/148197

Shri Prem Prakash Shokeen                                    ... अपीलकताग/Appellant

                                   VERSUS
                                     बनाम
PIO, Delhi Pollution Control Committee                 ...प्रनतवादीगण /Respondents
Dept. of Environment, Kashmiri Gate,
Delhi-110006

Date of Hearing                      :    30.04.2019
Date of Decision                     :    03.06.2019
Information Commissioner             :    Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on              :   30.03.2017
PIO replied on                        :   12.04.2017
First Appeal filed on                 :   24.04.2017
First Appellate Order on              :   21.06.2017
2ndAppeal/complaint received on       :   13.07.2017

Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 30.03.2017, seeking information
regarding copy of budget allocated to DPCC and expenditure against the
allocation each head wise and sub head wise for the last three financial years
i.e. 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17.

PIO/DPCC, Kashmiri Gate, Vide letter dated 12.04.2017 as below:-

       "There is No Budget granted to Delhi Pollution Control Committee by Delhi
       Government & other Government agencies".

Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed the First Appeal dated 24.04.2017. FAA
vide order dated 21.06.2017 upheld the reply of PIO.

Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with
the instant Second Appeal.
                                                                         Page 1 of 3
 Facts

emerging in Course of Hearing:

Both the parties are present and heard. An important issue of public interest has been raised by the Appellant. The Appellant submits that the respondent public authority i.e. Delhi Pollution Control Committee, GNCTD is being run without any budgetary planning and there is no budgetary control being exercised by Govt. of NCT Delhi. He relies on the reply of PIO to buttress his claim. The PIO submits that DPCC does not get any financial assistance or budgetary directive from Govt. of NCT Delhi. The Appellant asserts that he wanted to access the internal budget made by DPCC. It emerges from the deliberations of the parties that no such budget is prepared by the DPCC and money is spent on purely on contingencies as per the financial rules.

The frame of question stands clarified in course of hearing. The Appellant apprehends that no internal audit has been done by the DPCC. The PIO submits that no statutory audit is undertaken and only internal audit is undertaken.

Decision:

The Respondent DPCC hosts the following information on its website on the About Us section. The same reads as:

Under Section 4 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Section 6 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) is empowered to perform the functions of the State Pollution Control Board for all Union Territories. However, Section 4(4) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Section 6 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 provides that CPCB may delegate all or any of its powers and functions of a State Board in a UT under the said Acts to such person or body of persons as the Central Government may specify. The CPCB has delegated all its powers and functions as a State Board in respect of the UT of Delhi to a committee of officials as specified by the Central Government in March, 1991. This committee has been reconstituted on 14th June 2002 vide notification No. B-12015/7/92-AS.

Commission wonders as to how a public authority entrusted to oversee the implementation of anti pollution laws is running without budgetary provisioning. Even autonomous organizations follow the provisioning and budgetary tools to ensure financial efficacy and transparency. Lack of proper financial audit also raises concerns. The Commission finds that the Appellant has made his point through the information accessed under the present RTI application. However, it for the appropriate authority or judicial forum to issue appropriate instructions to remedy the situation, if warranted. No further Page 2 of 3 adjudication on the present second appeal is required. The Appellant is at liberty to seek redressal of his grievance which certainly attracts larger public interest before an appropriate forum.

Let a copy of the present decision be sent to Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT Delhi for information and action as deemed fit.

The Appeal is disposed off.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई. के . नसन्द्हा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त ) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत) Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 3 of 3