Right to Information Act

2005-05-30T04:06:00.000-07:00

I used the Delhi Right to Information Act – 2001: A Detailed Report

I travel from Vasant Kunj to Noida every day for work, covering 32 kms (one way) on Delhi and Noida roads.

In February 2005, the Outer Ring Road stretch from Panchscheel Flyover to Chirag Delhi Flyover was freshly laid. Within 20 days of this, I noticed that the road had started to come off at several places. About 2 meters from the pavement, a width of 6 meters was affected on the entire stretch. This also caused disruption to traffic. After a couple of weeks the road was patched up. It was not the best of the jobs done. The patches had depressions. (Issue 1)

Issue 2: Before the Savitri Cinema Flyover there used to be a pothole, apparently because of leakage of some pipe. This side of the road was also freshly laid. After about 5 weeks the leakage started again and bringing the pothole back.

Issue 3: Freshly laid Mathura Road: stretch from after Modi mill Flyover to Apollo hospital. The fresh laying was probably the most shoddy road construction I had ever seen in Delhi.

Taking note of these things, and having cognizance of the Right to Information Act, I thought of asking about the above mentioned from the PWD. With the help of Parivartan (www.parivartan.com) volunteers I prepared the application (Filled in the Form A).

18th & 19th April 2005, 10:00 hrs

I went to Police HQs at ITO (which is also the PWD HQs) and looked for the right place to submit the application. There is a Competent Authority for each PWD Zone. The Outer Ring Road stretch I was concerned about came under PWD Zone IV. I came to know that the Mathura Road stretch had been transferred to the National Highway Authorities of India (NHAI).

I approached an officer in Zone IV, he asked questions, and took me to the Head Engineer. He asked me some questions about what I do and what was my interest in filing the application. I explained to him the issue and told him that because I pay taxes I would be concerned about how my money is being spent. Moreover, Delhi Govt. has recently increased the road tax, which means more and proper development and welfare of people and this makes me all the more concerned. He then instructed the application be accepted.

There is a fee of Rs 25/- for filing the application. And if any documents are required like the Contract between the contractor and PWD, the fee is Rs 500/-. Whatever I asked for was to be provided as photostats (the fee of which is Rs 5 per page). As I got ready to pay the fee, I was told that the Accountant had left the key to the cupboard in which the Receipt Book was stored. He lived in Ghaziabad and would have to go back and get it. It was finally decided that I come the next day and collect the receipt in the morning. He would come early to hand it over to me.

The next day I went early, but there was no sign of the Accountant. Another official asked me the purpose of my visit. He told that the accountant had given the receipt to him and told him that I would come in the morning and collect it. I paid the fee and walked out confused and wondering – how come the receipt was ready early in the morning with out the Accountant actually present there? Did he go back to Ghaziabad in the evening and get the key?? (I have kept this as an open issue as somehow the accountant seemed a sincere chap).

In the afternoon same day I got a call from the Assistant Engineer on site, wanting to know what is the problem and asked me to visit him at his office to have a chat. He explained to me that this was a problem of Slipout, which is occurring on a lot of Delhi Roads and is a topic of research. I fixed up a time of Saturday 11:00 hrs at this office under the Chirag Delhi Flyover.

23rd April 2005, 11:00 hrs: Meeting with Assistant Engineer

I had a good 1 hr talk with him. I told him exactly why I filed the application. The thought process behind actually taking the time out to fill the application, go to ITO twice, just of public enterprises becoming more accountable and transparent. Explained to him that the customer in the private industry is also very demanding and that if we don’t do a good job he does not leave us, till he gets the desired quality. My present client is a Japanese one and it is known all over the world that Japs are extremely quality conscious.

He explained to the why a slipout happens and that there is no solution for it. He was expecting that I as an engineer would have some knowledge on this and could engage in a discussion. He again informed me that he himself very concerned about the condition of the road and that it had been temporarily patched; work was not over yet. (I had seen zebra markings and arrows on certain part of the road after it was patched. This could have been an indicator that the road laying was nearing completion)

He started stating things like the roads are not made to handle such heavy traffic, e.g. the container trucks which ply at night. He also explained that it was very difficult to make a road which is as busy as Outer Ring Road. Public does not co-operate with the PWD on keeping off the freshly laid roads.

For the issue 2 – the pothole – he referred to excess load on the carriageway, as being responsible for the leakage. The underground pipe was earlier not under the road, but the pavement. The road had been widened and the pipe exposed, but the strengthening of the pipe had not been done.

He told me that it might not have been necessary to fill in this Rs 25 form and taken so much pain. A better way to get the same information would have been to drop an application at his office and he would have looked into it.

Towards the end of the discussion I explained to him that as I have asked in my application, I would like to get an official intimation and would like to still inspect the road and get all the documents mentioned.

After a few days I received a call from the Asst Engr and we fixed up a time of 11:00 hrs 7th May 05. I did inform him that I would get along with me some people who would be knowledgeable about road construction. I sent an email to the office of the Executive Engineer confirming the same.

7th May 05, 11:00 hrs: Road Inspection

Attendees:
Mr S Kumar (Retd MCD officer – expert on road construction)
XXX (Private Contractor)
Vinay (freelance film maker)
Arvind (Parivartan)
Uday

Asst Engr
Junior Engr
Executive Engr

We rendezvoused at Barista opposite IIT. Before proceeding to the PWD Office at Chirag Delhi Flyover Mr XXX and Mr Kumar told us that if the old road is treated well there is no question a slipout occurring. The explanation given by the Asst Engr to me was not convincing.

While driving to Chirag Delhi Flyover, I noticed that the entire stretch under scrutiny had again been re-laid. The work had started previous weekend over the days it had been completed.

We reached the Assistant Engrs office; he was at first a bit taken aback on seeing more people. Vinay, on entering had started filming. We introduced ourselves. We informed him that if he has objections to the filming we would not do that and he can object to it any time. Our only intent was to use it as a tutorial or a documentary spreading information about the Right to Information Act.

The question and answer session started amicably; the experts kept asking for relevant information, which they were provided. They went through the technical report which was the basis of undertaking the task of strengthening of the Outer Ring Road, measurement book, job mix formula lab test report, etc. Every thing looked good - measurements, quantities, and percentages and quality material were in order. They were still not convinced that even after using standardized and recommended materials and quantities slipout could occur. It was finally recommended that a sample be collected, from the road and it be tested in a private lab. Though Sample collection is allowed during the inspection, as we had not informed them of the same before hand, they asked us to get permission from the Chief Engrs office. The Executive Engineer had also joined us in the mean while.

The camera was switched off on request of the Asst Engr when some talk about the corruption in other depts of the Govt started off.

Now we came to the present condition of the road. The engineers were not convinced that the job presently done also left much to be desired. We went out for physical inspection and pointed out stretches to the engineers which were still not smooth and required attention. I was assured that these would be smoothened at the earliest. During the inspection we were told that slipout had occurred at 10 places in the mentioned stretch. Now the logic was that they can’t stop the traffic for a very long time on the Outer Ring Road and drivers do not co-operate by staying away from the freshly laid road. He said that the lives of his workers are always at risk considering the unruly traffic at night.

Finally we went for inspection of the pothole (Issue 2). The pothole had been covered. It had been there the previous night.

The Asst Engr asked if any exceptional job done by a government personnel gets highlighted by the media. Arvind told him, citing an example, that our media is such that if there is something wrong and will make news, it gets highlighted else it is not considered news.

Currently satisfied, we thanked all the engineers for the co-operation and left.

We then decided to ask for some documents which we missed out in the first application; the sample request was also included in the second application.

11th May 2005, 09:30 hrs: PWD HQs

Located the Accountant, and told him that I am here to submit a follow-up application. He informed me that a Speed post had been sent the previous day asking me to come and collect the documents I had asked in my application.

I was sent to talk to a PWD officer. I told him about the case and he told me “so you are the one. You had taken the entire team for the inspection. Such a thing is not allowed as per the Act” and told me to read him the provision in the Act which allows this. I firmly told him that this was a done thing. (I was informed by Arvind there is no clause stating the number of persons present for the inspection. The act neither allows it nor disallows it. Steps are being taken to limit the number and the Act may be modified in the future). The content of the chat with this officer was similar to the earlier ones; I explained him the logic behind my step and that if he bought a computer from my firm, which went bad and I would not honour the guarantee, he would approach the Consumer Form.

Next, back to the Head Engineer, I met last time. After inquiring if I were still not satisfied, he accepted my application.

As per the Act the applicant has the right to read all the documents and select only the ones desired. During this process I apprised the Accountant about what had happened and that the road was repaired. He genuinely appreciated the effort and told me that he is not an accountant by appointment and that he was the one who appointed to introduce the RTI in his dept. The officer I talked to earlier came into the office and callously asked me why was I going through the docs here and that I should take them home and inspect them. The Accountant interrupted and said “Sir, he is exercising his right to read all the documents and select the ones he required. This is as per the Act”. (I had good discussion with the Accountant about the application of the RTI)

Having gone through all the pages I decided I wanted them all and hence deposited Rs 240 (for 48 pages). I also paid for the second follow up RTI application.

I have now received the acknowledgement of the receipt of my second application and am waiting for the next steps.

Observations
When tenders are accepted the price is quoted either % above or below PWD recommended rates in 2002. The tender in this case was accepted less than “10% below” of the recommended rates.

On the first meeting with the Asst Engr I was told that work was still going on and it was not complete. I wonder if it is a coincidence or was already planned, that before our inspection on 7th May 05, both the Issues were taken care of.

Considering that the contractor had to re-lay the entire stretch, enough margins would have been available to utilize. And. it would have been highly unlikely that the entire road be re-laid had my application not been submitted.

According to the experts slipout can’t occur if proper processes are followed, and if the engineers still say that it is a topic of research, the competence of the engineers can be questioned. Or that the expertise of the PWD has to be enhanced. CRRIs credibility can also be questioned.

Finally, if the understanding of the PWD engineers is correct and the contractor has repaired the road on his expense then it was indeed a job well done. Here again the reasons for not getting the desired smoothness of surface were not satisfactory.

Vishal's notebook

Right to Information Act