DDA Encroachment & Unauthorised Speed Breakers
Sanjeev Goyal
|
Registration Number |
DDATY/R/E/22/00031 |
|
Name |
S K Goyal |
|
Date of Filing |
06-01-2022 |
|
RTI Fee Received |
10 |
|
Payment Mode |
Credit or Debit Card / RuPay Card |
|
SBI Reference number |
202134237969502 |
|
Transaction Status |
SUCCESS |
|
Request filed with |
Delhi Development Authority |
|
Dwarka Maintenance Division
(A) The unauthorized and ill-shaped speed breakers are not only inconvenient for passerby but also is against the safety norms. This is an illegal activity against rules and court orders. Any violator is liable for action for this. In addition, those who support this activity and help in maintaining such speed breakers are also equally guilty. By not removing unauthorized speed breakers and other encroachments near Solomon Heights Society, Sector 19B, Dwarka DDA staff is also colluding with such activities. In this regard, please provide the following information: (1) In the last six months how many road inspections of this area have been carried out by DDA staff? (2) Please provide the list of officers who carried out road inspection? (3) Please provide the names of all officers who are helping in protecting these speed breakers installed without the approval of traffic police? (4) Please inform the reasons and facts for not removing these speed breakers? (B) Recently, cut in the road have been repaired near Sanskriti Apartment, Sector 19B. Apparently, the repair quality is poor, instead of providing a plain surface, humps have been created. In this regard, please inform: (1) Please provide all specifications appliable for such repair of cut in the road complied with by DDA? (2) The list of officers who have approved this apparently poor work? (3) At the time of repairing the whole width of road was repaired in one go without leaving any space for vehicles to pass. It is a matter of common sense that only half of the road should have been repaired in one day so that vehicles can pass through in the remaining space. No warning sign board or barrier was put in place which not only caused one accident on 23/12/2021 morning but also de-shaped the wet concrete. Please inform the names of all DDA officers who were responsible to supervise this repair work? (C) At several places one can fund debris, old kerb stones or tiles lying on the road, footpath etc. For example, at Kargil Chowk, some kerb stones are lying for the past 6 months. In this regard please inform whether removing old kerb stone/tiles is also the responsibility of the maintenance division? |
|
|
Telephone Number |
011-24631390 |
|
Email Id |
|
|
Appeal filed |
DDATY/A/E/22/00088 10/02/2022 |
|
Appeal to RTI No. DDATY/R/E/22/00031
Among other matters, we have been writing letters to DDA about basic maintenance issues for past 15 years. Same issues are being we raised again and again for action by the staff but things have not moved an inch. Potholes, uprutted kerb stone, open drains, missing tiles, high level of footpaths, wrong zebra crossing, mindless blocking of zebra crossing, unauthorized sped breakers, illogically fixed iron grills, walls on footpaths etc.
Whenever we inquire from DDA it is informed that field staff regularly inspect the area within their respective jurisdiction, but what they note and report only God knows. We have now strong hunch that many of field staff only record the pressing issues and leave many issues and many of the staff members are NOT even aware as to what they need to do?
Through this RTI we have been trying to attract the attention of maintenance division towards 3 unauthorised speed breakers and obstruction of footpaths around Solomon Society Sector 19B for past several months but they are avoiding action on that and after repeat RTI they have provided the below funny reply:
“The speed breakers are constructed as per the permission given by T.I. (Police) concerned. All the speed breakers in DMD-II jurisdiction have been made earlier. No speed breakers have been constructed recently. However, any speed breaker is found illegal shall be removed after consultation with T.I.(Police) & Public.” (Ref: F.5(RTI)21-22/AE(P)/DMD-II/DDA/59 dated 03/02/2022.”
This was in response to RTI filed on 06/01/2022 prior to this another RTI was filed on the same subject on DDATY/R/E/21/02779 09/10/2021 but the formality of uploading response on RTI portal was completed by putting a dot (.). System accepted this dot as response and RTI was closed.
In first sentence the DMD-II has accepted that Speed breakers are authorized and in second part showing their ignorance. Now the point is how DMD-II would know that speed breakers are unauthorized. Have they made any efforts or inquiry with traffic police? It is matter of common knowledge that the rubberized speed breakers are generally not allowed on roads. And traffic police would not allow 3 speed breakers within a distance of 15 meters in Dwarka. Over this, now DMD-II says that even if it is unauthorized they would consult police and public? What for they need to discuss it with public? Within public with whom they will discuss? It only confirms that their intention is not to remove these.
Why public should keep on reminding the staff about basic duties of field staff again & again? And despite that things are not moving. For footpath height we have spoken thousand times but staff in in deep slumber. Now a new mischief has begun, to install grills in front of zebra crossing, this is utter foolishness. The old kerb stone around trees in front of our society were removed a year ago for replacement but still not replaced the roots of trees are exposed – but who cares?
What to talk about removing obstructions the DDA staff itself in busy in erecting walls over footpaths. The DDA should organized training sessions for Dwarkites to learn how to jump the culvert wall constructed over footpath. To our understanding besides carelessness most of these things are happening because there is no standard check list for road inspection like street design check list devised by UTTIPEC, hence the staff is free to report or not to report any thing as per their mood. The UTTIPEC guidelines are so simple that even a person with low intelligence level can understand it easily but only DDA staff is not able to do it.
In this back ground, this appeal is filed on following grounds:
Ground: The RTI was files to know pointed replies to 8 questions however only one reply has been submitted without indicating the question number in response to which this has been provided. Therefore, the reply to RTI is grossly incomplete and following prayer is made:
(1) Please inform in response to which question the reply has been submitted, (2) Complete & to the point reply to balance 7 questions be submitted at the earliest along with justification for delay, (3) A penalty of Rs.250/- per day be imposed on PIO for not providing the complete reply in one go, (4) Adverse entry be made in the ACR of PIO for adopting delay tactics and (5) Disciplinary action may be initiated against PIO for submitting ambiguous reply.
PLEASE NOTE THAT I HAVE NO TIME FOR PHYSICAL HEARING, PLEASE TAKE DECISION BASIS MATERIAL ON RECORD
|
|