RTI Serving a copy of documents to the opposite party in a hearing before the CIC
A member of the Delhi Niwas Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd., Delhi sought information regarding financial irregularities in the Society's accounts. The CIC reminded the Complainant that serving a copy of documents (including Complaint, Second Appeal and Written submissions) to the opposite party is fundamental requirement for due process in legal proceedings and crucial for fairness, transparency, and also in the interest of expeditious response from the concerned Public Authority. It further reinforces the bonafide interest of the Appellant in obtaining the information at the earliest possible. The requirement of advance service is in accordance with the audi alteram partem requirement. It further ensures that the opposite party is aware of the facts of filing of a case in CIC, arguments of the Appellant and reason for discontentment.
Comments
Audi alteram partem is a Latin phrase that means "hear the other side" and refers to the legal principle that no person should be judged or have a decision made against them without a fair hearing. It has been seen that where the applicant had served advance copy of the Second Appeal/Complaint on the opposite party, the Respondent Public Authority tries proactively to resolve the case by either providing clarity on the subject or by providing revised and updated reply to the Appellants before the date of hearing. The result is a faster delivery of information, reducing the time, energy and efforts of the CIC in an early disposal. Thus, it is the interest of the Appellant/Complainant to serve copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on the Respondents.
Citation: Subhash Chander Banga v. Office of the Registrar Cooperative Societies, File No: CIC/REGCS/C/2024/612685; Date of Decision: 25.08.2025
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Vishakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books PIO’s Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. Her weekly article is being published since 2008 on this site. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and third party audit to individuals / organisations. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation at the link https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com
Forum How to Resolve the Gymkhana Imbroglio
The Ministry of Urban Development's order to resume land occupied by the Delhi Gymkhana Club has correctly drawn sharp attention to Delhi's chronic deficit in sporting and leisure infrastructure — a deficit that is real and must be addressed. Delhi ranks 141st out of 173 cities on the EIU Global Liveability Index, is the world's most polluted capital, and has only 16 DDA sports complexes for 33 million people — one per 2 million residents, roughly 90 times worse than England's ratio of citizen leisure centres. Singapore has eight times more Olympic pools per resident than Delhi, 17 track and field stadia, and 108 community clubs accessible by public transport. Nations that lead both competitiveness and liveability rankings — Singapore, Switzerland, Denmark — do so precisely because they invest aggressively in parks, community clubs, and sporting complexes. Delhi's ambitions as a global capital cannot be taken seriously without matching infrastructure.
Against this backdrop, shuttering the Gymkhana Club before alternatives exist is a cure worse than the disease. The Club's 27.3 acres house 30 tennis courts, 2 swimming pools, squash courts, a gymnasium, a library, and extensive green grounds — a rare oasis for over 15,000 members, the majority of them elderly retired professionals with a genuine need for accessible sports and leisure facilities. Forced out, they will have nowhere to turn except elite private clubs like DLF, Unitech, and Jaypee (going to be Adani) — whose membership fees run into millions of rupees and are entirely beyond the means of upper-middle-class retirees. The sole beneficiaries of the Gymkhana's closure, in the absence of alternatives, would be precisely those private real-estate and hospitality interests.
The real solution is a bold, large-scale redesign of Delhi's urban fabric to create sporting and leisure infrastructure on a war-footing. DDA's 5,000-acre unused land bank, Cantonment areas, and government properties across Delhi should be unlocked for this purpose. The Lutyens Bungalow Zone — nearly 6,900 acres accommodating merely 950 bungalows at 15 persons per acre — is the most glaring opportunity: redeveloped sensibly, it could yield a secure residential township of 2000 acres for VIPs and 5,000 acres of public commons for parks and a world-class International Sports and Leisure City. This is the kind of transformative intervention that cities like New York (840-acre Central Park) and San Francisco (1,000-acre Golden Gate Park) have made. The Gymkhana debate is an opportune moment for exactly such a course correction — and if abundant, accessible facilities are eventually built across Delhi, even its most devoted members may find they no longer miss the Club.
Raghav Chandra, IAS (retd)
