CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2009/001437/4152
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001437
Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Yadav
Neha Nursory N.H. 8
Shankar Chowk DLF III
Gurgaon, Haryana
Respondent : Mr. Sameer C Minz
PIO, HQ A. D. E. RTI Cell
Room No. 252, Old Secretariat
GNCT, Delhi-110054
RTI application filed on : 30/03/2009
PIO replied : 18/04/2009
First Appeal filed on : 05/05/2009 (Not enclosed)
First Appellate Authority order : 27/05/2009
Second Appeal Received on : 09/06/2009
S.No. Information Sought Reply of PIO
1. How many DISH offices are in Directorate of There are following District
Education where Deputy Director of Education is Offices:
chief officer? (1). In East ,(2 )North-East
(3) Northern Distt.(4)North-
West-A(5) North-West-B
(6) Western-A (4) Western-
B (8) Southern (9) South-
West-A(10) South-West-B
(11) Central/New Delhi
2. Is there a post of Nodal Officer in the office of Please mention clearly that
Deputy Director of Education? about whom nodal officers
are being talked
3. In how many Distt. Offices has nodal officers Same.
been appointed in addition. What are their
educational qualifications?
4. How many posts for Nodal Officer are accepted in Same.
Distt. Office by the Govt. or department?
5. Has a Yoga teacher been appointed as Nodal Mention clearly what
Officer in some Distt. Office? Mention please. information sought.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Not enclosed.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
FAA mentioned in his order that the Appellant was not present. PIO (HQ) and dealing assistant
(GOC Branch) represented the department. The appeal was heard. In his view satisfactory reply
had been given.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
1. Attention has not been given on reply of Q. No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.
2. Facts
have been suppressed knowingly.
3. A Yoga teacher, Shri Charan Singh, mentions his attendance in the office of nodal
officer.
4. Wrong and misleading information has been provided.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Rajendra Yadav
Respondent: Mr. Sameer C Minz, PIO
The PIO states that there is no sanctioned post of nodal officer but nodal officers are appointed at
different times for variety of purposes to facilitate certain jobs. After the Second Appeal of the
Appellant the PIO realized that the Appellant was seeking information about Yoga Teachers and
therefore obtained this information from all the districts and has brought it before the
Commission and given it to the Appellant.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The information has been provided to the Appellant before the Commission.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
16 July 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)
Rnj