CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002419/9771
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002419
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Bhupesh Gupta
15/28 Old Chandrawal
Civil Line, Delhi-110054
Respondent : Mr. Darwin Pershad
Principal & Public Information Officer
Delhi United Christian Senior Secondary School
(Govt. Aided and Recognized)
17, Raj Niwas Marg, Delhi
RTI application filed on : 05/04/2010
PIO replied : 04/06/2010
First appeal filed on : 14/05/2010
First Appellate Authority order : No order
Second Appeal received on : 31/08/2010
Information Sought
1. What was the land area of the school.
2. When and how did the school buy the plot.
3. What was the school’s land Khasra.
4. On whose name was the school been bought.
5. Under which government authority does the school plot come under.
6. During the time when the school bought the plot under which government authority was it.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)
1. Such information did not deal with the property matters.
2.. The school property belongs to the Societies running the school.
3. School was jointly run by Baptist Union of North India having its registered office.
4. Further the information would be obtained from the office of the Trustee.
Grounds for the First Appeal:.
Incomplete reply of the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
No order.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete information of the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Bhupesh Gupta
Respondent: Absent;
The respondent is a public authority since it is a Government Aided School and the deemed PIO &
Principal Mr. Darwin Pershad has not provided the appropriate information to the appellant. He has also
not given any reasons to refuse the information.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
Mr. Darwin Pershad, Principal and Deemed PIO is directed to give the complete
information to the appellant before 30 October 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
deemed PIO Mr. Darwin Pershad within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIO is guilty of not furnishing
information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as
per the requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the deemed PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause
notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why
penalty should not be levied on him.
Mr. Darwin Pershad will present himself before the Commission at the above address on
06 December 2010 at 02.30pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not
be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also bring the information sent to the
appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the information
to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him.
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
13 October 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AM)