In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/002078
Date of Hearing : November 11, 2011
Date of Decision : November 11, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Ms.Santra Gahlaut
A3/147, Janakpuri
New Delhi
The Applicant was represented by Shri B.S.Gahlaut during the hearing
Respondents
Directorate of Education
RTI Cell, Room No.220
Old Secretariat
New Delhi
Represented by : Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma, Asst. Director, ACP Cell
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/002078
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.26.3.11 with the PIO, O/o DDE, GNCTD. She stated that
ACP Cell vide their letter dt.23.12.09 had rejected her ACP claim merely on the ground that her
qualifications are B.Com B.Ed whereas she is B.PED, M.A.B.Ed. The Appellate Authority vide his
order dt.10.12.10 directed the DDE(AC) to process the case of ACP taking the proposal from the
DDE concerned. In this context, the Applicant sought the status of the case as also certified copies
of related rules and regulations in case the ACP is not approved. Shri Aunjum Masood, PIO replied
on 28.4.11 enclosing the information dt.8.4.11 furnished by Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma, ADE(ACP Cell)
who stated that the ACP cell has not yet received the case file for the Applicant for reexamination
from DDE(WestB). Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.7.5.11 with the
Appellate Authority and on not receiving any response from the AA, she filed a second appeal
dt.12.8.11 before CIC.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Appellant’s representative submitted that all he wants is the rule based on
which the second ACP was rejected. The Respondents on their part produced before the
Commission, the letter dt.2.8.11 written by Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma (ADEACP Cell ) to the
DDE(WestB) in which it was stated that as per R.R., degree of M.Ped is required for grant of 2 nd ACP
and that the Appellant does not fulfill these requirements .
3. As agreed to during the hearing, the copies of the rules based on which the Public Authority had
rejected the 2nd ACP to the Appellant were handed over to the Appellant’s representative
immediately after the hearing, thus fulfilling the requirement of the Appellant.
4. In view of the above, the case is closed at the Commission’s end..
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Ms.Santra Gahlaut
A3/147, Janakpuri
New Delhi
2. The Public Information Officer
Directorate of Education
RTI Cell, Room No.220
Old Secretariat
New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority
Directorate of Education
Room No.17
Old Secretariat
New Delhi
4. Officer in charge, NIC