CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi -110067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /SG/A/2009/000050/2572
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000050
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. S.K. Bhardwaj,
B-21, Sec.-19, Noida,
Distt. G.B. Nagar, U.P.
Respondent : The D.E.O. (A) & PIO,
New Delhi Municipal Council,
Education Department,
Palika Kendra, New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 02/06/2008
PIO replied : 09/07/2008
First Appeal filed on : 31/07/2008
First Appellate Authority order : not mentioned
Second Appeal filed on : 01/01/2009
The Appellant had asked in his RTI application that, What is the text of
notification no. F.27(3)/94-Edn./386 dated 26.02.1996? What promoted the NDMC from
implementing the Gazetted amendment to notification No. F.27 (3)/94-Edn./1068-1076
dated 4.11.1999. What are the particulars in respect head master, Middle School of Head
master, Middle School, promoted after the implementation of ACP Scheme dated
9.8.1999? Name, Qualification etc. Which communities are treated as STs. What were
the contents of the circular issued in the year 1997 for the post of Senior Lecturer
Humanities?
S. No. Information Sought. The PIO replied.
1. What is the text of notification no. F.27(3)/94- Photocopy of notification
Edn./386 dated 26.02.1996? No. F.27(3)/94-Edn./386
dated 26.02.1996 is
appended herewith for ready
reference.
2. What prompted the NDMC from implementing the The endorsement of the said
Gazetted amendment to notification No. F.27(3)/94- notification had not received
Edn./1068-1076 dated 4.11.1999 copy attached with in this Deptt. However as
RTI no. 1063 dated 17.4.2008. per NDMC Act 1994 under
section 43 NDMC should
frame its own Recruitment
Rules.
3. Who are the beneficiaries of non-implementations Beneficiaries can not be
of the Gazetted amendments of notification dated mentioned as the
4.11.1999? amendment of notification
dated 4.1.1999 was not
implemented in NDMC so,
it is clear that the
promotions dafter 1996 have
been done as per
notification dated 26.2.1996.
4. What are the existing RRs. Of 1997 and the current Copies of existing RRs. As
RRs. With respect to the following posts: well as current RRs. Based
(i) Sr. Lecturer-Humanities, Vice Principal, upon the Council Reso. No.
DEO. 10(M-2) & dated 18.6.08
(ii) Lecturer are attached herewith for
(iii) H.M. Middle School ready reference.
(iv) TGT
5. What are the particulars in respect head master, Such records are not
Middle School of Head master, Middle School, maintained in the Deptt. The
promoted after the implementation of ACP Scheme individual may
dated 9.8.1999? browse/inspect the available
(i) Name (ii) Qualification (iii) Cadre to which records in the Deptt. to seek
initially appointed in NDMC (iv) Date of information.
appointment to the basic cadre (v) Date of
promotion as H.M. Middle School? (vi) Names of
those H.M.s who were granted ACP without P.G.
Degree (viii) who was dealing with the promotion
of H.Ms, Middle School in the Estt. Branch of Edn.
Deptt. NDMC at the time of these promotions?
6. (i) What were the contents of the circular issued in Copy of circular is
the year 1997 for the post of Senior Lecturer appended herewith for ready
Humanities? reference. Individual may
(ii) Who was the candidate (a) on or before the cut inspect the available records
off date (b) after the cut off date? to seek the information.
(iii) When was the panel approved?
(iv) Whose names were on the approved?
(v) How long would have the panel existed?
(vi) Why a lecturer (Hindi) language promoted to
this post, teaching humanities to class XI-XII or VI-
X?
(vii) Why did he leave the post?
(viii) Why the next candidate on the panel, not
promoted once the promotes stepped down?
7. Which communities are treated as STs. The information is not
readily available.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
Not mentioned.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. S.K. Bhardwaj
Respondent : Mr. S.C. Kaushik PIO
The respondent states that information on point 5 and 6 is not maintained in the format sought
by the appellant and he has offered inspection of the files.
Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
The PIO will facilitate the inspection of relevant files by the appellant on 6 April 2009 at
2.00pm. The appellant will be given upto 100 pages of copies free of cost if he wants.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
April 1, 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)