CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi -110067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000106/3889Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000106
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mrs. Shobha Upadhyay,
B10/7052, Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi.
Respondent : Ms. P.D. Yadav
PIO,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Office of the Deputy Director of Education
C-4, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-1100057.
RTI application filed on : 12/04/2008
PIO's Reply : 04/12/2008
First Appeal filed on : 11/12/2008
First Appellate Authority order : 22/12/2008
Second Appeal filed on : 22/01/2009
Particular of required information:
The appellant had asked in RTI application for duly verified, year wise list of employees of
Deep Public School D2, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi and how have been paid transport allowance and
bonus from 1996. Action taken report by department of education for violation of section of 10
Delhi School Education Act, 1973 for non payment of transport allowance and bonus to employees
also give information of delayed payment of salary by Deep Public School to me. And provide
action taken report by department for unauthorized recovery of my salary & deduction of salary;
leave both for any leave taken by me.
The PIO replied:
The information asked for was called from Deep Public School, New Delhi as the same was
not available in this office. The Chairman of School has refused to provide the same on following
grounds:-
1. The information desired from some under RTI Act, Section-11 deals with third party
information and has no relation with public interest or activity. The information is exempted
from disclosure u/s 8 (j) of RTI Act, 2005.
2. Dr. O.P.Kajariwal, Information Commissioner has also stated in his order dated 25.04.2008
that unaided school can retain its privacy regarding its Management, Administration,
Finance etc.
3. Even otherwise the issue regarding applicability of RTI Act to unaided private school is
pending in judiciary in Hon'ble High Court of Delhi (Writ No. 8363/2008 and writ no.
8035/2008).
First Appellate Authority Ordered:
"PIO (SW-A) is directed to provide the information as detailed above within 15 days. PIO
(SW-A) is further advised to revised to review the information received by her from the IIIrd party
to ensure that the proper information is provided to the appellant."
Page 1 of 3
Relevant facts emerging during hearing 13 April 2009:
The following were present.
Appellant: Mrs. Shobha Upadhyay
Respondent: Ms. Satinder Kaur PIO and Mr. J.R.Meena APIO
Mr. Prakash Verma Manager of the Deep Public school states that the school has supplied the
information to the Education department. A perusal of the First appellate authority's order also
indicates that the information for only 2008-2009 was not available with the PIO. Mr.N.C. Kaushik
Education officer who is present admits that the details of 2008-2009 are with him. The PIO has
brought a letter of 6/4/2009 in which a noting has been made by ADE (ACT) Mrs. Abha Joshi
stating that the record is not traceable. The PIO also states that the information with Mr.N.C.
Kaushik Education officer is not the one which the appellant has sought.
The actions of the PIO appear to be denying the information by any means. She claims she does not
know where the information may be, the ADE (ACT) has also stated that the records are not
traceable. It is significant that the plea of not having records was not made before the First appellate
authority. The PIO appears to contend that nobody knows if the records which should be with the
department exist anywhere or not.
The Director of Education is asked to investigate this matter and give a report to the Commission
about where the information is located. This report will be submitted to the Commission before 5
May 2009.
The decision was reserved on 13 April 2009.
Decision announced on 27 June 2009:
The Director of Education Mr. Chandra Bhushan Kumar has sent a report on 04/05/2009 stating
that:
"From the explanations furnished by the DDE(SW-A), it seems that,
1- the record management pertaining to private unaided school has not been up to the
mark;
2- the concerned school did not assist in making the information available;
3- the concerned school also requested, by using third party clause, not to made available
the data (requisite) to the applicant.
Not with the guidance, the DDE(SW-A) has been able to retrieve the requisite information from the
concerned private school (original custodian of information). However, in view of the third party
information and consideration of the matter at the level of CIC, a view has to be taken at the level
of CIC."
The Commission has perused the information and does not see any merit in the exemption claimed
under Section 8(1)(j) by the Chairman of the School-the third party. In view of this the information
will have to be provided.
Before parting the matter the Commission would like to record that there was absolutely no reason
for the PIO not to have given details of "Action taken report by department of education for
violation of section of 10 Delhi School Education Act, 1973 for non payment of transport
allowance and bonus to employees" within 30 days.
Decision dated 27 June 2009:
The Appeal was allowed.
The complete information will be give to the appellant before 10 July 2009.
Brief facts leading to the show cause hearing on 24/02/2010:
On receipt of a letter from the Appellant dated 28/07/2009 alleging non-compliance of the
Commission's order, the Commission issued a show cause notice to you and further directed you to
provide the complete information to the Appellant. The Commission was in receipt of a letter dated
Page 2 of 3
26/08/2009 from the Appellant alleging that information provided vide the Respodent's letter dated
21/08/2009 is not in compliance with the Commission's order. It has been alleged that on Query
No.1 information was sought for the period from the inception of the school (which is claimed to be
1989) however, information provided vide PIO's aforesaid letter is only for the period of 1996-
2009.Secondly, with regard to Query No.2 it has been alleged that information in terms of the copy
of the acquaintance roll for the period from 2004-2009 was not enclosed as against the PIO's claim
made therein. Furthermore, information provided on Query No.3, 4 & 5 is not appropriate.
The Respondent was directed to provide the point-wise complete and correct information to
the Appellant before 11/02/2010. She was directed to appear before the Commission at the above-
mentioned address on 24/02/2010 at 10.30AM along with written submissions to show cause why
penalty should not be imposed on her under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Showcause Hearing on 24 February 2010:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mrs. Shobha Upadhyay;
Respondent: Ms. P.D.Yadav, PIO;
The PIO states that they do not have the records of the said school for the period 1994. The
PIO is directed to give this in writing to the Appellant and also give a copy of the reorganization
letter to the Appellant. The Appellant states that this should be available in the file which holds the
papers relating to the reorganization of the school. The PIO is directed to check the availability of
this file and give the information. In case the file is not available the PIO will state this to the
appellant in writing.
The PIO is also directed to give the photocopies of the budgets of the school from 1996 onwards.
The PIO has stated that no action has been taken in the matter of non-payment of dues to Miss.
Shobha Upadhyay since no complaints have been received. The appellant states that she has filed a
number of complaints with the Regional Director and she is giving a copy of the same to the
Respondent. The PIO is directed to obtain information on whether any action has been taken in
response to these complaints. If any action has been taken photocopies of notings and
correspondence will have to be provided.
The PIO is directed to give al the information as directed in these instructions to the Appellant
before 10 April 2010.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
24 February 2010
(In any case correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(BK)
Page 3 of 3