CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi -110067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001071/3743Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001071
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mrs. Shobha Upadhyay,
B-10/7052, Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi-70
Respondent : Mr. Satinder Kaur, PIO
Govt.of NCT of Delhi,
Office of the Deputy Director of Education South
West-A, C-4, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 05.03.2009
PIO replied : 06.04.2009
First Appeal filed on : 06.04.2009
First Appellate Authority order : 17.04.2009
Second Appeal received on : 08.05.2009
Information Sought:
The Appellant sought for information regarding Compliance report, report on past violations and
complete report on inspection carried out on 6th October 2005, at Deep Public School DIL, Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi. The details of the information sought by the appellant:
i) Legible attested copy of Inspection committee report with all attachments referred therein(i.e
Complete report) on Inspection Carried out on 6th October 2005, at Deep Public School DIL, Vasant
Kunj, New Delhi, Zone-20 under sub-section 2 of section 24 of DSER-1973. (Copy of cover sheet
attached). The inspection report is available with department of education who issued it under signature
of DE.
ii) Compliance report on the findings and action taken report on past violations.
The reply of PIO:
The Education officer, Zone-20 of this District has forwarded a letter dated 25.03 2009 from the
Chairman, Deep Public school, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
The PIO(SW-A)said that the communication was sent to the appellant within time but the appellant said
that it is not the information sought. The information sought should have been with the PIO(SW-A) is
directed to provide the same.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mrs. Shobha Upadhyay
Respondent: Mrs.Satinder Kaur, PIO
The PIO has provided the information however the appellant feels that there may be further infraction on
compliance and action taken on past violations. The PIO is directed to check from records and if there
Page 1 of 2
other records relating to this these will be provided. If there are no other records, the PIO will state this
categorically.
If any action has been taken subsequent to the reply received to the show cause notice this will be stated.
If no action has been taken then appellant will be informed accordingly.
Decision dated 17 June 2009:
The Appeal was allowed. The PIO was directed to give the above information to the Appellant before 5
July 2009.
Facts leading to the show cause hearing on 05/01/2010:
The Commission received a letter dated from 02/11/2009 from the Appellant stating that the information
received by her was not complete and she alleged that the PIO had concealed certain information. The
Appellant also attached a copy of an inspection report which was part of the information that the
Respondent should have provided but did not. Based on this the Commission issued a notice dated
09/11/2009 to the DDE & PIO SWA directing her to provide the complete information to the Appellant
before 29/11/2009. The Commission received a clarification from the PIO vide her letter dated
27/11/2009 which it did not find satisfactory and it therefore issued a show cause notice dated
07/12/2009 directing the PIO to appear before the Commission on 05/01/2010 at 12.30 p.m.
Relevant facts arising during the show cause hearing held on 05/01/2010:
The following persons were present:
Appellant: Ms. Shobha Upadhyay
Respondent: Mrs. PD Yadav, PIO & DDE (SWA) Mr. Jagjeet Singh
The Appellant had alleged that all records relating to the inspection report have not been provided to her
and she has provided an example with regard to an inspection report referred to in the main inspection
report. Mr. Ghosh, who appeared on behalf of the department, stated that there was a misunderstanding
with regard to which all documents were to be supplied to the Appellant. During the hearing he stated
that he had no problem in providing a photocopy of the entire file which he had brought with him to the
Commission (which he stated was the relevant record). He asked the Appellant to accompany him to the
Department’s office after the hearing. The Appellant came to the Commission in the afternoon and
stated that Mr. Ghosh refused to give her anything other than few pages. After she left, Mr. Ghosh
submitted photocopies of 20 documents to the Commission.
Mrs. PD Yadav was contacted on the phone and she was informed that she must come to the
Commission on 06/01/2010 at 10.30 am along with the entire file. The Appellant was also been
informed about this hearing.
Relevant facts arising during the show cause hearing on 06 January 2010:
The following persons were present:
Appellant: Mrs. Shobha Upadhyay
Respondent: Mrs. PD Yadav, PIO & DDE SWA
The PIO will deliver the duly attested photocopy of the entire file at the Commission before 5 pm today
(06/01/2010) with a covering letter stating how many pages are there. The Appellant will collect the
copy of the file any time on time 07/01/2010 from the Commission.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
06 January 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(Rnj)
Page 2 of 2