CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2009/003213/6425
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/003213
Appellant : Smt. Pratima,
S-114/49, D-Block,
Bhanwar Singh Camp,
Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi - 110057
Respondent : Public Information Officer,
Deputy Director of Education,
Education officer, (SW-A),
Govt. of national capital territory of Delhi,
C-4, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi – 110057
RTI application filed on : 06/08/2009 (transferred on 21/08/2009)
PIO replied : 00/00/0000
First Appeal filed on : 05/10/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 09/10/2009
Second Appeal filed on : 22/12/2009
Information sought:
Appellant want information regarding the Surajman D.A.V. School, Vasant Vihar as follows:
1 Is the school building is on govt. land?
2 Is there reservation for EWS Quota in the school?
3 Is the school giving admission to the children of economically weakened section through
the Quota? If yes, in which sections?
4 Give details of the process of EWS quota through which admission can be taken.
5 What is charge of application form & prospectus for EWS quota?
6 Is the true copy of Notary Public is accepted as the Birth Certificate at admission time?
7 Is BPL card is accepted as the income certificate?
8 On which basis students will be given admission when the application forms are more
than the vacancies?
9 Give the details of students who were give admission from last three years through EWS
quota?
10 Provide all documents regarding EWS matter of school.
PIO’s reply:
No reply.
Grounds for First Appeal:
The PIO did not provide any information.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
“The Appellant is present and complained that she had not yet received any information.
APIO (SW-A) is present and could not provide any evidence of having provided the
information. PIO (SW-A) is directed to provide the information within a week free of cost.”
Grounds for Second Appeal:
PIO did not provide any information.
Decision:
It appears that no information has been provided to the appellant. Even after the order of the
First Appellate Authority on 9/10/2009 to provide information within a week, no information
was provided to the appellant. Hence it appears that the FAA’s order has also not been
implemented.
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information to the appellant before
5 February 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying any information by the PIO within
30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing
any 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. He has further refused to obey the
orders of his superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information
may also be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has clearly ordered the information to be
given.
It appears that the 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.
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 15 February 2010 at
4.00pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed
on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the
information to the appellant.
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
15 January 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (SR)