Central Information Commission
Mr. Jai Dev vs Directorate Of Education, Govt. Of Nct ... on 31 December, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002865/6187
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002865
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Jai Dev,
House No. 194,
V.P.O. Pooth Khurd,
Delhi.
Respondent : Dr. Indira Singh
Public Information Officer & Dy. Director Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Directorate of Education, O/o The Dy. Director of Education, District North West-B, PitamPura, New Delhi - 110088.
RTI application filed on : 03-07-2009 PIO replied : 03-09-2009 First appeal filed on : 31-08-2009 First Appellate Authority order : 11-09-2009 Second Appeal received on : 10-11-2009 Date of Notice of Hearing : 27/11/2009 Hearing Held on : 31/12/2009
The Appellant had sought following information from PIO, S. No. Information sought PIO's reply a. Whether Ryan international school, sector 25, The school has hiked the fees as per Rohini Delhi-85, has taken proper/prior permission orders issued by the Directorate of and followed set guidelines by the Directorate of Education. Education regarding hike in school fees?
b. What is the permitted hike in school fees for this The permitted hike in tution fee is Rs.
school and the justification thereof? 400/- per month on the existing tution fee slab (Rs. 1500 - Rs. 2000) as per the circular dated 11.02.2009 issued by the Directorate of Education.
c. Provide a copy of the Income and expenditure The same is not available with the Statement furnished by the School to justify its case undersigned at present and will be for the said quantum of hike. supplied to you as early as possible. d. Whether the Income and Expenditure Statement has No. As per school statement, the accounted the money taken as so called "Voluntary School/Society has not collected such Donation" to their Education Society/Trust from the donations from the parents. parents while getting their wards admitted in the school? if e. Whether the private unaided schools like Ryan Not to be replied under RTI.
International School can force parents for donations(other than for management quota seats) if no, what action can be taken against the school by the Directorate of Education if some concrete proof is provided regarding forcing parents to shell out a large sum of money as "Donation" to its Education Trust/Society?
f. In compliance to the order NO. As per school statement "No. As per the F.DE./156(56)/Act/2009/778 dated the 11th order dated 25-05-2009 passed by the February, 2009 issued by the Directorate of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the Writ Education, whether Ryan International School has Petitions pending before it the convened a General Body meeting of the Parents stipulation regarding holding of General Teacher Association (PTA) and got the necessary Body Meeting of the School/Society had approval for the hike in school fees? If yes, the copy been stayed. However, the meeting of of the minutes of the meeting may be provided. If PTA was duly called wherein the issue not the reasons therefore and in that case how has of fee hike was discussed and resolved". the school hiked the fees?
g. (i) Whether as per records of the Directorate of (i) The School has formed a PTA.
Education, the school has a parent teacher association?
(ii) If answer to (i) above is yes, were the members (ii) The member of Executive council of of the Executive Council nominated by the school PTA were duly nominated by the School authorities or elected by the PTA. Give the exact and approved in the meeting held on 25- date of such election/nomination along with the 03-2009 presided over by the president tenure of such council. The names and addressed of of executive council of PTA. The names the of the members of the Executive council of the and addresses of EC Members are Association may be provided. Provided to the appellant.
(iii) How many members of the Executive council (iii) There are 3 such members of the EC have their spouse as employees of the school? out of total 15.
(iv) Whether for becoming a member of the (iv) The members of EC of school PTA executive council of a school PTA, elections are selected as per the memorandum of mandatory as per guidelines of Directorate of PTA and the guidelines of Directorate of Education or the Delhi School Education Act & Education. Rules 1973 or else they can be nominated by the School Authorities at their discretion?
h. Is the Directorate of Education in receipt of any Yes, The complaints regarding fee hike written complaint/s regarding the hike in fees by are being dealt separately by Competent this school? If yes give a copy each of such Authority. The copy of complaints and complaints and furnish the action taken by the action cannot be supplied at this stage. Directorate in this regard.
Ground of the First Appeal:
Incomplete and irrelevant information has been provided by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
"After careful examination of all the documents it is found that the information provided by the PIO is complete and satisfactory".
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The incomplete information had been provided by the PIO. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Absent;
Respondent : Dr. Vimlesh, Education officer on behalf of Dr. Indira Singh, PIO & Dy. Director;
The RTI Application has been filed on 03/07/2009 and since the appellant did not received any information he field first appeal on 31/08/2009. The PIO has sent a reply on 03/09/2009 and the First Appellate Authority Dr. Sunita Kaushik has mechanically disposed the first appeal without any application of mind.
The respondent states that there is no provision for the Director of Education to approve the increase of fees and hence the income and expenditure was not available at the time when the fees were increased by the school. It is now available with the respondent and will be sent to the Appellant. The Appellant has stated that as per the Delhi Education Act 1973 "the managing Committee of every recognized school shall file every year with Director such duly audited financial and other returns as may be prescribed, and every such return will be audited by such authority as may be prescribed." Hence he believes that the income and expenditure statement will be available with public authority. The respondent however states that the Director did not enforce this and even today the Director does no have the balance sheet for 2008-09. The public authority should ensure that all schools under it follow the prescribed norms for disclosure of information to it. The respondent states the minutes of the PTA in which the issue of the fee hike was discussed and approved have not been submitted to the Directorate. The Respondent states that the elections are mandatory to form the PTA. The PIO has not given the copies of the written complaints regarding the hike in fees nor details of the action taken by the Directorate. The PIO has refused to give the ingratiation without claiming any of the exemption under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. The PIO will give the information on points (c) & (h).
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO will send the information to the Appellant mentioned above to the Appellant before 15 January 2010.
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 31 December 2009 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (BK)