Central Information Commission
Sultan Mahmood Ali vs National Commission For Protection Of ... on 22 March, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मनु नरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/NCPCR/C/2023/605198
SULTAN MAHMOOD ALI ....शिकायतकताग /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR
PROTECTION OF CHILD RIGHTS,
5TH FLOOR, CAHDERLOK BUILDING 36,
JANPATH, NEW DELHI-110001. ....प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 18-03-2024
Date of Decision : 22-03-2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 18-11-2022
CPIO replied on : 19-12-2022
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 28-01-2023
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 18-11-2022 seeking the following information:
"I sent a complaint through DTDC Courier Services on 19.09.2022, against Mukarram Jah High School, a private school, affiliated by Council for the Indian Page 1 of 5 School Certificate Examination, (CISE), New Delhi, for alleged irregularities and violation of RTE Act and Prohibition of Collection of Capitation Act 1983. My complaint was received by this office on 21.09.2022, as per the information available at DTDC website (copy enclosed). When I contacted to the commission after a month to know the status of my complaint, I was told that my complaint was not yet received by this office and advised me to resend my complaint through E-baal Nidan-Online Complaint Management System. As per the advice of the official of the commission, I resent my complaint through online domain of E-baal Nidan on 18.10.2022 for which I was allotted a complaint ID 604 immediately (copy enclosed). Since I have not been informed about any progress of my complaint ID 604, I contacted again to the commission to know the status of my complaint but in vain. Therefore, in this regard you are requested to provide the below information on my complaint sent to you twice.
You are requested to furnish the below information:
1)Furnish the copy of Preliminary Enquiry Report.
2)Furnish the copy of show cause notice/notices issued to the Mukarram Jah High School regarding the above complaint.
3) Furnish all the copies/files and attachments, Documents/Evidence based on Preliminary Enquiry was concluded.
4)Furnish the copy of action taken report."
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the complainant on 19-12-2022 stating as under:
"Point No. 1, 3 & 4:
Enquiry report is awaited from Director (Education), Government of Telangana.
Point No. 2:
Copy of Commission's letter dated 16/12/2022 addressed to the Director (Education), is enclosed."
The FAA's order is not on record.
Page 2 of 5Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Absent Respondent: Shri Ramesh Samyal, CPIO appeared in person.
The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had already provided point-wise reply to the complainant vide letter dated 19.12.2022. The respondent vide letter dated 14.03.2024 filed their written submission and the same is reproduced as under:
"I am directed to refer to your letter No. CIC/NCPCR/C/2023/605198 dated 07/03/2024 (which was received in the Commission on 11/03/2024) on the subject mentioned above and to say that RTI application from Mr. Sultan Mahmood Ali was received by the Commission on 21/11/2022 (copy enclosed as Annexure-I). The applicant sought information regarding the action taken on his complaint against Mukarram Jah High School, a private school affiliated by Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination (CISE), New Delhi, for alleged irregularities and violation of RTE Act and Prohibition of Collection of Capitation Act, 1983. The available information was provided to Mr. Sultan Mahmood Ali vide this Commission's letter dated 19th December 2022 (Annexure-II).
2. The applicant had never gone in first appeal against the CPIO's letter dated 19/12/2022. The complainant had filed another application dated 28/02/2023 (Annexure-III) with reference to his complaint which was registered in the Commission as case No.TL 237421/2022-2023/RTE/ and CPIO's letter dated 19th December 2022 seeking the same information.
3. In response to his RTI application, a copy of enquiry report received from District Education Officer, Hyderabad on 06/03/2023 which run into 41 pages was provided to him on 20/04/2023 after depositing additional fee of Rs.82/- by him. Thereafter, neither the applicant filed an appeal nor sought any additional information from the Commission (Annexure-IV).
4. In view of having provided all the information sought by the applicant vide his RTI Application dated 18/11/2022 and 28/02/2023 and Page 3 of 5 also by inviting attention to Para.10 of DoP&T OM No.1/4/2009-IR dated 05/10/2009, wherein it is stated that only such information can be supplied under the Act which already exists and is held by the public authority or held under the control of the public authority and the PIO is not supposed to create information; or to interpret information; or to solve the problems raised by the applicants; or to furnish replies to hypothetical questions, it is requested to dispose of the complaint/appeal addressed to Telangana Central Information Commission of Mr. Sultan Mahmood Ali on its merits."
Decision The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of the records, notes that the respondent replied to the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act vide letter dated 19.12.2022. The complainant neither filed any written objection nor presented himself before the Commission to controvert the averments made by the respondent and further agitate the matter.
It is noted that the instant matter is a complaint under the RTI Act where no further direction for disclosure of information can be given and it is only required to be ascertained if the information has been denied with a mala fide intention or due to an unreasonable cause. Upon perusal of the facts on record, the Commission finds that appropriate reply has been given by the respondent. No mala-fide is established on part of the CPIO in this case. Hence, the Commission finds no further scope of intervention in the instant matter.
The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार तििारी)
Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्ि)
Authenticated true copy Date 22-03-2024
(अशिप्रमाणणत सत्यापित प्रनत)
(R K Rao)
Dy. Registrar
011- 011- 26181827
Date
Page 4 of 5
Page 5 of 5