Central Information Commission
Shri Shashi Bhushan Singh vs Gnctd on 13 December, 2023
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/106696
Shashi Bhushan Singh .....अपीलकर्ाग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Office of the Dy. Director of
Education, GNCTD, Zone - IX,
Distt. North West - A, BL-Block,
Shalimar Bagh, Delhi - 110088 ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 07-12-2023
Date of Decision : 08-12-2023
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 26-09-2022
CPIO replied on : 01-11-2022 & 07-12-2023
First appeal filed on : 02-11-2022
First Appellate Authority's order : 16-11-2022
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 08-02-2023
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 26.09.2022 seeking the following information:1
"1 What conditions do any society/trust have to fulfil for receiving an Essentiality Certificate for establishing a School?
2 Was the Essentiality Certificate issued to Dayanand Progressive Educational Society for running the G.D. Goenka Public School, Model Town, 3A Institutional Area, Model Town-III, District North, Delhi-110009? If yes then kindly share the details.
3 When was Recognition Certificate granted to G.D. Goenka Public School? Model Town, 3A Institutional Area. Model Town-III. District North, Delhi- 110009? If granted then request you to please provide a copy of the Certificate of Recognition."
The CPIO furnished a pointwise reply to the Appellant on 01.11.2022 stating as under:
"Point no. 1. File may be under submission for Higher Authority for n.a.
Point no. 2. As above.
Point no. 3. Recognition letter of G.D Goenka Public School is enclosed herewith."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 02.11.2022. FAA's order dated 16.11.2022, held as under:-
"The applicant has filed the first appeal against the reply of his RTI No. 428 dated 29.09.2022 stating therein that he has not been provided the information by the PIO. After going through the Appeal filed by the applicant, RTI application, and information provided by the PIO, it is observed that the reply has been provided the by the PIO., which is not satisfactory. The PIO is directed to provide the revised reply of question No. 3.1 only within 10 days."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent 2 Respondent: Shri Kuldeep Singh, Principle & APIO, Bhavina Bembi, Administrator, appeared in person.
The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had provided point-wise reply to the appellant vide letter dated 01.11.2022 wherein they had provided the information on point no. 3 of the RTI application. As regard to point nos. 1 and 2 of the RTI application, the respondent informed the appellant that file was under submission before the higher authority hence proper reply could not be provided at that point of time. However, during the course of hearing, the respondent stated that they had provided revised reply vide letter dated 07.12.2023 wherein they provided copy of the letter i.e. issue to Essential Certificate under Rule 44 of Delhi School Education Act, 1973 vide letter no. F/DN/Z-5/EC/90/232-237 dated 16.01.1990. Further, the respondent informed that conditions which required to be fulfilled for receiving an Essentiality Certificate for establishing a School is already available in public domain. The respondent apologised for the delay occurred in providing the information.
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of the records, noted that the respondent have provided point-wise reply to the appellant vide letter dated 01.11.2022 wherein they provided the information on point no. 3 of the RTI application. The respondent during the course of hearing submitted that they have furnished revised reply vide letter dated 07.12.2023 wherein they provided copy of the letter i.e. issue to Essential Certificate under Rule 44 of Delhi School Education Act, 1973 vide letter no. F/DN/Z-5/EC/90/232-237 dated 16.01.1990.
Further, the respondent informed that conditions which required to be fulfilled for receiving an Essentiality Certificate for establishing a School is already available in public domain. Moreover, the appellant neither filed any written objection nor presented himself before the Commission to controvert the averments made by the respondent and further agitate the matter. Hence, the submissions of the respondent were taken on record. The Commission 3 observed that the CPIO has provided an appropriate reply to the RTI Application as per the provisions of the RTI Act leaving no scope of intervention at this stage. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (R K Rao) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date 08-12-2023 Shashi Bhushan Singh Chamber No 409 Western Wing, Tis Hazri Court, Delhi - 110054 4