Central Information Commission
Raj Prakash vs Directorate Of Education on 27 April, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
BABA GANGNTH MARG, MUNIRKA
New Delhi-110067
F. No.CIC/DIRED/C/2017/187333
Date of Hearing : 20.04.2018
Date of Decision : 20.04.2018
Appellant/Complainant : Mr. Raj Prakash
Respondent : PIO/Nodal Officer-RTI Section,
Directorate of Education-(NTC)
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
2. PIO/Addl. Director of Education-
(Act-II), Directorate of
Education(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
3.PIO/Senior Accounts Officer-
Pension, Principal Accounts
Office(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Through: Sh. Manjeet Hooda-APIO
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 22.08.2016
PIO replied on : 30.08.2016
First Appeal filed on : - -
First Appellate Order on : - -
2nd Appeal/complaint received on : 23.11.2016
Information soughtand background of the case:
Vide RTI application date 22.08.2016, the complainant sought information as under:-
(i) Intimate the procedure of maintenance of Provident Fund Accounts in Govt. Schools and Govt. Aided Schools in Delhi.
(ii) Inform which Agency i.e. Pay & Accounts Office or Employees Provident Fund Commissioner maintains the provident funds of employees of Delhi Education Dept.
(iii) How interest is being given on PF.
(iv) Whether interest on PF is being given as per the rates prescribed by Govt.
(v) Whether PF in Govt. aided schools in Delhi is being maintained by Banks.
(vi) Whether the PF of employees of Govt. aided schools are not governed by Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952.
(vii) If Aided Schools are not governed by EPF Act, whether Delhi Education Deptt. has sought exemption from the Govt. to the effect that the PF of employees of Aided Schools would be maintained by Bank and the PF is invested in other firms/agencies to get better revenue.
(viii) Whether Pass Book/annul Statement of PF is not given to the employees every year.
PIO/APIO(HQ) vide letter dated 30.08.2016 has transferred the RTI application to ADE (Act-II), PIO, Principal A.O. Vikas Bhawan , Delhi under Section 6(3) of RTI Act.
Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, the complainant filed a complaint to the Commission.
Relevant facts emerging during the hearing:
Respondent has not appeared while the complainant has appeared and states that he is aggrieved by the non receipt of information in this case. He works for a Govt aided school and the PF is deposited in Savings Account of the Bank instead of PPF Account, which would fetch higher rate of interest. Hence he seeks information about the policy of payment GPF, as decided by the Aided School Committee.
Respondent APIO from the Dept of Education appeared after the hearing and placed a written submission on record from the PIO/Dy. Director(ASB), Directorate of Education. Perusal of the said submissions reveal that reply to the RTI application dated 22.08.2016 was provided to the applicant through Speed Post vide letter dated 29.09.2016.
Decision:
Upon perusal of submissions as placed on record by the Respondent from the Dept Of Education, the Commission notes that all relevant information has already been provided by the Respondent, which has been concealed and suppressed in totality by the Complainant. Neither records nor oral submissions of the complainant have anywhere mentioned receipt of any information from the Respondent. Taking a stern view of such misrepresentation of facts by the applicant, the Commission finds that no further information, in response to the RTI queries is required to be disseminated.
The case is thus disposed of.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(R.P. Grover) Designated Officer