Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Central Information Commission

Mr. Rajeev Bharti vs S.D. Sec. School (Gujrat) on 16 June, 2009

                   CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                             Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
                           Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi -110067
                                     Tel: + 91 11 26161796

                                                 Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000990/3728
                                                        Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000990

Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                            :      Mr. Rajeev Bharti
                                            H. No. 320, Hastsal Village
                                            Uttam Nagar
                                            New Delhi 110059

Respondent                           :      Mr. K.C.Bhasin

Manager and FAA S.D. Sec. School (Gujrat), Kirti Nagar New Delhi 110015 RTI application filed on : 17/07/2008 PIO replied : 20/08/2008 First appeal filed on : 10/09/2008 First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.

Second Appeal filed on               :      03.01.2009

                   INFORMATION SOUGHT                       REPLY OF PIO
   1        Period during which Sh. Madan       Sh. Madan Chawla was member of

Chawala was the PTA representative Executive Body in 2000; no traceable of S.D. Secodary School (Gujrat) record of 1999 (information provided by Kirti Nagar Sh. KP Singh, PTA Incharge) 2 Process by which Sh. Madan No record available to show how many Chawla was elected as PTA PTA members voted in his favour. representative. Sixteen members were present in the meeting. May be unanimous or raising Certified copies of all documents hand procedure (information provided by relating to the election procedure Sh. KP Singh) such as list of people connected to the election who were give notice, how many people participated in the election, how many people voted in favour of Sh. Madan Chawla 3 Names of Sh. Madan Chawla's two Lokesh Chawla (Class X) sons and the classes in which they Varun Chawla (Class IX) studied in 1999 4 Certified copies of the Student Student Attendance register of July 1999 Attendance Register entries of July enclosed 1999 for Sh. Chawla's two sons.

Certified copies of receipts of school School fee-book is not traceable fees paid by his two sons in July 1999 5 Certified copy of Student Photocopy of IX-A Student Attendance Attendance Register of Class IX-A Register for July 1999 6 Certified copy of Attendance Enclosed Register for teachers and other staff for July 1999 7 Certified copy of Attendance Enclosed Register for teachers and other employees for November 1999 8 Certified copies of School diary and Photocopies of Dispatch Register and Dispatch Register from July to Diary Register from July to November November 1999 1999 enclosed 9 Certified copy of list of names of List of Managing Committee members Managing Committees members and of school in July 1999 enclosed office bearers/members of the society running the school 10 Certified copies of: "As Mukesh Kumar U.D.C. is on leave • Complaint letters written by since 14th August. The file of Sh. R.C. Sh. RC Sahnni to Sh. SK Sahni is not traceable. It will be available Kapoor and school only when Sh. Mukesh Kumar rejoin his management duty and information will be sent to • Memos/letters written by the you." school to Sh. RC Sahni • The final measures taken by the school management against him The PIO replied.

Reply given in table above. Rs. 65 to be deposited as cost of photocopies and postal charges Grounds for First Appeal:

In his First Appeal, the Appellant requested for the following:
• Sh. KP Singh's letter providing the information (Pt. 1 and 2) • Varun Chawla was in IX-A or IX-B? (Pt. 3) • If school fee book is not traceable, who did the two boys give their fees to? How much was the monthly fee in 1999? (Pt. 4) • Information pertaining to Pt. 10 not provided yet. Sh. Mukesh Kumar went on leave on 14th August which is after 17th July when the request was filed. • Information provided after the thirty days and therefore appellant should not be required to pay the fees Order of the First Appellate Authority:
No Mentioned.
Submissions sent before the Hearing:
The PIO has sent vide letter dated 11/06/2009 a copy of the FAA's Order dated 17/10/2008.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Rajeev Bharti Respondent : Mr. K.C.Bhasin-Manager and FAA The PIO has provided most of the information and will give the following information: 1- If any decision has been taken on the showcause notice issued to Mr.R.C.Sahani by the letter dated 21 August 2004, details will be provided. The PIO will also give the letter of 26 July 2004 to the appellant.

Decision:

The Appeal allowed.
The PIO will give the information to the appellant before 30 June 2009.
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, 2005.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 16 June 2009 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (Rnj)