Central Information Commission
Ms. Sudeepti Chandra vs School Of Palnning And Architecture on 9 April, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000105/2678
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000105
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Ms. Sudeepti Chandra,
2/118, Sector-2, Rajendra Nagar, Sahibabad,
Ghaziabad (UP) -201005.
Respondent : Dr. D.R. Bains,
Registrar & PIO, School of palnning and Architecture, 4th Block B, Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi-110002.
RTI application filed on : 07/07/2008 PIO's Reply : 22/07/2008 First Appeal filed on : 05/10/2008 First Appellate Authority order : 06/11/2008 Second Appeal filed on : 19/01/2009 Particular of required information:-
The appellant had asked in RTI application for allowing inspection of answer sheets of various subjects of all the students for the theory examinations of 2nd year & 3rd year, Bachelor of Planning degree course of School of Planning and Architecture, from Special Secretary, Technical Education Bureau, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of HRD, New Delhi appellant roll no. is BP 305 Bachelor of Planning degree course.
The PIO replied.
It is informed that the required information does not attract the Section 7(1) of the Act. The information is under process and shall be sent to you as early as possible.
First Appellate Authority Ordered:
"On examination the appeal, it is observed that the information was furnished to you by the School as per availability of records. However, you grievance vide Para 7 to 9 of your above letter, has been considered and informed as follows:
(7). No reason for not-availability of attendance record is available on record of the School. (8). As regards the case of CIC referred by you, it is again informed that the School does not have provision in its rules to show the answer scripts to the students for external theory examinations as these are the confidential documents and the identity of external examiner cannot be disclosed.
(9). A copy of the Note No. 16/BPP/SPA dated 11th May, 2004 issued by Dr. S.D.Joardar, then Head of the Department of Physical Planning is enclosed for not permitting you to take the external examination of the subject "Techniques of Planning -II due to shortage of marks in the internal assessment of this subject."
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
The following were present.
Appellant: Ms. Sudeepti Chandra Respondent: Mr. N. K. Sharma PIO The respondent claims that the answersheets have been destroyed. The appellant points out that this was never disclosed to her earlier. The PIO was asked for resaons why this information was not disclosed earlier. He has no explanation for this. The PIO claims that as per their rules the answersheets have been destroyed. The PIO will give a copy of destruction of records register for the relevant records to the appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO will give a copy of the destruction of records register to the appellant before 30 April 2009.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law. The PIO has not explained why the information that records were destroyed earlier was not disclosed to the appellant. From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the PIO's actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1) . A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
He will give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1) before 5 May, 2009. He will also submit proof of having given the information to the appellant.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 9th April, 2009 (In any case correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)