Central Information Commission
Tej Singh Hudda vs Central Board Of Secondary Education on 9 October, 2017
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi-110066
website-cic.gov.in
Case No. CIC/CBSED/A/2017/187735/MP
Appellant. : Shri Tej Singh Hudda, New Delhi.
Public Authority : Central Board of Secondary Education,
Delhi.
Date of Hearing : 05th October, 2017.
Date of Decision : 09th October, 2017.
Present
Appellant : Present at CIC.
Respondent : Ms. Punam, Assistant & Shri Gaurav
Adhikari, Assistant at CIC.
RTI application : 16.08.2016
CPIO's reply : 29.09.2017
First Appeal : 27.09.2016
FAA's order : Not adjudicatd
Second Appeal : 22.11.2016
Information Commissioner : Manjula Prasher
ORDER
1. The appellant, Shri Tej Singh Hudda submitted RTI application before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), Delhi seeking the purpose of taking CTET II Examination; whether a candidate could appear in CTET II examination after having diploma (D. Ed)/ETC or Bachelor Degree; whether without having B. Ed degree, a candidate could appear in CTET II examination etc. through five points.
1
2. Not having received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal before the appellate authority (FAA). The FAA had not adjudicated on the appeal till the date of filing the instant appeal before the Commission.
3. Aggrieved, the appellant filed the instant appeal before the Commission on the grounds of no information had been provided by the respondent authority.
4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant stated that his daughter had done JBT and also cleared CTET Examination held by the CBSE but the Delhi Staff Selection Board did not recognize CTET examination for the job of teachers. He therefore sought the purpose of taking CTET examination by the CBSE. The CPIO did not respond to his RTI application. The respondents stated that the appellant's RTI application in question was not received by them. They received the RTI application along with the hearing notice from the Commission. The CPIO vide letter dated 29.09.2017, sent through speed post, provided the purpose of conducting CTET examination as well as eligibility of candidates for appearing in the CTET examination. They further added that the CBSE only conducts the CTET examination. It is the prerogative of the appointing authority to prescribe the criteria for fixing the educational qualification required for a particular job. The appellant stated that he did not receive the CPIO's reply dated 29.09.2017. The CPIO handed over a copy of the letter dated 29.09.2017 to the appellant during the hearing.
5. Having considered the submissions of both the parties, the Commission observes that the CPIO could not reply to the RTI application earlier as the respondent authority had not received the RTI application. On receipt of the RTI application along 2 with hearing notice from the Commission, however, the CPIO provided a point-wise reply to the appellant promptly. The Commission upholds the decision of the CPIO. The appeal is disposed of.
(Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
Deputy Registrar Address of the parties:
Shri Tej Singh Hudda, The Central Public Information Officer, House No. 55, Jindpur, Central Board of Secondary Education, PO: Alipur, Regional Office, Delhi, PS 1-2, Delhi-110036. Institutional Area, I.P. Extension, Patparganj, Delhi-110092.
The First Appellate Authority, Central Board of Secondary Education, Regional Office, Delhi, PS 1-2, Institutional Area, I.P. Extension, Patparganj, Delhi-110092.3