Central Information Commission
Kusum Tanwar vs Directorate Of Education on 30 April, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982
Kusum Tanwar ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
Directorate of Education,
GNCTD ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 30.06.2024 FA : 04.08.2024 SA : 19.09.2024
CPIO : 06.07.2024;
FAO : 16.08.2024 Hearing : 08.04.2026
30.07.2024
Date of Decision: 30.04.2026
CORAM
Chief Information Commissioner: RAJ KUMAR GOYAL
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 30.06.2024 before the CPIO, Department of Education, GNCTD, seeking information as under:
"I am victim, sufferer and direct involve in below mentioned events. Kindly provide following information mentioned below under RTI 2005 from School Priya Darshini Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya (PDSKV), Fatehpur Beri, South Delhi and DDE Office South Zone 24, Delhi Kindly provide from the school:-Page 1 of 11 Second Appeal No.
CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982
1) Certified copies of below documents of three teachers namely Ms. Aarti Sanga ma'am, Ms. Jyoti Sethi ma'am and Ms. Priyanka Dagar ma'am from June 23, 2023 to May 9, 2024 a. Time Table with seal and sign on every page.
b. Monitor Diaries with seal and sign on every page.
c. Teacher Diaries with seal and sign on every page.
d. Examination Duties with seal and sign on every page. e. Absentee Register or Arrangement Register with seal and sign on every page.
2) Certified CCTV Video Footages of below dates and rooms. All recording may be stored in front of me in the pen drive and handover to me at the same time. So, nobody can send me empty pendrive as requested by my husband Mr. Vikas Tanwar in his complaint dated 15-05-2024 to worthy The Director Education Sir about storage/to preserve of CCTV footage. Kindly provide below information's.
a. Video Footage of Principal Room / Office dated 02-05-2024 timing 08:00 AM to 12:00 PM b. Video Footage of Room No 25 dated 03-05-2024 timing 10:00 AM to 02:00 PM c. Video Footage of Room No 3 dated 03-05-2024 timing 12:00 PM to 02:00 PM d. Video Footage of outside Room No 3 dated 03-05-2024 timing 12:00 PM to 2:00 PM e. Video Footage of outside Room No 7 dated 04-05-2024 timing 8:00 AM to 10:00 AM f. Video Footage of Room No 24 dated 04-05-2024 timing 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM g. Video Footage of Room No 25 dated 04-05-2024 timing 1:00 PM to 2:30 PM h. Video Footage of Room No 3 dated 04-05-2024 timing 1:00 PM to 2:30 PM i. Video Footage of Principal Room / Office dated 04-05-2024 timing 1:30 PM to 3:00 PM Page 2 of 11 Second Appeal No. CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982 j. Video Footage of Principal Room / Office dated 06-05-2024 timing 8:00 AM to 10:30 AM k. Video Footage of outside Principal Room / Office dated 06-05-2024 timing 8:00 AM to 10:30 AM I. Video Footage of Room No 25 dated 06-05-2024 timing 8:00 AM to 10:30 AM m. Video Footage of Room No 3 dated 06-05-2024 timing 8:00 AM to 10:30 AM n. Video Footage of Room No 3 dated 06-05-2024 timing 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM o. Video Footage of Principal Room / Office dated 06-05-2024 timing 01:00 PM to 02:00 PM p. Video Footage of Principal Room / Office dated 21-05-2024 timing 07:00 AM to 04:30 PM q. Video Footage of Room No 1 dated 21-05-2024 timing 07:00 AM to 04:30 PM Γ. Video Footage of Room No 2 dated 21-05-2024 timing 07:00 AM to 04:30 PM s. Video Footage of Room No 3 dated 21-05-2024 timing 07:00 AM to 04:30 PM t. Video Footage of Admission Room dated 21-05-2024 timing 07:00 AM to 04:30 PM
3) Certified copies of CCTV Camera DVR Logs from 01-05-2024 to 24-05-2024 a. DVR System Logs with seal and sign on every page.
b. DVR Config Logs with seal and sign on every page.
c. DVR Storage Logs with seal and sign on every page.
d. Record Logs with seal and sign on every page.
e. DVR Account Logs with seal and sign on every page.
f. DVR Clear Logs with seal and sign on every page.
g. DVR Playback Logs with seal and sign on every page. h. DVR Connection Logs with seal and sign on every page.
Page 3 of 11 Second Appeal No.CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982
4) Certified copies of below document of the meeting presided by Principal ma'am on 06-05-2024 a. Meeting agenda with seal and sign on every page.
b. Minutes of meeting with seal and sign on every page.
5) Certified copies of below of all staff attended the school between 17-05-2024 to 24-05-2024 a. Attendance Register with seal and sign on every page. b. Work done by all presented staffs with seal and sign on every page.
6) Certified lists of below documents from this school a. Teachers with their names and date who had applied for online transfer in 2024? b. Teachers with their names and date who had withdrawn/deleted their applications of transfer?
c. Teachers with their names and date forwarded for transfer by the Principal ma'am?
From DDE Zone 24 Office:-
1) Certified copies of below documents a. Completed Enquiry report of 21-05-2024 submitted by the enquiry committee regarding my husband complaint dated 15-05-2024 including my statement.
b. Action taken report regarding enquiry report of enquiry committee of dated 21- 05-2024 c. Order copy / Govt Policy issued to Principal which authorized to ask reasons of transfer from the applicant teachers."
2. The CPIO, O/o Dy. Director of Education, South District, Zone-24 replied on 06.07.2024, as under:
Page 4 of 11 Second Appeal No.CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982 "The HOS of Priya Darshini Şarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya (PDSKV), Fatehpur Beri has been declared APIOs' therefore; the question/s of RTI applications is being forwarded under Section 5(4) of RTI Act-2005 through official G-mail with the directions to provide the information to the applicant on his given mailing address within the stipulated period of time specified in the RTI Act, 2005. (Copy attached) under intimation to this office."
3. Consequently, the APIO & Principal, Priya Darshini Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya (PDSKV), Fatehpur Beri, replied to the Appellant on 30.07.2024, as under:
"1. Information pertains to third party. Exempted as per section 8 (1)(g) of RTI act.
2 & 3. It is pertinent to mention that the safety of girl children as well as privacy of girls children along with that of whole staff (specially female staff) can be affected by these footage.
4 & 5. Information pertains to school confidential norms.
6. As per departmental guidelines.
7. Pertains to department."
4. Aggrieved with the reply, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.08.2024 before the FAA & Regional Director of Education (South District). The FAA vide order dated 16.08.2024, upheld the reply of the CPIO as under:
"The PIO DDE. Zone-24. Distt. South, wide their status reports dated 13/082024. respectively has submitted that RTI application was received on 01/07/2024 and the same was forwarded to HOS of the school through office mail being APIO, The APIO HOS has sent reply on 30/07/2024 to the applicant and corrigendum reply dated 08/08/2024.
Decision of FAA:
On perusal of RTI appeal and as well as the reply submitted by the PIO/DDE-, Zone- 24, Distt. South. It is observed that. PIO/DDE-Zone-24. has provide reply to the appellant. Hence appeal is disposed off."Page 5 of 11 Second Appeal No.
CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982
5. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 19.09.2024, stating as under:
"I am a victim, sufferer, and directly involved in the incidents that happened in the school, of discrimination, misbehaviour and harassment by the Principal Ms. Ntiesh Meena and three other teachers namely Ms. Priyanka Dagar, Ms. Jyoti Sethi and Ms. Aarti Sanga.
On 06/05/2024, Principal didn't hear me when I met to show her the proof regarding misconduct, misbehaviour, discrimination and harassment with me on the issues of clashes of time table and others holiday work by above mentioned 3 teachers. But Principal was not ready to hear against them.
Above named teachers, back bite and mislead to the Principal against me. Principal Ma'am misbehaved very cruelly and rudely with me which led to urgent hospitalization in Emergency to Paras Hospital, Gurgaon and admitted me. Being HOS didn't provide me medical assistance in the unbearable and miserable condition of my health and my heart beat was high not normal. It can be life threatening for me. It was her moral duty to provide medical assistance to me. On my family request having 2 years kid at home, Psychiatrist advised me 7-10 bed rest instead of admission in the Tulasi Health Care Society, Gurgoan.
I have intuition that Principal Ma'am has put adverse remarks on my service book which will affect by career and Principal ma'am threatened me that she will spoil my career. To prove and verify the facts I need certified documents and the CCTV footage mentioned above demanded RTI. But the school Principal/APIO/PIO refused to provide the information saying "Third Party, Female staff and Girls school". I was employed there in the same school and I was harassed by the Principal ma'am and her group by being a female staff in the same girl's school. Weather this school is exempted being a girls school/female staff for CCTV footages of this type of instances also. Government has installed cameras to capture such type of incidents.
Objections raised against RTI Reply are as under:Page 6 of 11 Second Appeal No.
CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982
1) I am employed in the same school. I can't be considered as third party. These teachers attend limited classes; they only do back biting, mislead and provoke to the Principal. They are not maintaining transparency in allotment of teaching classes to the teachers in the time table in official whatsgroup as it was before.
2) CCTV footages are mandatory to show cruelty of the Principal and other teachers to me. These footages show their in-human act towards me. I suffered in these footages and Principal is talking about safety of girls and female staff. Also, none of the footages demanded are unnecessary and are related to me. I was present in all the footages. It's also my safety being a female staff. These footages were requested to preserve in my husband complaint on 15/05/2024 to the Director for which enquiry report and action taken report has not been provided.
3) DVR logs are important to check the CCTV footages activities. Perhaps, Principal ma'am or other staff had deleted the CCTV footages. Something is there which they are hiding it. Kindly verify it.
4) This meeting was held in the school and it might relate to me only. So, it's important for me. I am working in the same school so it may be available to me. Meeting agenda's are generally available in official school Whatsapp group and signed by the school teachers. So it's not confidential.
5) Being a staff member, kindly provide."
Adjunct Hearing Proceedings & Decision
6. The Appellant was represented in person by Advocate Siddharth Chaudhary. On behalf of the Respondent, Hansraj Meena, SO & Rep. of CPIO, DDE South, Zone 24 along with Nitesh Meena, APIO & Principal attended the hearing in person.
7. The Rep. of the Appellant stated in the context of the above-mentioned grounds of second appeal that the Respondent has deliberately denied the CCTV footages.
8. The Respondent reiterated the reply provided to the Appellant and brought on record the written submissions dated 24.03.2026 of the concerned School stating that- "the school Page 7 of 11 Second Appeal No. CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982 has 3889 girl students enrolled and 116 teachers working in the school. It is further submitted that the information sought by the applicant does not involve any larger public interest. The applicant appears to be a habitual complainant and has been filing repeated RTI applications/complaints without any reasonable justification. Such actions result in unnecessary wastage of official time and create disturbance in the smooth functioning of the school, thereby adversely affecting the academic and administrative environment of the school.
It is further submitted that the information sought by the applicant does not involve any larger public interest. The application appears to be filed with the intention of misusing the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and amounts to an abuse of the right to information."
9. In addition to the above, the Commission noted a reply dated 08.08.2024, sent by the APIO to the DDE as 'corrigendum' reply in response to the First Appeal, mention of which was also found in the FAA's order, as under:
"As no larger public purpose has been demonstrated by the applicant. This information exempted from disclosure under section 8(1)(e) 8(1)(g) 8(1)(h) and 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act.
Reply of Ques 1-Information pertains to third party. This information Exempted as per section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act.
Reply of Ques 2-It is pertinent to mention that the safety of girl children as well as privacy of girl children along with that of whole staff especially female staff privacy can be affected by this information. This information is exempted as per section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act.
Reply of Ques 3-It is pertinent to mention that the safety of girl children as well as privacy of girl children along with that of whole staff specially female staff can be affected by this information. This information is exempted as per section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act.Page 8 of 11 Second Appeal No.
CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982 Reply of Ques 4-Information pertains to school confidential norms. The information exempted As per section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act.
Reply of Ques 5-Information pertains to school confidential norms. The information exempted As per section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act.
Reply of Ques 6-As per departmental guidelines and fiduciary relationship. This information exempted as per section 8(1)(e) of RTI Act.
From DDE ZONE 24 OFFICE Reply of Ques 1-Does not pertain to school, impede the process of investigation. The information as per section 8(1)(h) of RTI Act."
10. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case observes that the Appellant has not raised any legally tenable contention against the FAA's order or the CPIO's reply. In terms of the RTI Act, the reply dated 08.08.2024 is found to be relatively specific in respect of points 2,3,5 & 6 of the RTI Application, as compared to the earlier reply of 30.07.2024, as the specific exemptions in terms of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act have been quoted in the reply of 08.08.2024.
11. However, the reply in respect of points 4 and point 1(a) & 1(b) addressed to the DDE Zone 24 (mentioned in the last part of the RTI Application) is found to be inappropriate and erroneous in the absence of a cogent justification for invoking the exemption in terms of Section 8(1)(j) and 8(1)(h), respectively, in denying the information related to minutes of the meeting of the School as well as the enquiry committee report. It is also pertinent to note that the reply to point 1(a) & 1(b) addressed to the DDE Zone 24, was provided by the APIO, after stating that the information does not pertain to the school, which renders the reply as absurd, since the reply to the said points ought to have been provided by the CPIO/DDE Zone 24 itself.
12. Now, it is needless to observe that the sheer volume of the information sought by the Appellant and the grounds for second appeal suggests that the Appellant has raised an impractical demand for information and is insisting upon disclosure of personal Page 9 of 11 Second Appeal No. CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982 information of third parties and such information which entails the security of the School and their students, prima-facie based on personal disputes.
13. Given the facts of the instant case, the attention of the Appellant is drawn towards a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) & Anr. v. Aditya Bandhopadhyay and others [(2011) 8 SCC 497] which inter-alia observed as under:
'37. The right to information is a cherished right. Information and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability. The provisions of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging corruption. But in regard to other information, (that is information other than those enumerated in section 4(1)(b) and (c) of the Act), equal importance and emphasis are given to other public interests (like confidentiality of sensitive information, fidelity and fiduciary relationships, efficient operation of governments, etc.). Indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counter-productive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the non- productive work of collecting and furnishing information...."
14. Notwithstanding the observations above, limited intervention is warranted in the matter considering the findings recorded in para 10 above. The Commission therefore directs the CPIO/DDE Zone 24 to revisit the reply of 08.08.2024, provided in respect of points 4 and point 1(a) & 1(b) addressed to the DDE Zone 24 (mentioned in the last part of the RTI Application). The available information in respect of these points shall be provided to the Appellant, to the extent it concerns her or her complaints, etc. after redacting in terms of Section 10 of the RTI Act, such information/contents/names and identifying particulars, that pertain to third parties. The denial of information, if applicable, Page 10 of 11 Second Appeal No. CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982 in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act shall be adequately justified by the CPIO instead of simply quoting the exemptions. The said revised reply of the CPIO will be provided free of cost to the Appellant within two weeks of the receipt of this order under intimation to the Commission.
15. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
A copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Raj Kumar Goyal) (राज कुमार गोयल)
Chief Information Commissioner (मु सूचना आयु )
िदनां क/Date: 30.04.2026
Authenticated true copy
Bijendra Kumar (िबज कुमार)
Dy. Registrar (उप पं जीयक)
011-26186535
Page 11 of 11 Second Appeal No.
CIC/DIRED/A/2024/641982
Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)