Central Information Commission
Mr.Rakesh Thakur vs Directorate Of Education, Gnct, Delhi on 28 July, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001689/8736
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001689
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Thakur
B- 812, JJ Colony,
Bawana, Delhi - 39.
Respondent : Mrs. Neena Kumari
Public Information Officer & Dy. Director Education (NW-A) O/o The Deputy Director of Education (District NW-A) Directorate of Education Government of NCT of Delhi BL Block, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 24/02/2010
PIO replied : 15/03/2010
First appeal filed on : 10/04/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 06/05/2010
Second Appeal received on : 21/06/2010
S. No Information Sought Reply of the Public Information Officer
(PIO)
1. No. of chairs there in the Government Co-ed 53 Chairs Secondary School No. 1, JJ Colony, Bawana, Delhi-
39.
2. No. of tables there in this school 12 Tables
3. No. of tube lights there in the school. No. of Tube lights : 0
4. No. of Desks in this School. Information to be Information enclosed as according to the provided in the following format - required table mentioned in the S.No. Class Section No. of application Desks
5. No. of Fans there in this school. Provide the list that 19 rooms x 4 fans in each room = 76 Fans how many fans are there in which room. in total
6. No. of toilets there in this school 2 Toilets
7. What are the facilities available for drinking water in Answer given the school? Provide accurate details to the appellant.
8. The Appellant wants to inspect the entire above A written permission can be obtained mentioned infrastructure, thus a date and time for from the Director of the Directorate of inspection is requested. Education and the School can be visited.
Page 1 of 2Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Appeal dismissed by the FAA. The FAA had stated the inspection of the infrastructure could not be done under RTI.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and Dismissal of appeal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Rakesh Thakur;
Respondent: Mrs. Neena Kumari, Public Information Officer & Dy. Director Education (NW-A);
The appellant admits that he has got all the information on the queries 1 to 7 but has filed the appeal since he had not been given information of the infrastructure of the School. Section 2(j) of the RTI Act states, "right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes the right to-
(i) inspection of work, documents, records;
(ii) taking notes, extracts, or certified copies of documents or records;
(iii) taking certified samples of material;
(iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies. tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device".
Thus inspection of work is certainly part of the Right to Information. The FAA has erred in stating that the inspection of the infrastructure cannot be done under Right to Information.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the School on 03 August 2010 at 10.00AM at the School.
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.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 28 July 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(YM) Page 2 of 2