Central Information Commission
Chumki Saha vs Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan on 23 August, 2023
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग ,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या/Second Appeal No.: CIC/KVSAN/A/2022/642157
Chumki Saha .....अपीलकताग /Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
Public Information Officer Under RTI,
Administrative Officer & CPIO, Kendriya Vidyalaya
Sangathan (Min. of Education), Regional Office-Raipur,
Kendriya Vidyalaya No.-2 Campus, Deen Dayal Upadhyay Nagar,
Sector-4, Raipur-492010 (Chhattisgarh).
...प्रनतवािीगण/Respondents
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 07.06.2022
CPIO replied on : 07.07.2022
First appeal filed on : 10.07.2022
First Appellate Authority order : 26.07.2022
Second Appeal received at CIC : 03.08.2022
Date of Hearing : 23.08.2023
Date of Decision : 23.08.2023
सूचना आयुक्त : श्री हीरालाल सामररया
Information Commissioner: Shri Heeralal Samariya
Page 1 of 5
Information sought:
The Appellant sought following information:
• PIO furnished reply, vide letter dated 07.07.2022, as under:Page 2 of 5
• Dissatisfied with the response received from PIO, Appellant filed First Appeal, vide letter dated 10.07.2022.
• The FAA vide order dated 26.07.2022 held as under:
• Written submission has been received from the Appellant vide letter dated Nil as under :Page 3 of 5
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The PIO has not provided correct information to the Appellant.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present: -
Appellant: Present Respondent: Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Assistant Commissioner The Appellant reiterated the averments made in her written submission and stated that the HRA was not released for the months of April 2018 to August 2018. She stated that she had vacated the government accommodation on 31.03.2018 after taking due permission of the principal. She requested to direct the PIO to furnish the HRA Rules in this regard.
The Respondent stated that the information sought by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application is not available in their official record. He affirmed to provide the HRA Rules followed by their department.
Decision:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made during hearing, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent since only such information that is held and available with a public authority can be provided to the information seekers and giving reasons/ opinions/ interpretations, etc are beyond the scope of duty of the CPIO. However, PIO is directed to furnish to furnish a copy of HRA Rules followed by their department along with annexures if any, to the Appellant, free of cost via speed-post and via e-mail, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Page 4 of 5 Authenticated true copy.
(अनिप्रमानणतसत्यानपतप्रनत) Ram Parkash Grover (रामप्रकाशग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 5 of 5