Central Information Commission
Naveen Atri vs Directorate Of Education on 29 May, 2023
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
के न्द्रीयसच
ू नाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागगं नाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/DIRED/A/2022/135879-UM
Mr. Naveen Atri
....अपीलकताा/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
THE PIO/Nodal Officer (RTI Cell)
O/O THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION, ZONE-IX,
DISTT. NORTH WEST-A, BL BLOCK,
SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088
..... प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.05.2023
Date of Decision : 29.05.2023
Date of RTI application 28.04.2022
CPIO's response 31.05.2022
Date of the First Appeal 03.06.2022
First Appellate Authority's response 22.06.2022
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission 27.07.2022
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-
Page 1 of 6 Page 2 of 6The PIO vide letter dated31.05.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA.The FAA vide order dated 22.06.2022, directed the PIO to provide a point-wise revised reply to the Appellant. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: The appellant attended the hearing in person. Respondent: The respondent Shri Radhey Shyam, SPE, Ms. Kumkum Aggarwal, Lecturer Physical Education and Shri Satish Kumar, PET attended the hearing in person.
The Appellant reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that partial, false, and misleading information was provided by the CPIO. The appellant further stated that in the information furnished on point nos. 03, 04 and 05 the responses were not satisfactory. He informed that in response to point no. 03 acknowledgment of the notice issued to him for the inquiry committee meeting was furnished to him. Further, the appellant stated that in respect to point no. 04 he had sought copies of Questions asked to him with his given answers, but the same was not furnished to him. He also informed that on point no. 5 he had asked correctness regarding 05 points mentioned in the inquiry committee's reports but on this point also satisfactory reply has not been furnished by the department. He also stated that all the complaints filed by him were ignored by the Department forcing him to approach the Commission for Justice.
Further, the appellant alleged that there is also fraud in age while making the selection for the team. He also alleged that because of this system, his son to date was not selected even though he was given trials for under 14 when he was just 11-12 years old. The appellant also requested the Commission to furnish information to him or zone-09 to admit that their report is false and baseless.
The Respondent present during the hearing submitted that a suitable response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the Appellant. The respondent maintained that all allegations leveled by the appellant are false and baseless. They contended that their teams perform exceptionally well each Page 3 of 6 year and have even achieved gold medals, which serve as evidence of the transparency maintained by their organization. They also informed that notice of the inquiry committee meeting was served to the appellant on his WhatsApp and he also acknowledged it. The Respondent further contended that the Appellant has made baseless allegations against them due to his son's non-selection in the team due to availability of players who are significantly more skilled than the Appellant's son.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the Respondent to furnish correct and complete information to the Appellant, free of cost, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
Moreover, the Commission after carefully going through the submissions of both parties views the issue on a larger canvas and observes that there have been instances of discrimination, nepotism, and favouritism in the selection process for school cricket teams. It is imperative that such practices be eradicated from the selection process to ensure a fair and unbiased selection of the most skilled and talented students for the school cricket teams.
Therefore the Commission advises the DD District (Sports) to take the following steps to ensure a fair selection process:
The selection committee must be made up of impartial individuals who have no personal interest or bias toward any candidate. These individuals should have expertise in cricket and should be knowledgeable about the selection process.
The selection criteria should be transparent and objective, based solely on the cricketing abilities of the students. No consideration should be given to any factors unrelated to the cricketing abilities of the students, such as their kinship or acquaintances with the selectors.
The selection committee should conduct trials in a fair and impartial manner, giving all students an equal opportunity to demonstrate their cricketing abilities. The trials Page 4 of 6 should be conducted in a standardized and consistent manner to ensure that all students are evaluated on the same criteria.
The selection committee should maintain proper records of the trials and selection process, including the scores of the students and the reasons for their selection or rejection. These records should be made available to all stakeholders, including the students and their parents.
The school administration should monitor the selection process to ensure that it is conducted in a fair and unbiased manner. Any instance of discrimination, nepotism, or favouritism should be immediately reported to the higher authorities for investigation and appropriate action.
The Commission advises the DD District (Sports) to take these steps to ensure a fair and unbiased selection process for school cricket teams, and to prevent discrimination, nepotism, and favouritism in the selection process. Such practices not only undermine the integrity of the selection process but also have a negative impact on the morale and motivation of the students who are not selected based on their cricketing abilities.
The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सच ू ना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 29.05.2023 Page 5 of 6 Copy to:-
The DD District (Sports), DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION, SPORTS BRANCH, CHHATRASAL STADIUM, MODEL TOWN, DELHI-110009 Page 6 of 6