Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Randhir Sharma vs Central Board Of Secondary Education on 26 September, 2019

Author: Vanaja N Sarna

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                            क य सच  ु ना आयोग
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                             बाबा गंगनाथ माग
                            Baba Gangnath Marg
                        मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
                        Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                              Decision no.: CIC/CBSED/A/2018/120868/01732
                                          File no.: CIC/CBSED/A/2018/120868

In the matter of:
Randhir Sharma
                                                              ... Appellant
                                       VS
Central Public Information Officer,
Central Board of Secondary Education
Shiksha Kendra 2, Community Centre,
Preet Vihar, Delhi - 110 092
                                                             ... Respondent

RTI application filed on : 01/02/2017 CPIO replied on : 12/05/2017 First appeal filed on : 30/03/2017 First Appellate Authority order : Not on record Second Appeal dated : 03/04/2018 Date of Hearing : 25/09/2019 Date of Decision : 25/09/2019 The following were present:

Appellant: Present over VC Respondent: Smt. Seema Khakha, Assistant Secretary and PIO, present in person Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information regarding teachers who are teaching Physical Education Subject Code- 048 in Creane Memorial High School, Gaya, Bihar:
1. Name, qualification, name of the university and the year of passing.
2. Copy of the paragraph written by the teachers and how long they have been teaching +2.
1
3. Details of affiliation of the said school.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information. Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The CPIO submitted that an appropriate reply was given on 12.05.2017. She further submitted that the FAA disposed of the first appeal on 08.08.2017. The appellant did not contest the reply of the CPIO. Observations:
The reply of the CPIO was not contested by the appellant after the PIO explained the position. Hence, no further action is warranted. Decision:
The reply dated 12.05.2017 is treated as just and proper and the appellant appeared satisfied with the respondent's submissions The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आय! ु त) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 2