Central Information Commission
Rajeev Chadha vs Gnctd on 22 August, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: (Total 7 cases)
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133300, CIC/DIRED/A/2023/121831,
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299, CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140390,
CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140391, CIC/DIRED/A/2024/101764.
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/144717.
RAJEEV CHADHA .....अपीलकर्ाग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. PIO,
Vice Principal Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya,
Naraina, New Delhi- 110028.
2. PIO,
Dy Director of Education, Dist. South West A,
Zone 20, C-4 Lane, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi - 110057. ....प्रनर्वािीगण /Respondents
Date of Hearing : 13.08.2024
Date of Decision : 21.08.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Page 1 of 30
The above-mentioned Appeals of the same Appellant are clubbed together
for disposal through common order as the issue involved in each case are
similar in nature.
Relevant facts emerging from appeals:
RTI applications filed on : 17.04.2023, 13.02.2023, 28.04.2023,
12.06.2023, 10.07.2023, 16.10.2023
CPIO replied on : 23.05.2023,14.03.2023,04.05.2023,25.05.2023,
18.07.2023,10.08.2023,14.11.2023
First appeals filed on : 30.05.2023,15.03.2023,24.07.2023,14.09.2023,
16.11.2023
First Appellate Authority orders' : 27.06.2023,17.04.2023,10.07.2023,05.09.2023,
12.10.2023, 05.12.2023
2nd Appeals/Complaint dated : 07.08.2023,16.05.2023,04.10.2023,09.11.2023,
16.01.2024.
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133300
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.04.2023 seeking the following information:
1) Provide to me the names of the Primary incharge in the school in the year 2016-2017, 2017- 2018,2018-2019,2019-2020 and 2021-2022.
2) Provide to me the names of the time table incharge in the Primary wing in the school in the year 2016-2017, 2017-2018,2018-2019,2019-2020 and 2020-2021.
3) Names of the guest teachers in Primary wing in the year 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019 and 2019-2020.
4) Provide the classes given to the guest teachers and permanent teachers in the Primary wing in the school in the year 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019,2019-2020 and 2020-2021.
5) Provide the copy of the pages of the orders written in the order book maintained in the primary wing.
6) Name of the In charge in the Primary wing in the school who was the custodian of the order book maintained in the Primary wing in the year 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020 and 2020-2021.
7) Name of the teacher who is at present In charge of the order book maintained in the primary wing in the school.Page 2 of 30
8) Name of the Incharge in the Primary wing who took charge of the Primary wing on transfer of Ms. Monika from the school in the year 2021.
9) Date when Ms. Monika (Ex Assistant teacher Primary) SBV Naraina First Shift (1720002) handed over the charge of the Primary wing to the concerned teacher.
10) Classes taught by Shri Devraj (ID: 20160320), Assistant teacher(Primary) in the year2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 after he joined as the school on 19th May 2016.
11) Copy of the information shared by Sh Devraj (Assistant teacher) Primary in the session 2020-2021 regarding his teaching students of his class online as shared by other staff members on School Whatsapp Group 'Sbv naraina and through email to HOS, Shri Subhash Chand Rawat.
12) Provide the copy of the Broad sheet of the result prepared for the classes in the Primary wing in the year 2016-2017, 2017-2018,2018-2019,2019- 2020 and 2020-2021.
13) Provide the class given to Shri Devraj (Assistant teacher) Primary in the academic session 2020- 2021 and 2021-2022.
14) Name of the teacher who was assigned duty for preparing/writing the time table in the primary wing before issuing it to the concerned class teacher in the Primary wing for session 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018- 2019,2019-2020 and 2020-2021.
15) Provide the copy of the time table allotted to Shri Devraj in the year 2019-2020 by time-table Incharge in the Primary wing in the school.
16) Which subjects were taught by the Primary staff in class I and II in the school during the year 2016-2017, 2017-2018,2018-2019, 2019-2020 and 2020-2021.
17) Which subjects were taught by Sh. Devraj (Assistant teacher) Primary in classes allotted to him in the academic session 2016-2017, 2017- 2018,2018-20198,2019-2020 and 2020-2021.
18) Provide the copy of the order written in the order book handing over the charge of answering RTI applications to Shri Devraj (Assistant teacher )Primary and provide the name of the teacher who handed over the charge of RTI to Shri Devraj.
19) Provide the copy of the order written in the order book in the Primary wing vide which Shri Devraj was given Inchargeship of Primary Library.
20) Which subjects are taught by class teacher and which subjects are taught by subject teacher from classes KG to Vth in the session 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020 and 2020- 2021.
21) Provide the copy of the mails received by the school from Sh. Devraj( Assistant teacher) Primary during the academic session 2020-2021 Page 3 of 30 regarding information with respect to teaching and the number of students responded to his teaching online during the Pandemic period.
22) Provide the copy of the order/instructions circulated in the school on Whatsapp Group 'Sbv naraina'or written in the order book vide which the subject teachers were exempted from sending information regarding their teaching through Whatsapp or Email DURING SESSION 2020-2021.
23) Provide the names of the subject teachers from classes KG to XII who were exempted from sending information regarding teaching by them during the Pandemic year 2020-2021.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 23.05.2023 stating as under:
1. 2016 to 2021 Ms. Monika and 2021-22 Sh. Ram Kumar Sharma.
2. This information already provided to the applicant in RTI No. 22 dated:-
20.05.2022.
3. Sh. Brijesh Kumar April 2016 to 10 May 2016, Sh. Himanshu April 2016 to
31. Oct. 2019, Sh. Harsh April 2016 to March 2021, Sh. Vikas April 2016 to 14 Aug. 2019, Sh. Manish April 2016 to 21 Nov. 2019, Sh. Vinay April 2016 to 25 Nov. 2019.
4. This information already provided to the applicant in RTI No. 22 dated:-
20.05.2022.
5. Third Party information.
6. Primary in charge.
7. Primary in charge.
8. Sh. Ram Kumar Sharma.
9. Record not available.
10. Copy of time table already provided to the applicant under RTI No. 22.
11. No such information of online classes is available in school.
12. Concerned record as third party information cannot be disclosed as per RTI Act.
13. Copy of time table already provided to the applicant under RTI No. 22.
14. Primary in charge.
15. Copy of time table already provided to the applicant under RTI No. 22.
16. All subjects as per RTE.
17. As per time table provided to the applicant in RTI No. 22.
18. No such order is available in school.
19. No such order is available.
20. All subjects as per RTE.
21. No such record of online classes is available.
22. No such record of online classes is available.Page 4 of 30
23. No such record of online classes is available.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 30.05.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 27.06.2023, held as under-
"After going through the RTI Appeal and the requisite information submitted by the PIO, I have observed that the information provided is not satisfactory. Taking into consideration the instant appeal' PIO is directed to provide a revised proper reply as per the RTI Act,2005 within 15 days of receiving this order. Appeal disposed of accordingly."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-compliance of FAA's order, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/121831 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.02.2023 seeking the following information:
1. Provide the copy of the section of the RTI Act 2005 under which the Biometric attendance for the period 01" October 2017 to 24th January 2020 of all the staff members in the morning shift whose statements were recorded by the inquiry committee on 13/01/2021 and 15/01/2021 was provided to the undersigned under revised reply of RTI No. 09 dated 13/10/2021 vide letter Ref No. SBV/NAR/RTI/2021/237.
a.) Under the same section of the RTI Act 2005 provide the copy of the pages of the Biometric attendance of Sh. Bijender Singh Meena(Ex TGT Maths), Sh. Neeraj Kumar( TGT Maths), Ms Madhu Rani(Guest teacher English), and Ms Indu kumari Sah(Ex Assistant teacher Nursery) for the relevant period 01 October 2017 to 24th January 2020 extended upto 08th February 2020. against whom the undersigned had made allegations during the inquiry on 13th January 2021 and 15th January2021 in connection with complaint dated 23rd November 2020 regarding late coming in the school and marking attendance late in the Biometric machine by these staff members in order to establish conformity of facts between the allegations made by the complainant and the observations made by the inquiry committee in their report.
Page 5 of 302. Provide the copy of the section of the RTI Act 2005 under which the biometric attendance of all staff members in SBV Naraina First Shift(1720002) was not shared with the undersigned despite the orders of the First Appellate Authority/Regional Director of Education (South) dated 21/08/2020 under Appeal No.45/RTI/RDS/FAA/2020/196 (RTI ID:
32174).
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 14.03.2023 stating as under:
1. Please see section 12 of RTI ACT 2005.
(a) Please see section 12.
2. Please read section 8 (1) (1) with section 12 of RTI Act 2005.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.03.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 17.04.2023, held as under.
I have gone through the RTI Appeal and the records available. It is observed that the reply given to point 2 is misleading since Section 8(1)(1) does not exist in the RTI Act, 2005. Also, reply given to point 1 (a) is not satisfactory as per the information asked. Therefore, PIO is directed to provide proper information through a revised reply within 15 days of receiving of this order.
In compliance with FAA's order, the PIO furnished a revised reply to the Appellant on 04.05.2023 by stating as under:
With reference to your appeal No 28/RTI/RDS/FAA/2023/108 dt. 17.04.2023 in reference to your previous RTI (Application having ID: 393 received in this office on 14/02/2023) for seeking information under RTI Act 2005, the reply as per information available in this office Zone 20 is as under :-
Ans1-2 The information asked by the applicant is enclosed herewith which is received from concerned school."
"Point 2. Please read Section 8(1) (j) instead of 8(1) (1) as it was sent by clerical mistake. Section 8(1) (j) tells that information which relates to personal information, the disclosure of which has no relation to any public activity or interest or which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual.Page 6 of 30
Point 1. Earlier the same information was provided to the same applicant with the consent of the concerned employees but now it denied as per below rule: The biometric attendance of staff is an arrangement between the employees and the employer which falls under personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or public interest and disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individuals. In view of the above, the information cannot be supplied to the applicant under Rule 8 (1) (j) of RTI Act 2005."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal with the denial of information on the following grounds-
(i) "That the Appellant is part and participle of the same school and information regarding Biometric attendance sought by him in respect of the remaining staff members for the relevant period 01, October 2017 to 24r" January 2020 extended up to 08 February 2O2O does not come under the ambit of personal information as alleged and ought to be shared with him as shared by Vice Principal earlier under RTI-09/2020 dated 30/11/2021.
(ii) That the information regarding Biometric attendance of the remaining four staff members namely Sh. Bijender Singh Meena(Ex TGT Math), 5h. Neeraj Kumar(TGT Math), Ms Madhu Rani(Guest teacher English) and Ms lndu Kumari Sah (Assistant teacher Nursery) be shared in the interest of justice so that conformity of facts which could not be established by the inquiry officers in the inquiry report submitted to DDE District South West-A after inquiry on 13/01/2021 and 15/01/2021 and intentionally avoided by the inquiry committee which would have brought the truth to live regarding late coming by these staff members and the whole process of holding inquiry remain frustrated and later resulted in non conformity of facts.
(iii) That the information regarding Biometric attendance of the remaining four staff members namely Sh Bijender Singh Meena(Ex TGT Maths), Sh. Neeraj Kumar(TGT Maths), Ms Madhu Rani(Guest Teacher English) and Ms lndu Kumari Sah(Assistant teacher Nursery) for the relevant period 01/10/2017 to 24/11/2020(extended upto 08/02/2020) has intentionally not been shared with the Appellant unlike other staff members whose biometric attendance record were shared with the Appellant earlier under revised reply of RTI No.09/2020 dated 29/12/2021 and the apprehension shown by Page 7 of 30 the Vice Principal SBV Naraina First Shift (lD: 1720002) is an abuse of the transparency Act."
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.04.2023 seeking the following information:
a) Provide the copy of the page of the diary register showing the entry made in respect of my complaint under Diary No. 1637/2-20 dated 15/07/2022
b) Provide the copy of the inquiry report submitted by the re- inquiry committee in connection my complaint under Diary No. 1637/Z-20 dated 15/07/2022.
c) Provide the copy of the reviews submitted by the re-inquiry committee/ Officer's Ms Alka Nagpal Principal S(Co-ed), Sr. Sec School, Nanakpura, New Delhi and Shri Parveen Yadav Vice Principal (Co-ed) Sr. Sec School D Block, Vasant Kunj New Delhi after DDE Zone-20 constituted re-inquiry committee into my complaint vide order no.F.DE/54/DDE/Zone- 20/SWA/2022/1042 dated 15/10/2022.
d) Provide the copy of the page of the diary register showing the entry made under Diary No. 1427/2-20 dated 25/06/2022.
e) Provide the copy of the inquiry report submitted by the inquiry committee after the committee had been detailed for re-inquiry into the matter in respect of the entry made under Diary No 1427/Z-20 dated 25/06/2022.
f) Provide the copy of the inquiry report submitted to DDE(SW-A) by the inquiry officer's in respect of the complaint forwarded to Section Officer(VIG), Vigilance branch, District South West-A by DDE Zone-20 under letter Ref No: DE-54/DDE/SWA/Z-20/2019/62 dated 20/01/2020.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 25.05.2023 stating as under:
(a) The information asked by the applicant is enclosed here with (copy of the page of the diary no. 1637 dt. 15.07.2022.
(b. c. e & f) The concerned files are under submission, so information asked by the applicant cannot provide.
(d) The information asked by the applicant is enclosed herewith (copy of the page of the diary no. 1427 dt 25.06.2022.
Page 8 of 30Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 30.05.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 10.07.2023, held as under:
After going through the RTI Appeal and the requisite information submitted by the PIO, I have observed that the information provided is not satisfactory. Taking into consideration the instant appeal, PIO is directed to provide complete and correct information as per the RTI Act 2005 including the legible copies as sought by the appellant, within l5 days of receiving this order.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-compliance of FAA's order, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140390 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 12.06.2023 seeking the following information:
The undersigned made a representation/complaint regarding Objection with regard to Grant of "No Objection Certificate" to Shri Guru Dutt (Employee ID: 20000755) working as TGT (Math's) in SBV Naraina First Shift(ID: 1720002) on promotion to the post of Principal through UPSC against all rules, regulations and stipulations under Diary No. 1752/Vig/HQ dated 29/03/2023. In order to know the present status and Action taken report in respect of my representation /complaint dated 29/03/2023 under Diary no.1752/Vig/HQ, the undersigned filed an RTI application with PIO/DDE, District South West-A on 08/05/2023 and in response to my RTI application, the Asstt. Public Information Officer, Distt South West-A forwarded the reply received from SO (Vigilance), Office of the Deputy Director of Education, Distt South West-A on 07/06/2023 under Ref No. de.54/DDE/SW-A/VIGL./RTI/2023/149 through letter Ref No. DE- 54/DDE/SW-A/RTI/ID-1938/23/480 dated 07/06/2023 The copy of the RTI application dated 08/05/2023 and the information received from Asstt. Public Information Officer, Distt South West-A on 07/06/2023 and the reply received from SO (Vigilance), Distt SW-A dated Page 9 of 30 07/06/2023 are enclosed as Annexure A, Annexure B and Annexure C respectively with this RTI application.
The PIO (HQ) is requested to provide the information under the following points in connection with the reply received from SO (Vigilance), O/o DDE, South West-A (Vigilance Branch) under point no 3 and point no.4 of RTI No.1938 dated 07/06/2023( Refer to Annexure C) in connection with my representation/complaint dated 29/03/2023 under Diary No.1752/Vig/HQ.
1. Provide the copy of the representation submitted by Shri Guru Dutt (ID:
20000755), TGT (Math's), SBV Naraina First Shift(ID: 1720002) to the Worthy Director of Education regarding his case.
2. Provide the copy of the noting containing the comments of the Worthy Director of Education on the basis of which the case of Shri Guru Dutt (ID:
20000755), TGT (Math's), SBV Naraina First Shift (ID: 1720002) was closed.
3. Provide the Vigilance report issued to Shri Guru Dutt (ID: 20000755), TGT Math's, SBV Naraina on promotion to the post of Principal through UPSC.
4. Provide the copy of the "No Objection Certificate" issued by the Directorate of Education to Shri Guru Dutt (ID: 20000755), TGT(Maths) on Promotion to the post of Principal through UPSC.
5. Provide the copy of the other relevant papers/documents from the file regarding case of Shri Guru Dutt (ID: 20000755), TGT (Maths) forwarded to the Worthy Director of Education on the basis of which the case of Shri Guru Dutt was closed by the Worthy Director of Education.
SECTION-B The undersigned made a representation/complaint to SO (Vigilance), Vigilance branch, Directorate of Education under Diary No. 1475/Vig/HQ dated 14/03/2023. Vide reply dated 07/06/2023, the SO(Vigilance), O/o DDE, Distt. South West-A, (Vigilance Branch) informed under point no 1 and point no. 2 of the reply dated 07/06/2023 having ID: 1938 that the case of Shri D.S Rawat (ID: 19910536), Vice Principal, Moti Bagh-I, GBSSS is already under process at Vigilance branch, Directorate of Education and DOV. (Refer to Annexure C) The SO (Vigilance), Vigilance Branch, Directorate of Education is requested to provide the information under the following points in connection with the representation under Diary No. 1475/Vig/HQ dated 14/03/2023.
1. Provide the present status now of the representation under Diary no.
1475/Vig/HQ/ dated 14/03/2023.
2. Provide the Action Taken Report (ATR) in the representation under Diary no. 1475/Vig/HQ dated: 14/03/2023 The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 18.07.2023 stating as under:
Page 10 of 301&2. Pertains to Vigilance Branch Head Quarter, Dte. of Education, No representation and main file of noting available in Vigilance Branch of District SW-A.
3. Information denied under Section 8(1)(j) in The Right to Information Act, 2005.
4. Not pertains to Vigilance Branch, NOC not issued by Vigilance Branch.
5. Pertain to Vigilance Branch Head Quarter, Dte. of Education, No such records available in District SW-A. Requisite information of Section B is as follows:
1 & 2. Reply already provided to the applicant vide letter dated 07/06/2023 in r/o RTI ID No. 1938. Present status report is still same.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 24.07.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 05.09.2023, held as under.
The record was called for and perused. On going through the information sought in the said RTI, it is observed that the PIO (HQ) had appropriately forwarded the RTI application to concerned branch i.e., Vigilance Branch for providing information. PIO (HQ) had also transferred the RTI application to District PIO (South West A) and Zonal PIO (Zone-20) under intimation to the appellant.
Vigilance branch has provided the information to PIO (HQ) vide letter dated 03.07.2023PIO (HQ) is directed to forward it to the appellant. Vigilance Branch is directed to provide current status of Section (B) of the RTI application.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-compliance of FAA's order, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140391 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.06.2023 seeking the following information:
1. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Guru Dutt (ID: 20000755) (TGT Maths), SBV Naraina First Shift (1720002) in the year 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.Page 11 of 30
2. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Ravi Chand (ID: 19991012), Ex TGT (Hindi), SBV Naraina First Shift at present working as (PGT Hindi) in Shaheed Captain Amit Verma Govt Sarvodaya, Inderpuri (ID: 1720121) in the year 2019- 2020, 2020-2021,2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
3. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Digamber Singh Rawat (ID: 19910536), EX- Vice Principal SBV Naraina First Shift (ID: 1720002) at present working as Vice Principal, GBSSS Moti Bagh-I(ID: 1719010) in the year 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021- 2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
4. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Pramod Kr Sharma (ID: 19990474), Ex- Vice Principal, SBV Naraina First Shift(ID:1720002), at present working as Vice Principal at GBSSS, Rajokari(ID: 1720028) in the year 2019-2020, 2020-2021,2021- 2022,2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
5. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Pawan Kumar Tanwar (ID: 20037572), (TGT Natural Science), SBV Naraina First Shift (ID: 1720002) in the year 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
6. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Dharam Veer Singh (ID: 19990332), (TGT Math), SBV Naraina First Shift (ID: 1720002) in the year 2019-2020, 2020- 2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
7. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Ram Kumar Sharma (ID: 20090669), Assistant teacher (Primary), SBV Naraina First Shift (ID: 1720002) in the year 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
8. Was a Disciplinary Proceeding contemplated/pending against Shri Harish Manchanda (ID: 19920356), Ex TGT Math, SBV Naraina First Shift(ID:
1720002) at present working as PGT (History), Sarvodaya Vidyalaya, Mansarovar Garden(ID: 1516003) in the year 2019-2020, 2020- 2021,2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
9. Was there a clear case of initiating vigilance inquiry against the officials whose names are mentioned under points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 above in the year 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 20221-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023- 2024 respectively.
10. Was there a proposal for initiating vigilance inquiry against the officials whose names are mentioned under points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 respectively in the year 2019-2020, 2020- 2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
11. What was the vigilance status of the officials whose names are mentioned above under points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7and 8 respectively in the Page 12 of 30 year 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 respectively.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 06.07.2023 stating as under:
1to 11.
Section 8(1)(j) in The Right to Information Act, 2005 read as:
(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has not relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information:
Provided that the information, which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. As there is no larger public interest has been established for disclosing the information in the instant application, being the sought for information personal, denied u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI Act 2005.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.07.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 06.09.2023, held as under.
I have gone through the RTI appeal, as well as the reply submitted by the PIO/DDE- Zone-21, Distt. South West-B, Najafgarh. It is observed that, PIO/DDE-South West-A, has not provided satisfactory reply. PIO/DDE- South West-A, is directed to and send the proper revised reply to the appellant as per RTI Act-2005, within 15 days of receipt of this order.
In compliance with FAA's order, the PIO furnished a revised point-wise reply to the Appellant and denied the information by invoking Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the denial of information, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/144717 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.07.2023 seeking the following information:Page 13 of 30
Please refer to my earlier RTI application dated 24/05/2023 having ID: 1339 and the reply of RTI No.1339 received from DDE (Zone-20), District South West-A through mail on 05/07/2023. The copy of the RTI application dated 24/05/2023 having ID: 1339 and the copy of the reply received from DDE (Zone-20) after obtaining from HOS, SBV Naraina First Shift under ID: 1339 are enclosed as Annexure A, Annexure B and Annexure C respectively with this RTI application.
In continuation of the remarks given by HOS, SBV Naraina First Shift in the reply under ID: 1339 (Refer to Annexure C), the PIO/DDE, Zone-20, District South West-A is requested to provide the Additional information under the following points after obtaining the same from HOS, SBV Naraina First Shift(ID: 1720002)_
1. Provide the certified copies of the pages of the examination register maintained in the Primary wing in which exam duties were assigned to the Primary staff from year 2014 to 2021.
2. Provide the certified copies of the pages of the Student attendance register maintained in the Primary wing showing recording of attendance of present and absent students by the staff on invigilation duty during examination from year 2014 to 2021.
3. Provide the certified copies of the pages of the examination register showing distribution of answer sheets to the Primary staff for checking and receiving back the same answer sheets from the staff after checking from the year 2014 to 2021.
4. Provide the certified copies of the pages of the register maintained in the Examination branch of Primary wing showing circulation of important circulars, orders and date sheets amongst Primary staff by the Primary in charge/ Exam in charge from year 2014 to 2021.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 10.08.2023 stating as under:
The information sought by the applicant is enclosed as received from concerned Govt School under Zone-20. The asked information consist of 394 pages SO the applicant may deposit money in Distt SW-A Account Branch @Rs. 2/- per page.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.09.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 12.10.2023, held as under.
I have gone through the RTI appeals, as well as the reply submitted by the PIO/DDE- Zone-20, Distt. South West-A. It is observed that, PIO/DDE-
Page 14 of 3020, provide the reply of RTI filed by appellant. Hence appeal is dispose off.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/DIRED/A/2024/101764 Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.10.2023 seeking the following information:
1. Date when my RTI application dated 10/07/2023 having ID. No-03 addressed to Public Information Officer/Deputy Director of Education, Zone-20, Distt. South West-A received in the office of DDE Zone-20.
2. Date when the reply of RTI ID No-03 was received from HOS, Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya Naraina First Shift, New Delhi-110028.
3. Date when the reply given by the HOS, Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya Naraina First Shift(ID: 1720002) in respect of RTI ID No-03 was forwarded by PIO/DDE Zone-20 under mail ID: [email protected]. Provide the certified copy of the said mail.
4. Date when the reply of RTI ID No-03 under letter Ref No. F.DE/54/ΡΙΟ/Z-
20/2023/RTI- 03/381 dated 10/08/2023 forwarded to the undersigned by RTI Zone-20 under their mail ID: [email protected]. Provide the certified copy of the said mail.
5. Date when fire broke out in the electricity panel in Zone-20due to which the reply of RTI ID No-03in respect of the undersigned was not timely disposed off on dated 10/08/2023.
6. Provide the copy of the complaint made by PIO/DDE Zone-20/RTI Zone-
20 to the Electricity office regarding fire in the electricity panel in Zone- 20 as stated in reply of RTI ID No-03 given by RTI Zone-20 under mail ID:
[email protected]
7. Provide the complaint number of the complaint made by PIO/DDE Zone20/RTI Zone-20 in respect fire in the Electricity panel on account of which the RTI application dated 10/07/2023 of the undersigned having RTI ID No-03 was timely not disposed off on dated 10/08/2023 by RTI Zone20 due to non-availability of electricity.
8. Date when electricity in office of Zone-20 was restored after fire broke out in the electricity and due to non-availability of electricity the reply of RTI ID No-03 was timely not disposed off on dated 10/08/2023.
9. Provide the details of any casualty that took place on account of fire in the electricity panel in Zone-20 due to which the reply of RTI ID No-03 Page 15 of 30 was timely not disposed off by RTI Zone- 20 on dated 10/08/2023 under their mail ID: [email protected]
10. When was the system of sending replies of RTI's by RTI Zone-20 through mail ID: rtizone-20 restored in the office of RTI Zone-20 after the fire in electricity panel in Zone-20 broke out on 10/08/2023 was rectified.
11. Was the reply of RTI having ID No-03 dated 10/08/2023 also sent to undersigned by PIO/DDE Zone-20 under speed post on account of non-
availability of electricity in Zone-20 due to fire in the electricity panel on 10/08/2023.
12. Date when reply of RTI ID No-03 dated 10/08/2023 by PIO/DDE Zone-20 was disposed off and forwarded to the undersigned by RTI Zone-20 under mail ID: [email protected] as it was not timely disposed off earlier on dated 10/08/2023 on account of fire in the electricity panel in RTI Zone- 20 on 10/08/2023.
13. Copy of the mail vide which the replies of RTI ID No-03 dated 10/08/2023was disposed off by PIO/DDE Zone-20/RTI Zone-20 and the same was forwarded to the undersigned on mail ID:
[email protected]
14. Date when the RTI under ID No 63680, 63679,63649, 63604, 63594, 63585, 63576, 63562, 63561, 63555, 80429, 63539, 63523, 63522, 63485 and 63838 was forwarded by PIO/DDE (Zone-20) to the respective Government schools under Zone-20 through mail ID:
[email protected]
15. Was the electricity supply cut off in the office of PIO/DDE (South West-
A), Administration Branch District South West-A, O/o Asstt. Public Information Officer District South West-A as well as O/o Regional Director of Education running in the same building after fire broke out in the electricity panel in Zone-20 on 10/08/2023.
If so, provide the copies of the complaint made by these offices independently for restoration of electricity and the date when electricity was restored in these offices.
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 14.11.2023 stating as under:
1. RTI application received in this office on 12.07.2023. 2,3. Reply received from the HOS, SBV, Naraina on 31.07.2023.
4. Reply forward to the applicant on 05.10.2023 with the specific reason.
5. On dated 09.08.2023.
6. Complaint made verbally to the caretaker on the day of incident and written on 09.08.2023.Page 16 of 30
7. D. No. 1962 dated 09.08.2023 8 to 11.
The information sought does not come under the definition of Information under Rule 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. The applicant is not entitled to receive advice, explanation, clarification, opinion and views to his queries under RTI Act, 2005.
12 to 13.
As per point no. 4 14 to 15.
The information sought does not come under the definition of Information under Rule 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. The applicant is not entitled to receive advice, explanation, clarification, opinion and views to his queries under RTI Act, 2005.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.09.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 12.10.2023, held as under.
I have gone through the RTI appeals, as well as the reply submitted by the PIO/DDE- Zone-20 Distt. South West-A. It is observed that, PIO/DDE Zone-21, Distt. (South West-B) has not provide proper reply. PIO/DDE- Zone-21, Distt. South West-B, is directed to send the proper revised reply to the appellant within 15 days of receipt of this order Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-compliance of FAA's order, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent No. 1: Ms. Seema Roy Chaudhary, PIO, DDE- Zone 20, Dist. SWA, GNCTD New Delhi present in person.
Respondent No. 2: Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Kannaujia, Principal/ APIO accompanied by Sh. Sanjay Dagar, Primary In-charge, Sh. Suresh Kumar, PGT, SBV Naraina, Delhi present in person.
Written submissions filed by the Respondent No. 1 in each case except in case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133300, are taken on record, contents of the same (case-wise) are reproduced below for the sake of clarity:Page 17 of 30
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/121831:
"1. With reference to Hearing Notice vide File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/121831 Dated 29-07-2024 to be heard on 13/08/2024, it is submitted that the appellant Sh. Rajeev Chadha had submitted his application for seeking information under RTI Act, 2005 regarding biometric attendance for the period 01.10.2017 to 24.01.2020 of all the staff members of SBV, Naraina in the morning shift whose statement were recorded by the Inquiry Committee on 13.01.2021 and
15.01.2021. The said RTI Application having ID No.393 dated 13-02-2023 received in this office offline on 14/02/2023 for seeking information under RTI Act. 2005, is attached as Annexure-A.
2. The reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone 20, Distt. South West-A, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter NO. DE-54/PIO/Z-20/2023/RT1/252 dated 14/03/2023. is attached as Annexure-B.
3. The appellant had also filed an appeal dated 17.04.2024 against the reply with the FAA, Distt. South West-A, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The First Appellate Authority directed the PIO to provide proper information through a revised reply within 15 days of this order", attached as Annexure-C.
4. The revised reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone-20, Distt. South West-A, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter No.F.DE-54/PIO/Z- 20/2023/RT1/495 dated 04-05-2023, is attached as Annexure-D."
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299:
"1. With reference to Hearing Notice vide File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299 Dated 29-07-2024 to be heard on 13/08/2024, it is submitted that the appellant Sh. Rajeev Chadha had submitted his application for seeking information under RTI Act, 2005 regarding to provide the copy of page of the diary register showing the entry made in respect of my complaint under Diary No. 1637/7-20 dated 15.07.2022. To provide the copy of the inquiry report submitted by the re- inquiry committee in connection to my complaint under Diary No. 1637/7-20 dated 15.07.2022, to provide the copy of the page of the diary register showing the entry made under Diary No. 1427/7-20 dated 25/06/2022. The said RTI Application having ID No. 1050 dated 28-04-2023 received in this office offline on 29/04/2023 for seeking information under RTI Act. 2005, is attached as Annexure-A. Page 18 of 30
2. The reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone 20. Distt. South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter NO. DE-54/PIO/Z-20/2023/RT1/581 dated 25/05/2023, is attached as Annexure-B. 3 The appellant had also filed an appeal dated 10.07.2023 against the reply with the FAA. Distt. South West-A, Vasant Vihar. New Delhi. The First Appellate Authority directed the PIO of 7-20 to provide complete and correct information including the legible copies as sought by the appellant within 15 days of this order", attached as Annexure-C. 4 The revised reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone-20. Distt South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter No.F.DE-54/PIO/Z- 20/2023/RT1/825 dated 26-07-2023, is attached as Annexure-1)."
Extract of letter No.F.DE-54/PIO/Z-20/2023/RT1/825 dated 26-07-2023 (Revised reply):
"2. Point wise reply on the subject Order is as under:-
(a) Detailed status report:-
(i) The applicant Sh. Rajeev Chadha, (Resident of xxx xxx, New Delhi) has filed a complaint about status of his complaint and inquiry report of his complaint.
(b) Copy enclosed of reply provided to the applicant.
(b) The point wise comments on the appeal filed by appellant are as per below:
(i) Copy of the page of diary register showing the entry made in respect of applicant complaint already provided to the applicant through his RTI No.1050.
(ii) Copy of the inquiry report cannot be provided as file is under submission.
(5) Copy of RTI application Photocopy of RTI (RTI no. 1050) application dated 28/04/2023 filed by Sh. Rajeev Chadha, PGT, resident of xxx xxx New Delhi is enclosed herewith."
CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140390:
"1. ..... the appellant Sh. Rajeev Chadha had submitted his application for seeking information under RTI Act, 2005 regarding copy of representation submitted by Sh. Guru Dutt, TGT(Maths), SBV Naraina to the Worthy Director of Education regarding his case. Copy of noting containing the comments of the Worthy Director of Education on the basis of which the case of Sh. Guru Dutt, TGT(Maths) was closed. To Provide the Vigilance report issued to Sh. Guru Dutt on promotion to the post of Principal through UPSC. Copy of the NOC issued by the Directorate of Education to Sh. Guru Dutt, TGT(Maths) on promotion to the post of Principal through UPSC. To provide the copy of the other relevant papers Page 19 of 30 from the file regarding case of Sh. Guru Dutt, TGT(Maths) forwarded to the Worthy Director of Education on the basis of which the case of Sh. Guru Dutt was closed by the Worthy Director of Education. To provide the present status of the representation under Diary No. 1475/Vig/11Q dated 14/03/2023. To provide the ATR in the representation under Diary No. 1475/Vig/1IQ dated 14/03/2023. The said RTI Application having ID No.35893 dated 12-06-2023 received in this office offline on 20/06/2023 for seeking information under RTI Act. 2005, is attached as Annexure-A.
2. The reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone 20, Distt. South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter NO. DE-54/PIO/Z-20/2023/R11/784 dated 19-07-2023 is attached as Annexure-B."
CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140391:
"1. With reference to Hearing Notice vide File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/140391 Dated 29-07-2024 to be heard on 13/08/2024, it is submitted that the appellant Sh. Rajeev Chadha had submitted his application for seeking information under RTI Act, 2005 regarding Was a Disciplinary proceeding contemplated/pending against Sh. Guru Dutt, TGT(Maths). SBV Naraina, 1 shift in the year 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22. 2022-23 and 2023-24 respectively. Was a Disciplinary proceeding contemplated/pending against Sh. Ravi Chand, Es TGT (Hindi). SBV Naraina. 1 shift at present working as PGT(Hindi) in SCAV Govt. Sarvodaya, Inderpuri in the year 2019-20, 2020-21. 2021-22. 2022-23 and 2023-24 respectively. The said RTT Application having 11) No. 1940 dated 05/06/2023 received in this office offline on 07/06/2023 for seeking information under RTI Act. 2005, is attached as Annexure-A.
2. The reply was provided to the applicant by the then APIO. District South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter NO. DE-54/DDE/SW-A/RTI/ID- 1940/2023/544 dated 06/07/2023, is attached as Annexure-B.
3.The appellant had also filed an appeal dated 10.07.2023 against the reply with the FAA. Distt. South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The First Appellate Authority directed the PIO to provide proper information through a revised reply within 15 days of this order", attached as Annexure-C.
4. The revised reply was provided to the applicant by the then APIO, District South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter No. DE-54/DDE/SW-A/RTI/ID- 1940/2023/656 dated 23-09-2023. is attached as Annexure-D."
CIC/DIRED/A/2023/144717:
"1. ... the appellant Sh. Rajeev Chadha had submitted his application for seeking information under RTI Act, 2005 regarding to provide the certified copies of the pages of the examination register maintained in the primary wing in which exam duties were assigned to the Primary staff form year 2014 to 2021, provide Page 20 of 30 the certified copies of the pages of the student attendance register maintained in the primary wing showing recording of attendance of present and absent students by the staff on invigilation duty during examination from year 2014 to 2021. The said RTI Application having ID No. 03 dated 10/07/2023 received in this office offline on 12/07/2023 for seeking information under RTI Act. 2005, is attached as Annexure-A.
2. The reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone 20, Distt. South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter NO. DE-54/PIO/Z-20/2023/RTT- 03/881 dated 10/08/2023, is attached as Annexure-B.
3. The appellant had also filed an appeal dated 20.09.2023 against the reply with the FAA, Distt. South West-A, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi. The First Appellate Authority stated that DDE Zone-20 has provided satisfactory reply and hence disposed off the appeal accordingly, attached as Annexure-C.
4. The revised reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone-20, Distt. South West-A. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter No.F.DE-54/PIO/Z- 20/2023/RTI/1284 dated 03-10-2023, is attached as Annexure-D. Extract of revised reply vide letter No.F.DE-54/PIO/Z-20/2023/RTI/1284 dated 03.10.2023:
"2. Point wise reply on the subject notice is as under :-
(a) Detailed status report: Sh. Rajeev Chadha, resident of xxxx, New Delhi-
110028 had sent an RTI (RTI No. 03, dt. 10/07/2023) regarding seeking information under RTI Act, 2005.
(b) Copy of information provided, if any, to the applicant The applicant has already been provided the following information (Copy enclosed):-
(c) "The information sought by the applicant is enclosed as received from concerned Govt. School under Zone-20. The asked information consist of 394 pages, so the applicant may deposit money in Distt-SW-A, Account Branch @ Rs. 2/- per page".
(d) Copy of RTI application Photocopy of RTI (RTI no. 03) application dated 10/07/2023 lodged by Sh. Rajeev Chadha is enclosed to this letter for ready reference."
CIC/DIRED/A/2024/101764:
1. With reference to Hearing Notice vide 29-07-2024 to be heard on 13/08/2024, it is submitted that the appellant Sh. Rajeev Chadha had submitted his application for seeking information under RTI Act, 2005 regarding Date when applicant RTI Application dated 10.07.2023 having ID No. 03 addressed to PIO. Zone-20 received in the office of DDE(Zone-20). Date of reply when RTI ID Page 21 of 30 No. 03 was received from HOS, SBV Naraina, 1 shift. The said RT1 Application having ID No.406 dated 16-10-2023 received in this office offline on 17/10/2023 for seeking information under RTI Act. 2005, is attached as Annexure-A.
2. The reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone 20. Distt. South West-A, Vasant Vihar. New Delhi vide mail dated 13.11.2023, is attached as Annexure-B.
3. The appellant had also filed an appeal dated 17.11.2023 against the reply with the FAA. Distt. South West-A. Vasant Vihar. New Delhi.", attached as Annexure-C.
4. The revised reply was provided to the applicant by the then PIO Zone-20, Distt. South West-A, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi vide letter No.F.DE-54/PIO/Z-
20/2023/RTI/1458 dated 22-11-2023, is attached as Annexure-D. Extract of revised reply vide letter No.F.DE-54/PIO/Z-20/2023/RTI/1458 dated 22.11.2023:
Point. No. Information
1. RTI application received in this office on 12.07.2023.
2. Reply received from the HOS. SBV, Naraina on 31.07.2023.3
4 Reply forward to the applicant on 05.10.2023 with the specific reason.
5 On dated 09.08.2023.
6 Complaint made verbally to the caretaker on the day of incident and written on 09.08.2023.7 D.No. 1962 dated 09.08.2023
8 to 11 The information sought does not come under the definition of Information under Rule 2(1) of the RTI Act, 2005. The applicant is not entitled to receive advice, explanation, clarification, opinion and views to his queries under RTI Act, 2005.
12 to 13 As per point no. 4 14 to 15 The information sought does not come under the definition of Information under Rule 2(f) of the RTI Act. 2005. The applicant is not entitled to receive advice, explanation, clarification, opinion and views to his queries under RTI Act, 2005.
(c) Copy of RTI application Photocopy of RTI (RTI no. 406) application dated 16.10.2023 lodged by Sh. Rajeev Chadha is enclosed to this letter for ready reference."
In case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133300, the Appellant restricted his claim against point No. 4 and 12 of RTI application by pleading the information i.e. details of classes given to the guest teacher and permanent teachers in Page 22 of 30 primary wings and the broad result sheet prepared for classes have been wrongly denied by the Respondent ignoring the fact that Appellant was part and participle of the SBV Naraina at the relevant time and entitled to get the information sought. He added that even such information was earlier shared with him on whatsapp in an informal manner, so why there is a denial under the RTI Act. He prayed for the Commission to direct the Respondent to provide the relevant information and further urged to penalize the PIOs. Here it is clarified that a reporting officer may have initiated and returned the annual performance appraisal report (APAR) of an employee while he being his/her superordinate but once the same is accepted by the competent authority, it becomes a third party personal information and hence, reporting officer cannot claim a copy of the same as a matter of right under the RTI Act.
Respondent No. 2 submitted that information as is available on record has been provided to the Appellant pointwise. For point No. 4 of RTI application, he stated that records other than timetable are not available in their office as the timetable prepared is dynamic in nature which keeps on changing as per the need of the school. He clarified that names of guest teachers (subject wise) are available with them which he showed to the Commission during the hearing and handed over a copy of the same to the Appellant which is taken on record. Further, the Respondent No. 2 clarified that there is no duty charter prepared other than the ones given to the Appellant. He also handed over a copy of orders dated 2018 of the teacher's duty allocation to the Appellant during the hearing which is taken on record.
In case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/121831, Respondent No. 1 reiterated the contents of her averred written submissions as mentioned in the preceding paragraphs and also handed over a copy of the written submission to the Appellant during the course of hearing, which is taken on record.
Appellant contended that he sought copy of biometric attendance of concerned habitual late comer teachers to expose their faults at that time for which he also made the complaints, however, the information has been wrongly denied by the PIO ignoring the fact that Appellant was serving SBV, Naraina at the relevant time and also being one of the complainants. He prayed the Commission to initiate penal action against the Respondents for the alleged mala fide denial of biometric attendance records.
Page 23 of 30In case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299, the appellant expressed his dissatisfaction with the reply on the ground that firstly the extract of register furnished against para (a) and (d) of RTI application was not legible. Further, the inquiry report on his own complaint regarding fabrication and manipulation of attendance records by the erring teachers, has not been given by the PIO ignoring the fact that Appellant himself was the complainant and has every right to get the report of inquiry.
Respondent No. 1 appraised the Commission that point- wise reply along with information has already been provided to the Appellant. However, she volunteered to provide a legible copy of the register against para (a) and (d) to the Appellant and also agreed to intimate the broad outcome on Appellant's complaint.
In case File No. CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140390, the Appellant is aggrieved by the fact that copy of noting on his complaint was not supplied against Point No. 1 of RTI applications and further, the information on other points have been wrongly denied by the PIO under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act ignoring the fact that Appellant has filed complaints against the third party of which he is seeking information.
Respondent reiterated the contents of their reply and written submission as quoted in the preceding paragraphs.
In case File No. CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140391, the Appellant again contested denial of information by the PIO under the alleged garb of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. He contended that SBV, Naraina ignored the fact that he made complaints against 12 officials in respect of Fraudulent LTC availed by them for which after inquiry by DDE (SW-A) on 26.06.2018 amount of Rs. 9,77,957/- was recovered by the auditors for which he deserves appreciation, however, it was totally ignored by the SBV. He added that in this regard, he sought information through 11 points regarding Disciplinary proceedings pending against the concerned third-party officials against whom he made complaints. The information was later provided to him; therefore, he prayed the Commission that erring PIOs should be punished for the delay so caused in giving the late information.
Page 24 of 30Respondent reiterated the contents of their written submission as quoted above.
In case File Nos. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/144717 and CIC/DIRED/A/2024/101764, the Appellant did not contest the merits of revised reply, however, he contended that there is a huge delay in compliance of FAA's order for which penal action should be taken against the Respondent.
Respondent submitted that reply has already been provided to the Appellant initially and also in compliance with the FAA's order.
Lastly, Respondent No. 1 claimed that Appellant is a habitual RTI Applicant who filed multiple RTI applications and baseless complaints seeking same information just to harass Respondent Public Authority, nonetheless, reply against each application has been provided to the Appellant and there is no mala fide in withholding the information.
Decision:
The Commission after adverting to facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records observes that as far as RTI applications are concerned in each case (except for case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299 and CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140390), appropriate response has been provided by the Respondents in terms of the RTI Act which is upheld by the Commission.
The Commission further notes that the Appellant during hearing raised his voice multiple times and broke the decorum of the Commission due to which he was pacified by the bench and it is noteworthy that he being in the noble profession of teaching is not following norms of basic decent behaviour in representing his case and in this regard, the Commission would like to advise the Appellant to exercise due care and restrain from such objectionable conduct during the case proceedings.
Now, coming to the case wise observation, it has been observed in case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/121831, CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140391, the Respondent Page 25 of 30 appropriately denied the biometric attendance and other requested information of the third party as it attracts exemption of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Here, attention of the Appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner & Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794.The following was thus held:
"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."
Further, with regards to the information sought by the Appellant regarding the biometric attendance records, the Commission finds it pertinent to quote the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the decision of Dr. R S Gupta vs. Govt. of NCTD & Ors. in LPA 207/2020 dated 31.08.2020, wherein the Hon'ble Court held as under:
"10. ... The attendance record is part of service record which is a matter between the employee and the employer and ordinarily these aspects are governed by the service rules which fall under the expression "personal Page 26 of 30 information". The disclosure of this information ex-facie has no relationship to any public activity or public interest and pertinently, the appellant is not able to explain or show any nexus between the personal information sought and the public interest involved, for seeking its disclosure. Thus, in our view, in absence of even a remote connection with any larger public interest, disclosure of information would be exempted as the same would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Petitioner has thus failed to establish that the information sought for is for any public interest, much less 'larger public interest'."
In view of this, the arguments tendered by the Appellant during hearing that his entitlement for information being part of SBV, Naraina at relevant time is rendered inconsequential.
In case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299 and CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140390, although the responses given by the Respondent are partially appropriate, however, it is noteworthy that Appellant being the complainant has right to know the broad outcome of his complaints in terms of the RTI Act. Hence, the Commission directs Ms. Seema Roy Chaudhary, PIO, DDE Zone 20, GNCTD, Delhi to provide legible copy of register against para (a) and (d) of the RTI Application. In the event the legible records/register is not available, then she should afford opportunity of inspection of records to the Appellant pertaining to the said points of RTI application on a mutually decided date and time within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Intimation of date and time should be sent to the Appellant well in advance in writing. Copy of documents as may be desired by the Appellant be provided upon receipt of requisite fees as per RTI Rules. While complying with the directions, information which are exempt as per the RTI Act may be redacted.
In case File No. CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140391:
It transpired during the hearing that Appellant's claim of having saved Government's money by pointing out fraudulent LTC claim is not wholly true because the claimant as per the record travelled but did not book their tickets as per the instructions contained in DoPT instructions/letter in this regard. They deposited/refunded the amount involved in the Government treasury. As Page 27 of 30 such, it appears not to be a case of fraud rather a simple case unauthorized claim which has been resolved with recovery.
In case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133299 and CIC/GNCTD/A/2023/140390:
Ms. Seema Roy Chaudhary, PIO, DDE Zone 20, GNCTD, Delhi is directed to intimate the broad outcome of the Appellant's complaints under reference in both these Appeals i.e. within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
FAA to ensure compliance of the directions.
In case File No. CIC/DIRED/A/2023/133300, CIC/DIRED/A/2023/144717 and CIC/DIRED/A/2023/101764, the Commission finds no scope for relief to be granted in these matters.
Be that as it may, the Commission notes that more than 20 cases of the Appellant have already been adjudicated by this Commission in the past against same/different Public Authorities. It is also worth noting that eight Second Appeals are listed today i.e. on 13.08.2024 for hearing which shows that the Appellant has filed numerous RTI Applications with different public authorities. This intention of the Appellant militates against the spirit of the RTI Act whose primary objective is providing information to the citizen.
It appears that the Appellant has misconceived the role of the Central Information Commission, and it is apparent from his submissions in each and every case that he is trying to create a fear among the PIOs and the FAAs by pressing for penalty against them. The CIC is an adjudicating body to give relief only in such cases where it is found that the relevant admissible information is not provided to the applicant. However, in the present cases, the PIO and the FAA cannot be expected to satisfy the Appellant, when the appellant is not in search of information but only trying to settle his baseless grievances against the department by filing multiple, vexatious, repetitive RTI applications followed by appeals. All the Second Appeals are inter-related in some manner or the other and are clearly indicative of absolute misuse of the provisions of the RTI Act.Page 28 of 30
The Commission further finds it expedient to note that the PIOs are already doing this assignment under the RTI Act in addition to their normal duties. In this regard, the Commission would like to draw attention of the parties towards a recent decision of this bench, wherein aspect of "misuse of the right to information Act by the Appellant" has been explained in a detailed manner. The relevant extract of ratio laid down in the matter of Nandkishor Gupta v. CPIO, Northwestern Railway, Head Quarter Office, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur - 302017 is as under:
"...It is noted that the Appellant is a serving government employee under the Respondent Public Authority. Therefore, while taking recourse to the RTI Act for his service-related matters, the Appellant is expected to approach the Public Authorities with clean hands. Under the provisions of the RTI Act, while the CPIO/PIO is obliged to facilitate free flow of information to the citizen, it is equally incumbent upon the information seeker to put his/her application in the simplest form possible so that CPIO/PIO can understand the request unambiguously. The Commission is also mindful of the fact that the unenviable noble duty assigned under the RTI Act to Central Public Information Officers (CPIO) and First Appellate Authorities (FAA) by the respective Public Authorities is 'in addition to their normal duties and without any additional remuneration paid for the same' for which they must devote extra efforts, time, and energy.
The Appellant being a serving employee of the respondent Public Authority has as much right to information as is available to any other citizen of India. However, such a serving employee has an added obligation to frame the request in simplest and most easily understood form possible because he/she knows the circumstances under which his/her colleagues are working while also discharging the additional duty as CPIO and FAA. Therefore, the conduct of the Appellant in the present matter, to say the least, is questionable and is not appreciated.
Accordingly, the appellant is cautioned and admonished wherein he should keep in mind that the RTI Act should be used judiciously, sensibly and responsibly so that purpose of the RTI Act would not be defeated. The Commission leaves it to the concerned disciplinary authority for any consequent action in the matter."Page 29 of 30
In view of the above, the Appellant is advised to make judicious and sensible use of his right to information in future.
With these observations, these appeals are disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणर् सत्यानपर् प्रनर्) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Regional Director of Education.
South District, C-4 Lane, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057.Page 30 of 30
Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)