Central Information Commission
Jitendra Sharma vs National Council For Teacher Education on 26 July, 2021
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/NCTED/A/2020/100898
Jitendra Sharma ....अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
National Council for Teacher Education,
RTI Cell, G 7, Sector 10, Dwarka, New
Delhi - 110075. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 26/07/2021
Date of Decision : 26/07/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 15/09/2019
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 29/10/2019
First Appellate Authority's order : 22/11/2019
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 03/01/2020
1
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.09.2019 seeking following information pertaining to Show Cause Notices issued under Sec. 17 of the NCTE Act 1993 to the Govt. Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan for BEd Course vide F. No. / NRC/NCTE/RJ-49/2018/191525 dated 24 March 2018, and for MEd Course vide F. No./NRC/NCTE/RJ-3/2018/192047 dated 28 March 2018, including inter-alia;
1. Provide the attested photocopies of the affidavits submitted by Government Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Bikaner (Rajasthan) for compliance of Regulations 2014 for its B.Ed and M.Ed Courses.
2. Provide the attested photocopies of the papers or the documents submitted by the Principal, IASE, Bikaner in response to above stated two Show Cause Notices.
3. Provide theattested photocopies of the decisions taken by the NRC, NCTE on the responses received from the Principal, IASE, Bikaner on the above stated two Show Cause Notices.
4. In case no responses have been received till date from the Principal, IASE, Bikaner please provide copies of documents which show the consequential action taken by the NRC, NCTE.
5. Provide the attested photocopies of the affidavits submitted by Government institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Ajmer (Rajasthan) for compliance of Regulations 2014 for its B.Ed and M.Ed Courses.
The copies of documents pertaining to or showing the compliance of the revised recognition Orders for its B.Ed and M.Ed Courses by the Government Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Ajmer (Rajasthan) that have been submitted by it to the Office of the Regional Director, NRC, NCTE.
6. If the Government Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Ajmer (Rajasthan) has not submitted compliance of the revised Recognition Orders issued for its BEd and M.Ed Courses till date please provide the attested photocopies of the Show Cause Notices issued if any to the Institute by the NRC, NCTE under Sec. 17 of the NCTE Act 1993.
7. If the Government Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Ajmer submitted the replies to the Show Cause Notices issued to it under Sec. 17 for its failure to submit compliance of Regulations 2014 to the NRC, NCTE, for its B.Ed and M.Ed Courses, please provide the attested photocopies of the documents submitted by it to NRC, NCTE.
28. If the Government Institute of Advanced Studies in Education, Ajmer has not submitted any reply and documents in response to Show Cause Notices if issued to it for noncompliance by it of Regulations 2014 for its B.Ed and M.Ed Courses, please provide attested photocopies of documents showing the consequential action taken by NRC, NCTE."
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 29.10.2019. FAA's order dated 22.11.2019 directed the PIO (NRC), NCTE to furnish the appropriate reply to the applicantwithin 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.
Subsequently, the CPIO informed the Appellant on 28.11.2019 that the information has been requested from the concerned Institute and will be provided upon its receipt.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-receipt of the information, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
During the pendency of the Second Appeal, the Appellant sent a rejoinder dated 23.01.2020 wherein he had stated that he has received the reply of the CPIO dated 10.01.2020 but is not satisfied with the same as most of the points of the RTI Application were not answered.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio conference. Respondent: Rajesh Borkar, PS & PIO (WRC) present through audio conference.
The Appellant stated that he is aggrieved with the fact that proper reply/information was not provided by the CPIO in a time bound manner and even the copy of the revised reply of the CPIO dated 22.07.2021 was not received by him through proper channel as he accessed a copy of the same from the records of the Commission shortly prior to the hearing.
The PIO tendered his unconditional regret and stated that the earlier reply was provided by the then PIO and assured that in future reply to RTI Applications will be provided in a point-wise manner.3
Decision:
The Commission based on a perusal of the facts on record observes that the revised reply of 22.07.2021 provided by the CPIO cogently suffices the information sought for in the RTI Application and is as per the provisions of the RTI Act.
However, the Commission is irked by the fact that the then PIO failed to provide a proper reply to the RTI Application as he failed to specify the points of the RTI Application with respect to which he was providing the enclosures.
The Commission records severe admonition for the then PIO's callous approach while replying to the instant RTI Application.
The present PIO shall ensure service of a copy of this order to Naveen Malik, the then PIO for taking note of the admonition of the Commission.
Further, the present PIO is also directed to ensure that due diligence is exercised in future while responding to the RTI Applications and to the extent possible, the reply to the RTI Applications should be sent to the applicants via email in addition to the postal medium for easier and timely accessibility of the information.
With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 4