Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'school'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Request for Community Support
  • Connect with Community
  • Learn about RTI
  • Website News & Support
  • Read RTI News & Stories
  • RTI Act Critics's RTI Act Critics Topics
  • Fans of RTI India's Fans of RTI India Topics
  • Insurance Consumer's Insurance Consumer Topics
  • Activists of Transparency and Accountability's Activists of Transparency and Accountability Topics
  • Issues with BWSSB's Issues with BWSSB Topics
  • Law+Order-Bangalore-32's Law+Order-Bangalore-32 Topics
  • Issues With Electricity Board's Issues With Electricity Board Topics
  • RTI Activists's RTI Activists Topics
  • YOGA's YOGA Topics
  • help each other's help each other Topics
  • forest and wild life's forest and wild life Topics
  • Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C.'s Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C. Topics
  • RTI Activist+Politics's RTI Activist+Politics Topics
  • hostels and lodging places's hostels and lodging places Topics
  • RTI Activists in Rajasthan.'s RTI Activists in Rajasthan. Topics
  • RTI info warriors in Haryana's RTI info warriors in Haryana Topics
  • DisABILITY Rights and RTI's DisABILITY Rights and RTI Topics
  • Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI.'s Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI. Topics
  • Eco club's Eco club Topics
  • Self Employment in Sport's Self Employment in Sport Topics
  • RTI related to land issue's RTI related to land issue Topics
  • Open SourceTechnology support to RTI's Open SourceTechnology support to RTI Topics
  • TRAP group's TRAP group Topics
  • Odisha RTI Activists's Odisha RTI Activists Topics
  • right to information activists's right to information activists Topics
  • Mumbai's Mumbai Topics
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA Topics
  • Chartered Accountants's Chartered Accountants Topics
  • ngosamachar's ngosamachar Topics
  • Growing INDIA's Growing INDIA Topics
  • we are all friends.'s we are all friends. Topics
  • RTI for Government employees's RTI for Government employees Topics
  • Dhanus - Pending Salaries's Dhanus - Pending Salaries Topics
  • Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors's Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors Topics
  • Mahamumbai's Mahamumbai Topics
  • FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS's FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION's ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Topics
  • MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS's MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS Topics
  • INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES's INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • AAKANKSHA's AAKANKSHA Topics
  • RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE's RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • JVG DUPED CUST.'s JVG DUPED CUST. Topics
  • anti corrupt police's anti corrupt police Topics
  • Save Girl in Punjab's Save Girl in Punjab Topics
  • Rent Apartment in US's Rent Apartment in US Topics
  • RTI Kerala's RTI Kerala Topics
  • maharashtra's maharashtra Topics
  • Right Way Of India(RTI)'s Right Way Of India(RTI) Topics
  • Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India's Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India Topics
  • Navi Mumbai's Navi Mumbai Topics
  • electricity curruption in up's electricity curruption in up Topics
  • SHARE n STOCKS trading's SHARE n STOCKS trading Topics
  • WEWANTJUSTICE's WEWANTJUSTICE Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS's MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS Topics
  • ex-serviceman activities's ex-serviceman activities Topics
  • SSCC's SSCC Topics
  • Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates's Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates Topics
  • jharkhand RTI activist group's jharkhand RTI activist group Topics
  • Suhail's Suhail Topics
  • govt.servant's govt.servant Topics
  • RTI Uttar pradesh's RTI Uttar pradesh Topics
  • anti-corruption team's anti-corruption team Topics
  • Manaism's Manaism Topics
  • Insurance's Insurance Topics
  • sonitpur datri sewa samity's sonitpur datri sewa samity Topics
  • indian youth manch's indian youth manch Topics
  • HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies's HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies Topics
  • youth's youth Topics
  • aastha's aastha Topics
  • RTI for Citizens's RTI for Citizens Topics
  • ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA's ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA Topics
  • learn always's learn always Topics
  • R.T.I.'s R.T.I. Topics
  • Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana's Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana Topics
  • Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna's Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna Topics
  • MBA, business and new entrepreneur.....'s MBA, business and new entrepreneur..... Topics
  • students seeking help's students seeking help Topics
  • UN-DO CORRUPTION's UN-DO CORRUPTION Topics
  • RTI Corporate's RTI Corporate Topics
  • Electrical group's Electrical group Topics
  • V4LRights's V4LRights Topics
  • Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool's Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool Topics
  • Gaming's Gaming Topics
  • WE Born to help's WE Born to help Topics
  • help the elderly citizen's help the elderly citizen Topics
  • NATIONAL ISSUE's NATIONAL ISSUE Topics
  • Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association's Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association Topics
  • Corruption free Country's Corruption free Country Topics
  • surajyam's surajyam Topics
  • kanpurvictims's kanpurvictims Topics
  • Railway Group A Services's Railway Group A Services Topics
  • RTI BALLIA's RTI BALLIA Topics
  • Encroachment of public property by private giants's Encroachment of public property by private giants Topics
  • Case Status - Anti Corruption's Case Status - Anti Corruption Topics
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT Topics
  • Aam Aadmi (The Common Man)'s Aam Aadmi (The Common Man) Topics
  • Court Marriage in Punjab's Court Marriage in Punjab Topics
  • ALL's ALL Topics
  • Youth India Social Group (YISG)'s Youth India Social Group (YISG) Topics
  • ye kya fandda h's ye kya fandda h Topics
  • mindset's mindset Topics
  • anti corruption's anti corruption Topics
  • activism's activism Topics
  • common's common Topics
  • state group's state group Topics
  • social help group's social help group Topics
  • landlords of uttar pradesh's landlords of uttar pradesh Topics
  • Concern Citizens Forum for India's Concern Citizens Forum for India Topics
  • edusystem's edusystem Topics
  • Ratna Jyoti's Ratna Jyoti Topics
  • development in indian village's development in indian village Topics
  • technovision's technovision Topics
  • Mighty India's Mighty India Topics
  • Against Corporate Fraud's Against Corporate Fraud Topics
  • Stop crime's Stop crime Topics
  • PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION.'s PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION. Topics
  • NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti's NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Topics
  • Authenticated Public Plateform's Authenticated Public Plateform Topics
  • shalin's shalin Topics
  • terminater's terminater Topics
  • RTI Wind Energy's RTI Wind Energy Topics
  • AMICE (INDIA)'s AMICE (INDIA) Topics
  • HELPING HAND !'s HELPING HAND ! Topics
  • Go..................?'s Go..................? Topics
  • Co-Op Housing Society's Co-Op Housing Society Topics
  • we are equal's we are equal Topics
  • Phoenix Deals's Phoenix Deals Topics
  • AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS's AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS Topics
  • Theft Cases in chandigarh's Theft Cases in chandigarh Topics
  • Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits's Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits Topics
  • Solar Systems's Solar Systems Topics
  • Get aware about ur Education and related rights's Get aware about ur Education and related rights Topics
  • Save Mumbai's Save Mumbai Topics
  • Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board's Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board Topics
  • ashayen's ashayen Topics
  • unemployment's unemployment Topics
  • Employee Solution's Employee Solution Topics
  • is kanpur university against sc/st's is kanpur university against sc/st Topics
  • URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL's URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL Topics
  • RTI HELP INDIA's RTI HELP INDIA Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics

Categories

  • Uncategorized
  • Section 18 (1)
  • Section 11
  • For Common Man
  • Section 16
  • Section 2(h)
  • Section 8 (1)(j)
  • Simplified RTI
  • Government Employee and RTI
  • RTI Act 2005
  • Success Stories
  • Exempt Organisation
  • DG IT
  • Section 8 (1) (e)
  • Section 2 (h) (d) (i)
  • Supreme Court Decisions
  • Section 2 (j) (i)
  • Section 2
  • Section 8
  • Section 20
  • Section 19
  • SIC Punjab
  • High Court Decisions
  • Section 9
  • Section 24
  • DoPT
  • RTI Awareness
  • Section 6 (3)
  • Section 6
  • Section 2 (f)
  • Opinion
  • Department of Posts
  • Ministry of Railways
  • Departments
  • Ministry of Home Affairs
  • Ministry of Corporate Affairs
  • Ministry of Law & Justice
  • Government of NCT of Delhi
  • Delhi Police
  • Ministry of Human Resource Development
  • Staff Selection Commission
  • Court Decisions
  • CIC Decisions
  • Activism
  • Section 25
  • University
  • Section 7
  • Ministry of Agriculture
  • Section 3
  • RTI Discussions
  • Section 19 (8) (b)
  • BSNL & MTNL
  • Section (1) (d)
  • Section 8 (1) (d)
  • DIrectorate of Education
  • Govt of NCT of Delhi
  • Cooperative Housing Society
  • RTI for School
  • Member RTI
  • Municipal Corporation
  • Ministry of Defence

Categories

  • RTI Directory
  • Important RTI Decisions
  • Other Important Court Decisions
  • Sample RTI
  • Acts & Circulars

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 19 results

  1. Pradip adroja

    About CTET

    I want to know that person passed from Gujarat secondary education board can apply in CTET and get a job in kendriya vidhyalay.
  2. Shrawan

    Examination Marks RTI

    Version 1.0.0

    22 downloads

    RTI Application for Competitive Examination Marks ( Check Application Format and mode of payment of RTI Application Fee from RTI Rules applicable to the public authority ) For guidance in writing and submitting RTI Applications, please refer to: How to Fill RTI Application Form
  3. Central Information Commission gave a title to the decision in which CPIO steadfast fought against the disgruntled employee, who blatantly misused RTI, subverted process of law with malicious intentions as Fight of a bold officer against abuse of RTI and directed the Public Authority to place this order in their official website under the heading ‘Fight of a bold officer against abuse of RTI’ in their RTI Section. (If you want to file an RTI , please go to our guide to file RTI online) Shri Sanjay Chaturvedi posted as a Principal & APIO in the Govt. Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya Chirag Enclave, New Delhi submitted to CIC that he is aggrieved with repeated RTI applications filed by Shri Ranjan Sharma (RTI Applicant) and the order passed by the Appellate Authority who allowed inspection of records and directed to provide the documents, free of cost. As the First Appellate Authority has no power to review its order once passed and communicated. CPIO being aggrieved with the decision of the First Appellate Authority, have approached Commission under Section 19 (3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. For any RTI help, head straight to our forum and post your query. Fight of a bold officer against abuse of RTI He stated that RTI Applicant, Shri Ranjan Sharma has been charge sheeted under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 and he Shri Sanjay Chaturvedi (Appellant) was appointed as Inquiry Officer in the matter by the Department. Since the initiation of enquiry, a number of RTI applications have been filed seeking unrelated information which does not warrant any public interest in any way as the sole motive behind filing these RTI applications was just to harass him. The Commission on perusal of the documents on record and after hearing the Appellant was of the opinion that this was a clear case of harassing a sincere officer by Shri Ranjan Sharma though filing frivolous RTI applications against Shri Sanjay Chaturvedi for being an Inquiry Officer in the disciplinary case against Shri Ranjan Sharma. The commission noted that the RTI Applicant had adopted a stratagem of contrivance to delay the disciplinary proceedings and even went to the extent of threatening civil and criminal action against the inquiry officer. Sanjay Chaturvedi Vs Ranjan Sharma Citation number: CIC/AD/A/2013/001721­SA dated 4.7.2014 (This is an extract of the decision available on the CIC public website, and is meant for generating interest in our readers only. For the true detailed and authentic copy you must read and download the decision from the CIC website. If you have any query, kindly post it over our website here!)
  4. [caption id=attachment_2086" align="aligncenter" width="400] ICSE vs CBSE[/caption] The fate of Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations which conducts the Indian Certificate of Secondary Education (ICSE for Class X & XII) under the RTI Act 2005 is still not decided. However, you cannot get the information from ICSE board under RTI as of now like; certified copies of evaluated answer sheets. Earlier the Delhi high court in Council For The Indian School ... vs Ajay Jhuria & Anr on 24 July, 2012, observed that "according to the learned counsel for the petitioner since the Council is neither owned nor it is substantially financed and, because of the clear statement made in the said communication dated 24.03.2006, nor is it controlled by Central Government, the question of the Council being regarded as public authority does not arise at all." High court further states that "we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge as also by the Central Information Commission. We leave the question of, whether the Council is a public authority or not within the meaning of The Right to Information Act, 2005, open and to be decided in an appropriate case." The case came up to CIC hearing on 06.12.2013, wherein Vide RTI dt 4.7.13, appellant had sought certified copies of evaluated answer sheets of Chemistry paper I and Paper II in respect of Shri S.Gleams Raman, their son. CIC observed that "A perusal of records shows that Shri OP Kejriwal, Information Commissioner, in appeal no. CIC/OK/A/2006/00303 dt 24.10.08 had held the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination as a public authority. This order of the Commission had been upheld by the Single Bench of the Delhi High Court vide their order dt 30.5.11 (W.P.©8537/2008 and CM 16410/2008). Subsequently on an appeal filed by the ISCE(LPA 617/2011) a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi vide their judgement delivered on 24.7.12, had observed as follows: “5. In view of this offer given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we feel that we need not go into the question whether the Council is a public authority or not, however, we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge as also by the Central Information Commission. We leave the question of, whether the Council is a public authority or not within the meaning of the Right to Information Act, 2005, open and to be decided in an appropriate case.” In the light of the above decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the appeal was disposed of by Sh. Rajiv Mathur, Central Information Commissioner. The decision can be downloaded from here: http://rti.cc/34 File No.CIC/RM/A/2013/000967 Appellant: Shri S.G. Raman, Ranchi Public Authority: Council For The Indian School Certificate Examination, New Delhi Date of Hearing: 06.12.2013 Date of decision: 06.12.2013 (Rajiv Mathur), Central Information Commissioner ICSE vs CBSE - only one is under RTI! However, if you read the 'About the Council' Page, following is stated "The Council has been so constituted as to secure suitable representation of: Government of India, State Governments/Union Territories in which there are Schools affiliated to the Council, the Inter-State Board for Anglo-Indian Education, the Association of Indian Universities, the Association of Heads of Anglo-Indian Schools, the Indian Public Schools’ Conference, the Association of Schools for the ISC Examination and members co-opted by the Executive Committee of the Council... As a leader in the provision of world-wide educational endeavours, the Council's vast experience and wisdom is called upon in many forums such as the Council of Boards of School Education in India (COBSE), State Education Departments, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), the National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT), the Ministry for Human Resource Development and the Planning Commission, affirming the intrinsic integrity and credibility of the Council and the system it espouses." It's an irony that one one hand CBSE is under RTI ICSE is not. what's your views? Related articles across the web What is ICSE board ICSE specimen paper
  5. rtiindia

    RTI for CBSE Affiliated School

    [caption id=attachment_2082" align="aligncenter" width="460] RTI for CBSE Affiliated School[/caption] If the School is under the CBSE Affiliation rules, and if any information by use of RTI for CBSE Affiliated School is sought about that school, then it is the information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and has to be furnished. In a decision delivered on 03.12.2013, CIC has referred the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in WP© No.7265/2007 dt 25 Sept 2009. The decision states that: “8. Information as defined in Section 2(f) means details or material available with the public authority. The later portion of Section 2(f) expands the definition to include details or material which can be accessed under any other law from others. The two definitions have to be read harmoniously. The term held by or under the control of any public authority in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act has to be read in a manner that it effectuates and is in harmony with the definition of the term information as defined in Section 2(f). The said expression used in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act should not be read in a manner that it negates or nullifies definition of the term information in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. It is well settled that an interpretation which renders another provision or part thereof redundant or superfluous should be avoided. Information as defined in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act includes in its ambit, the information relating to any private body which can be accessed by public authority under any law for the time being in force. Therefore, if a public authority has a right and is entitled to access information from a private body, under any other law, it is information as defined in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The term held by the or under the control of the public authority used in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act will include information which the public authority is entitled to access under any other law from a private body. A private body need not be a public authority and the said term private body has been used to distinguish and in contradistinction to the term public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. Thus, information which a public authority is entitled to access, under any law, from private body, is information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and has to be furnished.” RTI for CBSE Affiliated School Vide RTI dt 17.7.13, appellant had sought information on 20 points relating to Sarti Beri Rajaram Public School. Appellant insisted that he should be provided information on all 20 points and if the same is not available with the CBSE, they should obtain the information from the school concerned and pass it on to him. The Commission directed the PIO to go through the Hon'ble High Court order observation and if the information sought by the appellant is accessible to them, under CBSE Affiliation rules, the same may be collected from the school and furnished to the appellant. If not, a suitable response be provided to the appellant within one month from date of receipt of the order. For further information, you may read the The CBSE Affiliation website is located here: http://rti.cc/2- CBSE Affiliated rules here: http://rti.cc/2x The numerous discussions on our forum regarding School and RTI here: http://rti.cc/2y Here is the earlier article of us regarding RTI for Private School: http://rti.cc/2z DECISION: The Decision can be downloaded and read from here: http://rti.cc/30 File No.CIC/RM/A/2013/000969 Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, Shamli Public Authority: CBSE, RO, Allahabad Date of Hearing: 03.12.2013 Date of decision: 03.12.2013 (Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner
  6. Central Information Commission has directed UPSC to allow inspection of evaluated answer sheet of Civil Service Exams. CIC has also allowed obtaining the certified photocopies of evaluated answer sheet of Civil Service Exams to the candidates. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Bandopadyay v/s CBSE is very clear and a candidate has a right to inspect/obtain a photocopy of his evaluated answer sheet. However, UPSC contended that it is the stand of the public authority i.e. UPSC that the information is denied u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, notwithstanding the orders of the Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Bandopadhyay. It was submitted by UPSC that the orders of the Supreme Court are applicable to CBSE and not to the UPSC. However, CIC in it's decision observed that the stand taken by the UPSC is in clear violation of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Commission did not concur the decision of the CPIO/Appellate Authority of UPSC to not provide the information to the candidate and in terms of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, instead the Commission directed CPIO, UPSC to provide certified photocopies of answer sheets of Civil Services 2012 Mains Examination, sought by the applicant in his RTI, within two weeks from date of receipt of the order. Evaluated answer sheet of Civil Service Exams During the hearing Public Authority from UPSC was represented by Dr Kulbir Singh, Jt Director/CPIO and Shri Imran Farid, Under Secretary(CSM), UPSC. Earlier Shri Gorav, of Distt. Fatehgarh, Haryana Vide his RTI dt 21.5.13, had sought information on 7 points relating to Civil Services Mains Exam 2011 and 2012 as also seeking photocopies of his answer sheets for the two exams. CPIO vide letter dt 25.6.13, provided a point wise response and informed the appellant that evaluated answer sheets for 2011 has outlived their retention period and the answer sheet for 2012 was denied u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. An appeal was filed on 9.7.13 questioning the denial of photocopy. AA vide order dt 12.8.13, upheld the decision of the CPIO. Submissions made by the public authority were heard. CPIO submitted that in respect of query no. ©(ii) where the appellant has sought photocopies of answer sheet in respect of 2012 Main Examination, it is the stand of the public authority that the information is denied u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, notwithstanding the orders of the Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Bandopadhyay. It is his submission that the orders of the Supreme Court are applicable to CBSE and not to the UPSC. In the absence of the appellant, his views could not be ascertained. DECISION (Quoted verbatim from the decision) The Commission does not concur with the decision of the CPIO/AA. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Bandopadyay v/s CBSE is very clear and a candidate has a right to inspect/obtain a photocopy of his evaluated answer sheet. The stand taken by the UPSC is in clear violation of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In terms of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Commission directs CPIO to provide certified photocopies of answer sheets of Civil Services 2012 Mains Examination, sought by the appellant in para 2©(ii) of his RTI, within two weeks from date of receipt of the order. As the matter has been unduly delayed, the photocopies shall be provided free of cost. If you have queries on the above, you may post it at our forums here. Do you have anything to add to this decision? Please post it in the comments below.
  7. After his son not getting good marks in the MBBS exam, father filed RTI to obtain copy of question paper and answer keys and disclosure of marks from the University. RTI Applicant stated that supply of the documents after completion of the admission process would be embarrassing, humiliating and prejudice to the life and liberty of his son, therefore if he is given a speedy access to the said documents, then his ranking is likely to move­ up. However, Central Information Commission did not agree to this and recorded that "Complainant has failed to prove how the non­ disclosure of information affects the life and liberty of his son. (If you want to file RTI Online, do read our guide on how to file RTI online here) His son getting poor marks and his son’s belief in having done well in Botany and Zoology is not good enough to invoke the ‘life and liberty’ clause. It is not proper and correct to treat every application for disclosure of marks sheet or key etc, as life and liberty related application. Hence that plea was rejected by CIC. Urgency Clause On the issue of urgency clause, CIC stated that if the disclosure as sought reveals increase in marks of appellant’s son, and admissions get closed, he might lose one year which could be irreparable. This is the only ground on which the urgency plea could be accepted and priority in hearing could be granted. But, because the appellant sought compensation of Rs 5 lac and penalty be imposed on the public authority, CIC observed that there is no justification for hearing it on priority. Immediate imposition of penalty The Commission further observed that if complainant wanted to treat this complaint as complaint only, there is no need for urgent hearing because, heavens do not fall if there is no immediate imposition of penalty and grant of compensation which can wait for the other side to present their case. Thus CIC finds that there is no urgency in the complaint and directs the matter to be listed for hearing as per its turn. Statutory rules prescribed by any Public Authority do not get overridden by the provisions of the RTI Act The RTI application also raised the following issue before the commission "Whether the University or for that matter any Public Authority has to supply the documents as per the fees prescribed under the RTI Act when the Complainant/Appellant seeks information under RTI Act or according to the fees prescribed by the Public Authority." In case Sh. Deepak Agnihotri Vs. State Bank of India F. no. CIC/SM/A/2009/001883­AT, by the Information Commissioner Shri A.N. Tiwari: In my understanding it would be entirely fallacious to hold that because of the presence of the RTI Act and the Rules , public authorities are completely barred from fixing the charges at which they would try to sell or disclose information. RTI Act enjoins that Public Authority could progressively bring more and more information into the public domain and authorize their disclosure. RTI Act, does not , at any place, say that such public authorities would be barred from placing any fee or price or a charge on the disclosure of the information brought by them into the public domain. In Registrar of Companies & Ors. versus Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Ors. in WP © No. 11271/2009, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi of the Delhi High Court discussed in his decision dated 01.06.2012 as follows: The said rules being statutory in nature and specific in their application, do not get overridden by the rules framed under the RTI Act with regard to prescription of fee for supply of information, which is general in nature, and apply to all kinds of applications made under the RTI Act to seek information. Therefore, commission decided that the statutory rules prescribed by any Public Authority do not get overridden by the provisions of the RTI Act and accordingly dismisses the instant Appeal while upholding the CPIO and AA’s decision. The Appellant was advised to pay the charges laid down for verification of details of PNR and obtain the information which may be provided by the PIO. Citation: CIC/SA/C/2014/000268 dated 07.07.2014 Dr. Jeet Singh Mann Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University You can discuss this decision at our forum here! This is an extract of the decision available on the CIC public website, and is meant for generating interest in our readers only. For the true detailed and authentic copy you must download the decision from the CIC website or from here!
  8. This is a case study of how after two years of suffering and harassment, a teacher got his respect back by using an RTI. A must read for all of us who are still exploring about RTI. If you want us to help you in drafting or correcting your RTI, please post at our forum here. You can also learn how to file RTI Online by following our guide. On a false complaint of a student, an inquiry was ordered against a maths teacher wherein feedback was taken from students asking them whether they liked the teacher or not. The school dropped the charges against the teacher after finding that there was some kind of politics at play in the school and there was an attempt to vilify the teacher. RTI brought respect to teacher after 2 years However, this did not end here. The report that the charges has been dropped against him, was never told to him from the past 2 years. He was put to serious suffering, agony and anguish for the last two year's. When he filed RTI to know the inquiry report and feedback received, this was denied by PIO. The school went ahead of suppressing the vital information to First Appellate Authority, ie Directorate of Education, GNCTD, Delhi. The teacher filed a second appeal with the central information commission (cic) but school didn't give any bit of information to the teacher even then. During the hearing at CIC, however the school did produce the inquiry report wherein it finally revealed that the charges were already dropped on Feb 2013 and that it was never told to the teacher. It was indeed a very pathetic non-responsive attitude of the PIO against a teacher who was liked by most of the students and he is made to suffer without any relief or information about the dropping of charges against him. CIC recorded that PIO has a harassing attitude as was evident from the denial of teacher right, and from the fact that there was an attempt of suppression of information from FAA. Teacher has the right to have a copy of the inquiry report, whether it is favorable or not. Teacher also has right under RTI Act but also under the principles of natural justice, especially when the inquiry into allegations was completed. CIC issued show cause notice to PIO for imposing maximum penalty, ordered that certified copies of inquiry must be supplied and ordered token payment of Rs. 1000/- as compensation. The citation is available here Vinod Kr. Malik Vs. Dte of Education, GNCTD (This is an extract of the decision available on the CIC public website, and is meant for generating interest in our readers only. For the true detailed and authentic copy you must read and download the decision from the CIC website)
  9. Obtaining information from Unaided Recognised schools is possible by applicability of section 2 (f) of RTI Act by which information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority has to be provided. Thus when an RTI applicant wanted to know the action taken against the S.M. Arya Public School for making commercial use of the school premises, Central Information Commission allowed it by directing Directorate of Education to use its regulatory powers under Rules, 50, 179(2), 180 and 183 of the DSER&A ­1973. (You can read many related discussions on Schools and RTI at our forum, and if you have any query, you can ask from our experts here!) Commercial use of the school premises Under section Rule 179 (2) of the THE DELHI SCHOOL EDUCATION ACT, 1973 (DSER&A­ 1973), accounts of every aided school shall be open to inspection by auditors, inspecting officers of Directorate of Education and CAG, where as under Rule 180 the account management and auditing /inspection of unaided Private school shall also be open for auditing, inspection by Director of Education and CAG. Further, Rule 183 of DSER&A­ 1973 speaks about proper accounting and management of fees and contribution received by management committee of school. Thus exercising powers under section 2(f) of the RTI Act using its regulatory powers under Rules, 50, 179(2), 180 and 183 of the DSER&A­ 1973, Directorate of Education was directed to provide information under RTI, about commercial use of the school premises by S.M. Arya Public School. Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act states that “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advises, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; The case is available at CIC website here! Do you have anything to add to this story, kindly post it over comments below or go ahead and post your views over forum. (This is an extract of the decision available on the CIC public website, and is meant for generating interest in our readers only. For the true detailed and authentic copy you must read and download the decision from the CIC website)
  10. An employee, against whom an inquiry was conducted, has been asking for the copy of the inquiry report from past 6 years. He claims to have already obtained from the office concerned, he also claims to have obtained a copy of noting of DDE unofficially. But according to PIO the files are missing. The Commission directed the Directorate of Education GNCTD, Delhi to make a thorough investigation and search for the file which is not missing, but misplaced, as stated by the appellant and report the same. (If you have any query regarding RTI, kindly post it over our forum here!) The employee has every right to have a copy of inquiry report and the relevant annexure, under the principles of... natural justice and according to guidelines of the departmental enquiry, so that he can go in appeal if he is aggrieved by the inquiry report. An employee cannot be kept in uncertainty of charges against him eternally. The appellant complained that he is waiting for the last 6 years. Search for the file which is not missing but misplaced The Commission notes the pathetic state of affairs with reference to the important files containing documents which are crucial for appellant’s right to employment. The DDE/PIO has a duty to trace the file, share it with the appellant because the appellant cannot be kept in uncertainty of charges against him eternally. The Commission also directs the respondent authority to find who was the controller of records at the relevant point of time and who might have been responsible for the misplacing the file. A systematic inquiry must be initiated in this regard also. The citation is available here: Ms. Upma Saxena Vs. Dte of Education, File No.CIC/AD/A/2013/001261­SA dated 20­06­2014
  11. A senior citizen was made to wait for three years to get his due remuneration of working as Guest teacher in a school. When confronted by Central Information Commission, Dte of Education agreed that the Guest teacher was entitled for the remuneration. The Commission found this delay as a serious lapse on the part of the Public Authority, who indulged in unnecessary correspondence among various officers of the same Department, instead of making payment to a senior citizen like the RTI applicant of the age of 69 years, who has been made to wait for 3 years. Not only CIC directed the Public authority to pay within a week but also ordered to pay 125% more than the remuneration apart from the remuneration and interest, within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the order for the delay in information supplied. At our forums we have a lot of discussions on School & RTI and if you have any questions to ask regarding RTI please go ahead and post it here! In this case the CIC went further ahead and directed the PIO/APIO(NW)/Principal of the GBSS School and the DDE (Planning) North­West District to show cause why penalty cannot be imposed on them for the inordinate delay in furnishing the information about the payment of dues to the RTI applicant. Guest Teacher Mr. Attar Singh Kaushik aged 69 years submitted that he is seeking information through his RTI application dt. 3­9­2012 regarding the non­payment of his salary for the relevant period he worked as guest teacher. PIO replied on 14­9­2012 saying that the payment of appellant’s salary is the responsibility of the concerned Head of the School. Being unsatisfied with the reply of PIO, the appellant preferred First Appeal dt. 27­12­2012. As he could not receive any order from the FAA in the prescribed time, he approached the Commission with the 2nd appeal. Decision: (Verbatim as per CIC decision) Commission heard the submissions. "The appellant is entitled to remuneration as a guest teacher for the teaching and relating work for the period from 7­3­2011 to 31­3­2011. The Principal of the school calculated the amount as Rs.7,200/­ to be paid to the appellant. He has quoted sanctions from Planning section, etc. and presented papers for non­payment of the dues to the appellant. The Commission finds this delay as a serious lapse on the part of the Public Authority, who is indulging in unnecessary correspondence among various officers of the same Department, instead of making payment to a senior citizen like the appellant of the age of 69 years, who has been made to wait for 3 years. The respondents agree that the appellant is entitled to receive the payment. The Commission, therefore, directs the respondent authority to inform by what date the payment of Rs.7,200/­ will be released, within one week along with interest on the same, from the date it was due to be paid till the date on which it is being paid at a simple interest prevailing in the banks. The Commission also directs the respondent authority to pay the appellant a compensation of Rs.9,000/­ apart from the remuneration and interest, within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the order for the delay in information supplied. The Commission also directs the PIO/APIO(NW)/Principal of the concerned School and the DDE(Planning) North­West District to show cause why penalty cannot be imposed on them for the inordinate delay in furnishing the information about the payment of dues to the appellant." The decision is available here at CIC website: Mr. Attar Singh Kaushik Vs. Dte. Of Education, Delhi
  12. As per the Delhi Education Act, blood relations cannot be more than one in the Governing body of the school. On a basis of complaint, Directorate of Education had inspected G.D.Soni D.A.V. Senior Secondary School, Pusa Road, New Delhi in reference to the constitution of its governing body. An RTI applicant sought action taken on the special inspection conducted by the Directorate of Education on the complaint. Not satisfied by response, applicant approached CIC who asked Directorate of education to explain whether there was any action taken against the said school for having two real brothers as executive members of the Governing body The RTI Applicant has alleged that as one person, who retired as Additional Director of Education, is included in the said governing body of the School, the Directorate of Education is hesitant to go strict against the School. The appellant submitted that through his 1st RTI application dt. 22­11­2012, he is seeking information as to action taken on the special inspection conducted by the Directorate of Education on the complaint dated 16­-8-­2010 on which PIO replied on 10-12 2012 . Two real brothers Being unsatisfied with the reply of PIO, the appellant preferred First Appeal. Having received no reply from the First Appellate Authority within the prescribed period, the appellant has approached the commission in Second Appeal. Central Information Commission had passed the order to the Directorate of Education directing them to explain whether there was any action taken against the said school for having two real brothers as executive members of the Governing body. The case is available here at CIC website! There are numerous discussions over our forum in reference to School and RTI here!
  13. Whether a school is public authority or private body, it has a duty Under sections 4 and 8 of Delhi Education Act 1973, to abide by the regulatory conditions of service, payment of salaries as prescribed, etc for which the school has to maintain the records, which provide an inherent and implied right to information to their employees. Under Right to Education Act 2009 also the recognized school is under an obligation to appoint eligible teachers and provide them prescribed wages. This also reveals that it has given inherent right to information to the teachers from their employers. If the RTI applicant in her capacity as ex-employee of the school has right to information under any legislation such as Delhi Education Act, that will fall under the purview of section 2(f) of the RTI Act which gives the PIO, Appellate authority and the Information Commissioner, power to enforce her right to information. This was decided by Chief Information commission in the latest decision available here. The RTI appellant submitted that through his RTI application, she is seeking copies of her appointment letter issued by Jindal Public School, staff statement of all the employees, acquaintance roles (PBR), certified copy of her service book, etc. She sought copy of her service book which is maintained by the school and the school claims that it would not fall under RTI Act. CIC stated that as an employee/former employee of the school, he / she has every right to information about her service book, leave record, appointment details and any other information pertaining to her service. CIC directed the school to discharge their obligation under law by furnishing the information sought by the teacher to the school authority, who in turn is directed to provide the same to her within 21 days. You can participate in the numerous discussions on such issues at our forum here What is your reaction? Comment below!
  14. Public Information Officer of Sri GURU TEGH BAHADUR KHALSA COLLEGE acted both as PIO and First Appellate Authority. Applicant had sought information as to action taken on his letter relating to irregularities in selection of students for admission under the Sports quota and not satisfied with the response of Public Information Officer, Sri GURU TEGH BAHADUR KHALSA COLLEGE, the applicant filed the first appeal. However, instead of a reply by First Appellate Authority, PIO again replied to the applicant. A response to the appeal should have been responded to by the AA and not the PIO himself as per the RTI Act. Named after the 9th Sikh Guru Sri GURU TEGH BAHADUR KHALSA COLLEGE is a constituent of University of Delhi. It is a co-educational institution established in the year 1951 by Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management Committee to instill ideals of self-sacrifice and service among the youth. It draws inspiration from the life of the Guru who laid down his life in Delhi to uphold freedom of belief and conscience and whose sacrifice and martyrdom for secular ideas are unique in the annals of our country. As per the website of the school, RTI applications can be made on plain piece of paper duly signed by the applicant. The application would only be considered complete and eligible for answer when submitted with Rs10. The application must be submitted to the Administrative Officer during office hours. The Appellate officer is the principal of the college. SGTB Khalsa College Public Information Officer This matter came up to CIC for hearing. CIC recorded that "The Commission has considered the submissions made and finds that as per the provisions of the RTI Act, a response to the appeal should have been responded to by the AA and not the PIO himself. It is also found that the appellant has addressed his appeal dt 26.10.13 to the PIO, rather than to the FAA. The Commission directs the Principal, SGTB Khalsa College, to provide a written response to the appellant". File No.CIC/RM/A/2013/001171 Appellant: Shri Nardev Singh Tyagi, New Delhi Public Authority: Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Khalsa College, DU, Delhi Date of Hearing: 27.01.2014 (Image screenshot taken from main school website for illustration purpose only)
  15. When asked about the University rules relating to obtaining permission to proceed abroad on a private visit, first Public Information Officer writes stating ‘usual terms and conditions’ , and 1st Appellate Authority conveniently bypassed the main issue on which information was sought and disposed of the appeal. The information sought in the RTI was very simple and it was expected that a Dy Registrar of the AMU would have obtained the information and provided the same to the appellant. This was not done. Aligarh Muslim University evading RTI CIC went to an extent to direct Vice Chancellor to make officers handling RTI should be made aware of the responsibility. The CIC recorded that "A copy of this order be marked to Lt Gen (retd) Zameer Uddin Shah, Vice Chancellor, Aligarh Muslim University with directions to ensure that officials of the AMU entrusted with the responsibility of implementing the RTI Act, are made aware of their responsibility and act in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In the instant case, the Dy Registrar (Admn-T) has failed to provide a speaking order and has conveniently skirted query no.1 of the RTI." The AMU website regarding RTI can be visited here. Vide RTI dt 11.7.13 appellant had sought information on the following: University rules relating to private visits abroad and copy of the resolution of the Executive and Academic Council for the same. Sanctioning authority for casual leave of teachers. CPIO/SO(T) vide letter dt 16.7.13 provided a response to query no.2 and transferred query no.1 to CPIO, Council Section. CPIO/SO Council, vide letter dt 29.7.13, expressed inability to trace the Resolution. Submissions made by the appellant and public authority were heard by CIC. Appellant submitted that the AA/Dy Registrar(Admn-T) had vide his letter dt 22.5.13, addressed to the appellant, had made a reference to ‘usual terms and conditions’ in response to a letter from her. Vide her RTI addressed to the CPIO/SO(T), the appellant had sought University rules relating to obtaining permission to proceed abroad on a private visit. SO(T) for some inexplicable reasons, transferred this query to CPIO(Councils) and the AA Shri SM Suroor Athar in his order dt 26.8.13, conveniently bypassed the main issue on which information had been sought and disposed of the appeal. CPIOs present were unable to provide any reasonable explanation for not providing the information. File No.CIC/RM/A/2013/001127 Dr. Rachna Kaushal, Aligarh Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 22.01.2014 Rajiv Mathur, Central Information Commissioner
  16. In yet another case of blatant disregard to RTI Act, Allahabad University Registrar has yet again made deliberate attempt to deny information to RTI Applicant. The Commission also observed during various hearings that the Registrar of the University who is designated as an Appellate Authority, does not respond to any of the appeals put up before him. In the light of his continued intransigence, the VC may like to initiate appropriate action against the Registrar. The CIC has recoded in the decision that "A copy of this order be marked to the Vice Chancellor, Allahabad University, Prof A.K.Singh with directions to ensure that the officials tasked with the responsibility of providing information under the RTI Act discharge their duties in accordance with the provisions of the Act. It seems that a deliberate attempt has been made in the instant case to deny information to the appellant, Shri Avinash Dube. The Commission also observed during various hearings that the Registrar of the University who is designated as an AA, does not respond to any of the appeals put up before him. In the light of his continued intransigence, the VC may like to initiate appropriate action against the Registrar. The Commission would like to have a report from the Vice Chancellor on the measures taken in regard to setting right the deficiencies observed in implementation of various provisions of the RTI Act, within thirty days from date of receipt of this order." Registrar Allahabad University Earlier Vide RTI dt 21.7.12, RTI Applicant had sought information on 3 points relating to purchase of utensils and chairs for 2010-11 for the hostels of Allahabad University. An appeal was filed on 14.2.13 as no information was provided. Appellant submitted that despite a lapse of over one and a half years, information sought has been deliberately denied to him. Moreover, the FAA Prof VP Singh has failed to hear his first appeal. CIC disposed of the appeal recording that "The Commission finds that various officials of the University are deliberately acting in a manner which is against the spirit of the RTI Act. " You should read the RTI Act Section 20 (2) in this reference which states "...recommend for disciplinary action against the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, under the service rules applicable to him." Learn how to become RTI Activist here and do something about it. File No.CIC/RM/A/2013/001244 Shri Avinash Dube, Allahabad Vs Allahabad University, Allahabad 20.01.2014
  17. Central University of Jharkhand provided nil response to the RTI Application after a lapse of almost four months. CIC recorded that "It clearly indicates that the Central University of Jharkhand is making a mockery of the provisions of the RTI Act and there seems to be no application of mind either on part of the CPIO or the FAA." A show cause notice was issued to the Dr KP Mahanta, CPIO as to why action u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act be not initiated against him for the unwarranted delay in providing the information. CIC also recorded that "If there are other persons responsible for delay in providing information to the appellant, the CPIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause notice and direct them to provide a response to the Commission. A copy of this order was also marked to Prof Darlando T.Khathing, Vice Chancellor, Central University, Jharkhand, with directions to ensure that the provisions of the RTI Act are adhered to, both in letter and spirit. The officials dealing with the Right to Information should ensure that information is provided within the stipulated timeframe. The Central University of Jharkhand came into being under the Central Universities Act, 2009 that envisages establishing and incorporating universities for teaching and research in the various states on 1st of March, 2009. The University offers 5-year Integrated Courses that are carefully designed to meet the multidisciplinary needs including Choice-based Credit system (CBCS) across 10 Semesters. Admission will be based on the score obtained by a candidate in the Central University Common Entrance Test (CUCET- 2013). The details of the RTI can be seen in this webpage of the University. Central University of Jharkhand Vide RTI dt 8.5.13, appellant had sought information on 2 points seeking rules relating to treatment. Advocate for the public authority submitted that in response to appeal dt 10.6.13, FAA vide letter dt 17.7.13 directed the CPIO to provide a response to the appellant provided the information sought was not exempted. CPIO vide order dt 4.10.13, informed the appellant that there is no such order. Appellant submitted that his RTI was filed on 8.5.13 and the CPIO has provided a response finally on 4.10.13 and that too after a lapse of almost four months. (Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner File No.CIC/RM/A/2013/000730, Decision: http://rti.cc/3z Appellant: Kumar Pankaj Anand, Morabadi, Ranchi Public Authority: Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi Date of Hearing: 21.11.2013 Date of decision: 16.12.2013 Here are the various discussions relating to Universities and RTI
  18. [caption id=attachment_47" align="alignright" width="300] Obtaining evaluated answer sheets Under RTI[/caption] There are many decisions and discussions on obtaining evaluated answer sheets under RTI. Not only answer keys, but you will also be given copies of your evaluated answer sheets / OMR sheets for departmental exams. See these decisions on the links: CIC Decision 1 & CIC Decision 2. If you want to read details of the court decisions regarding the evaluated answer sheets under RTI, here are the abstract of the details available at our site which details about JUDGEMENTS & DECISIONS WHICH HAVE PERMITTED DISCLOSURE OF EVALUATED ANSWER SHEETS UNDER RTI. The original blog post may be read here posted by J.P. Shah Here is the summary on what you can obtain information regarding evaluated answer sheets under RTI: Mark list and selection list as per the order of merit A copy of evaluated answer sheets of all the pages of all the subjects. A copy of test key answer sheets of all the pages of all the subjects The court decision are as under i]. University Exams: 49 page judgement dated 05-02-2009 of divisional bench of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta headed by Chief Justice in M.A.T. No. 275 of 2008-University of Calcutta & ors. Vs Pritam Rooj. This is judgement of divisional bench of a High Court headed by Chief Justice and is available on website of High Court of Calcutta. ii]Departmental Promotion Exams: High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in WP©.No. 6532 of 2006© Treesa Irish Vs CPIO Dept of Post, Govt. of India and others dated 30-08-2010 [27 pages] iii] Public Service Com Exam: In CWJC NO. 160665 of 2008 (Bihar Public Service Commission Vs. State Information Commission and others) decided on 11.12.2008, the High Court of Judicature at Patna upheld the order passed by the State Information Commission directing supply of photocopy of the answer books of two papers to the information seeker, of an examination conducted by Bihar Public Service Commission. The Hon’ble High Court directed that, “…..the BPSC shall supply a certified copy of the answer books demanded by the petitioner, as undertaken by the learned Advocate General on its behalf, within a period of three weeks from today.” iv] Professional Exams: High Court of Delhi on 30.04.2009 in W.P.© 8529/2009 Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, v/s. Central Information Commission, New Delhi. v] Departmental Exams: WP © No.30963 of 2006 (J), (V.B.Santosh vs. CPIO o/o the Post Master General, Kerala Circle) of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala vide order dated 29.2.2008. vi] University Exams: W.P.(MD)NO.4815 of 2008 of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on 13/09/2010 - R.Ramasamy v/s 1.The Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education, Chennai, 2.The Registrar, T.N. Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai and others. vii] All types of answer sheets: STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB, Chandigadh .dated 27-05-2010 CC No. 3033 of 2009:Sh. Surinder Kumar Vs Public Information Officer, O/o Commissioner, Excise & Taxation Punjab, [iMPORTANT]. Viii] Rajasthan Information Commission decisions: A.)RIC decision dated 26.7.2010 for Appeal no.398/2010 for Nivedita Chandravat v/s Exam Controller, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur. B.)RIC decision dated 08.02.2011 for Appeal no.2483/2010 for Kumari Taramani Agarwal v/s Exam Controller, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur. C.)RIC decision dated 22.4.2009 for Appeal no.235/2009 for Kumari Taramani Agrawal v/s Chief Exam controller, University of Rajasthan. IX] Judgement dated 09-08-2011 of 2 Judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in CIVIL APPEAL NO.6454 OF 2011 Obtaining evaluated answer sheets under RTI Here is the summary on what you can get regarding evaluated answer sheets under RTI: Mark list and selection list as per the order of merit A copy of evaluated answer sheets of all the pages of all the subjects. A copy of test key answer sheets of all the pages of all the subjects And here is our format posted by our team member Sh. J.P. Shah here to obtain information regarding evaluated answer sheets under RTI. Please go through the news reported and aggregated by our team regarding the evaluated answer sheet under rti
  19. It is an unequal fight between an Institution and the student when an institution insist that discontinuation of studies before completion of the course by any student, the entire course fee is to be charged from the said student and the fee once paid is not be refunded in any circumstances. This is a clear Exploitation of student. In the judgement pronounced by CIC, they have opined that the college authorities are being unfair and unjust to the appellant, in as much as they have refused to refund even a part of the fee of over Rs.3.00 lakhs. CIC has expressed anguish to an extent of stating that "This is sheer exploitation of a hapless student." Seema Dental College, Rishikesh, which was responded to by the said college vide letter dated 3.8.13, in which the college authorities have stated that as per regulations of the college, in case of discontinuation of studies before completion of the course by any student, the entire course fee is to be charged from the said student and the fee once paid is not be refunded in any circumstances. The college authorities have also stated that both the appellant and his daughter, Ms.Shivani Sundriyal, had sworn affidavits to this effect at the time of Shivani’s admission in the college. Exploitation of student In the judgement pronounced by CIC it stated that: "The position is explained to the appellant. It is an unequal fight between an Institution and the student. Even though the appellant and her daughter had given an undertaking renouncing their rights on the fee deposited at the time of admission, yet, in my opinion, the college authorities are being unfair and unjust to the appellant, in as much as they have refused to refund even a part of the fee of over Rs.3.00 lakhs. This is sheer exploitation of a hapless student. The appellant has already received a copy of the letter of the college under reference. It is open to him to take recourse to law, if he is so advised. The matter is being closed at the Commission’s end. In many cases the universities steadfastly maintain that it is a clear policy not to return original certificates unless the student paid the entire course fee for which he was enrolled. In one of the consumer cases the Thanjavur District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum has ordered the Sastra Deemed University, Thanjavur, to refund a student Rs 1,12,000 paid as tuition fee for five semesters. In another case Agrieved Party: Swanpnil Kadam Case Against: SIG Engineering College, Pune (SIGCE), Ruling by: Maharashtra State Consumer Forum Order : Full refund with costs. The Maharashtra State consumer forum ordered the refund of full fees with costs, to a student who took admission in one college and moved to another. Even if the college puts out a notice that they will not refund the fees, or make you sign an agreement about non- refundability of fees, then it is bad in law. Many consumer courts have held such an opinion and ruled in favor of the student. However, it is also true that irrespective of the nature of education you want to pursue, all education providers are service providers. The seminal 1978 judgment by the Supreme Court (BSB Vs A Rajappa & Ors SC 578) established that education is an industry and students are customers. You may also be interested in many forum discussions regarding this issue here! What is your opinion on Colleges and Universities doing Exploitation of Student?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy