CIC: The lease deed is an open document, which can also be obtained from the Sub Registrar’s office – CIC: Providing document which is already under his possession is futile; If copy has not been provided, furnish it to the appellant
The appellant is present along with her husband Mr. S.K.Gaur. The Public Authority is represented by Mr. Umrao Singh, Additional Director along with the third party Mr. Naresh Kumar Gaur and Amit Gaur.
2. The Appellant by his RTI application had sought information regarding her complaint against Gyan Jyoti Public School Chawla and on the basis of which inspection committee was formed. She wanted copy of the inspection report, copy of the lease deed of the school and copy of land ownership proof. PIO for point no. 1 stated that it was under process and for other points stated that it was third party information. Being unsatisfied, appellant filed first appeal. FAA dismissed the appeal stating that the information was already furnished to the appellant. Being unsatisfied, appellant approached the Commission.
3. Both the parties made their submissions including the third party. The respondent authority submitted that the inspection report referred to in the RTI application is finalized and they can provide the copy of the same to the appellant. As regards the providing of the lease deed copy, the third party expressed their objections saying that the appellant, with whom they have already made settlement, will misuse the same by engaging them in some unnecessary litigation. Hence they are not willing to provide the copy of the same to the appellant.
4. Representative of Gyan Jyoti Public School states that the appellant Smt Sunita Sharma alias Sunita Gaur alias Sunita Kumari is the wife of Sh. Suresh Kumar Gaur who is the real brother of Naresh Kumar Gaur and that they were involved in family property dispute since 1991 which was amicably resolved in the year 2006 as per the Deed of Family Settlement. He states that the appellant and her husband harbor ill feeling and personnel vendetta towards Naresh Kumar Gaur, with the aim of maligning the reputation of school. Since 1992, they have been filing frivolous and bogus complaints to various departments Viz CVC, Income Tax department, CBSE and police stations on a regular basis to inflict damage to the reputation of the school. He also stated that the appellant had already obtained the lease deed and other documents from the Sub Registrar Office
4. The Commission having heard the submissions and perused the record, holds that there is no merit in the contentions put forward by the third party, as the lease deed is an open document, which can also be obtained from the Sub Registrar’s office. However, the commission observes that if what has been stated by the representative of the school is true, then providing document which is already under his possession is futile. In view of the above stated facts, the Commission directs the PIO to check with the concerned Sub Registrar Office whether the copy as sought by the appellant has been either provided to him or his Wife. If the same has been provided, then the PIO need not furnish any addition copy and if no copy has been provided then, he is directed to obtain the copy of the same from the school/S.R Office, and furnish it to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. The Commission also advices the appellant not to use the RTI mechanism for settling their personal disputes, the information if any should be restricted to the legal provision of the Act and in Public Interest. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Citation: Sunita Sharma v. Dte of Eduction(South West-B), GNCTD in Case No. CIC/SA/A/2015/000778