CIC: The RTI application & the first appeal were addressed to ‘NCTE, New Delhi’ which is not the complete address of the respondent authority; Hence, there is a doubt whether they were actually received - CIC: Provide an appropriate reply as per the Act
1. Shri Aditya Vashishth, the appellant had sent a complaint on 06.10.2015 to the office of President, NCTE regarding the irregularities in the recruitment process of Assistant teachers in Primary Schools in Uttar Pradesh. He sought daily progress report of action taken on his complaint dated 06.10.2015 along with the reasons for not taking any action on the complaint and the details of the officer concerned who was responsible for not taking any action on the complaint.
2. Not having received any information from the CPIO, the appellant approached the FAA. The FAA does not appear to have adjudicated in the matter. Aggrieved, the appellant came in second appeal before the Commission stating that required information had not been provided.
3. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant’s representative stated that the appellant had filed a complaint on 06.10.2015 to the NCTE regarding the selection of ineligible candidates for the post of Asstt. Teacher in Primary Schools, Uttar Pradesh. In his RTI application he sought the action taken or in the contrary no action having been taken, reasons of inaction on his complaint but no information/communication was received from the CPIO.
4. The CPIO stated that on going through the records it was found that the neither the RTI application nor the First appeal were traceable in the office and also no reply/communication was sent to the appellant in this regard.
5. On hearing both the parties and after going through the records the Commission observes that the RTI application dated 05.03.2016 and first appeal dated 08.04.2016 filed by the appellant do not have complete address of the CPIO and the FAA. The RTI application and the first appeal both are addressed to ‘NCTE, New Delhi’ which is not the complete address of the respondent authority. Hence, there is a doubt whether the RTI application and the first appeal in question sent through the post were actually received in the office of the respondent authority. In view of this, during the hearing the appellant has handed over a copy of RTI application dated 05.03.2016 to the CPIO. The Commission now directs the CPIO to provide an appropriate reply keeping the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 in view to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order keeping in view the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The appeal is disposed of.
Citation: Shri Aditya Vashishth v. National Council for Teacher Education in Appeal No. CIC/SA/A/2016/001648/MP, Date of Decision: October 13, 2017