Copy of answersheet of daughter admitted under EWS quota in an unaided public school was sought claiming that she was descriminated against - CIC summoned the Principal to appear it u/s 18(3)(a); parents to encourage child to spend more time on learning
The appellant is present along with her daughter Saba Khan. The Public Authority was represented by A.K.Goel, ADE.
2. Appellant through his RTI application had sought a copy of the answer sheet of Ms Saba Khan in maths and science subjects in compartmental exam of class 9th held on 25.04.2012 and 26.04.2012. PIO by his letter dated 04.06.2014 informed the appellant that the information is not maintained in the office. Being unsatisfied with the information furnished, appellant filed first appeal. FAA upheld the reply of PIO. Being unsatisfied, appellant approached the Commission.
3. Both the parties made their submissions. The appellant submitted that her daughter was studying in an unaided public school, namely, Upras Vidyalaya, under the EWS quota. The HOS was prejudiced against EWS students and her daughter is one such victim. Her daughter Saba Khan was made to fail in the two subjects, namely, Maths and Science and was not promoted to 10th class. She has also given compartmental, but was not passed. Three such students who did not qualify compartmental, were promoted into 10th at the discretion of the HOS/Principal. As her daughter was confident that she did well, she wanted a copy of her answer sheet in both the subjects. But the school did not give, instead they gave grading sheet under CGPA wherein her daughter was shown as getting 3.6 on 9point scale, and she was given E1 and E2 grades. [E1 means between 2130 and E2 means between 020 marks]. The school authorities have not given exact marks sheet.
4. The concerned school is not represented in this hearing. The respondent officer from the Directorate of Education, Mr. AK Goel submitted that the concerned school is an unaided public school and they also support the cause of the student.
5. Having heard the submissions and perused the record, the Commission observes that it is the duty of the HOS/Principal to explain the student her deficiencies by showing her answer sheet where she has to improve etc. The Commission has perused her grading sheet of the student, where the student is given remark as “EIOP” which means the student is eligible for improved performance. Hence, the school should help the student to improve her performance. Therefore, the Commission in exercise of its powers under section 18(3)(a), summons the HOS/Principal, Mr. P.K.Srivastava to appear before the Commission on 19/6/2015 at 2.30 PM along with report sheets/answer sheets of Saba Khan and her other classmates whom the appellant has alleged as failed, but the HOS had promoted them to 10th Class. The Commission also directs the respondent officer/Dte of Education to take this RTI application as complaint as there is an allegation of discrimination among EWS Students under RTE Act, which resulted in nonpromotion of the EWS Student from 9th to 10th class and enquire into the same and furnish a report to the Commission before the next hearing date.
6. The Commission also noticed that the performance of the student at the studies is below average and needs to improve. It is proper for the parents to encourage child to spend more time on improving the status of learning instead of confronting every one in the school without doing proper home work.
6. The Commission orders accordingly.
(M Sridhar Acharyulu)
Citation: Ms. Shamshera Begum vs. Dte of Education(South West-A) in Case NO. CIC/SA/A/2014/001099