Copy of the answer sheets in English Language of Applicant in ICSE Examination was not provided - Respondent: Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations is not a public authority under Section 2(h) of RTI Act - CIC: Denial upheld

O R D E R

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 23.05.2019seeking the following information:

‘Please provide a copy of the answer sheets in English Language of Applicant Siddhant Mukherjee having UID 6982878 in ICSE Examination 2019 pursuant to the recheck request #RR62973 upon payment of appropriate charges by email and by post’

The Assistant Secretary vide letter dated 29.05.2019, informed the Appellant as under:

Dear Sir,

This has reference to your RTI Application dated 23.05.2019 seeking information under RTI Act, 2005

Kindly note that the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations, New Delhi, is not a public authority under Section 2(h) “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; of the said Act.

However, there is no provision in the CISCE Regulations and syllabuses 2019 for providing the copies of the corrected answer scripts, therefore the same cannot be provided to you.

No IPO was found attached with your application.

Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 14.06.2019, which has not been adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority as per available records.

Grounds for Second Appeal:

The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. Appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing: The Appellant did not participate in hearing despite being served the hearing notice.

The Respondent submitted that the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations, New Delhi, (hereinafter called the 'Council') is a financially and functionally independent body. He further submitted that the ‘Council’ is a completely unaided educational body and is registered as a Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and was neither established under the Constitution or under any law or any notification / order of the Government nor controlled and financed by the Central or State Government. The Council therefore, cannot be termed as a 'public authority' so as to make it amenable to coverage under the provisions of RTI Act, 2005. He further relied upon an earlier judgment of the Commission vide Second Appeal File No. CIC/MOHRD/C/2019/133799 titled as Anil Karla vs. CPIO, heard and decided on 12.04.2021 dealing with the similar issue of the instant RTI Application.

Decision:

Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that Respondent office has established that it is not a public authority under Section 2(h) “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; of the RTI Act and is as such not amenable to the jurisdiction of the RTI Act in view of the previous decisions of this Hon’ble Commission in the matter of Anil Karla vs. CPIO bearing File No. CIC/MOHRD/C/2019/133799 which has already been heard and decided on 12.04.2021.

The Commission further relies on judgment dated 01.09.2016 passed by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Writ Petition No. 12549 (W) of 2016 titled Dinesh Sinha and others Vs. The Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations and others, wherein it has been held that the Council is not a "public authority" under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission further relies on judgment of the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide its order dated 24.07.2012 in the case of CISCE Vs. Ajay Jhuria bearing LPA No. 617/2011, wherein it has observed in paras 2 and 3 of the judgment/order that prima-facie there is merit in the contention that Council does not fall within the definition of a "Public Authority" under section 2(h) “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution; (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government; of the RTI Act, 2005.

With the above observations, the instant Second Appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

The Appeal, hereby, stands disposed of.

Amita Pandove

Information Commissioner

Citation: Yakshay Chheda v. Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination in CIC/MOHRD/A/2019/650057, Date: 11.03.2022