O R D E R

Information Sought:

The Complainant filed an online RTI application dated 04.08.2020 seeking information on the following four points:

“In July 2019, MHRD released note regarding Audit conducted on Kendriya vidyalaya buildings across the country. In this Audit, MHRD found around 21 Kendriya vidyalaya buildings across the country have been fond partially or fully unsafe. Regarding this audit report I need below information.

1) Could you please provide that complete audit report in PDF file and also link where I can download the file where MHRD found around 21 Kendriya vidyalaya buildings are unsafe.

2) I see 21 Kendriya vidyalaya buildings are found unsafe. Could you please provide information about on which grounds these buildings are declared as unsafe in audit. Please provide reasons for declaring these as unsafe buildings for each of these 21 unsafe kendriya vidyalaya buildings separately I detail.

3) Continuation to 2nd request, please also provide information on what are the corrective actions government or kendriya vidyalaya or respective authority taken for each of these 21 unsafe buildings to covert these unsafe buildings to safe buildings. Please provide this information of action taken for each of these

21 vidyalayas separately in detail.

4) Please provide information regarding, in this audit report, is there any kendra vidyalaya building which is found unsafe due to the reason of number of floors in the buildings exceeded three floors (including ground floor).”

Er. A. K. Agarwal, Executive Engineer & PIO, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (Hqrs.), New Delhi vide letter dated 31.08.2020, denied information u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 to the Complainant as under:

Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 01.09.2020. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 24.09.2020, upheld the CPIO’s reply.

Grounds for Complaint:

The Complainant filed a Complaint u/s 18 of the RTI Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. Complainant requested the Commission to take appropriate legal action against the Respondent.

Submissions made by Complainant and Respondent during Hearing:

The Complainant did not participate despite being served the hearing notice.

The Respondent submitted that the information sought in the present RTI Application cannot be divulged to the Complainant as the same is confidential in nature.

Decision:

Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that the instant matter is a complaint filed under Section 18 of the RTI Act. Hence, the only adjudication required to be made by the Commission is to determine if the information has been denied with a mala fide intention or unreasonable cause to the information seeker. The Commission further observes that reply provided by Shri Anil Agrawal, Executive Engineer & CPIO, KVS (HQ), vide letter dated 31.08.2020 and submission made during the hearing are contradictory in nature and the same establishes the mala fide intention. The Commission admonishes the Respondent public authority for providing such mindless and incongruous replies. The conduct of the aforesaid official during the hearing of the instant Complaint is viewed adversely by the Bench. The Commission furthermore observes that the Respondent public authority has treated the instant RTI Application/First Appeal and Complaint in a cavalier manner. The said conduct of the Respondent public authority amounts to gross violation of the provisions of the RTI Act. It also raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information is with mala fide intent.

In view of the above, the Commission deems it fit to direct the registry of this bench to issue show-cause notice to Shri Anil Agrawal, Executive Engineer & CPIO, KVS (HQ), for providing contradictory and vague replies to the Complainant, as to why action should not be initiated against him under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act for failing to compl