ORDER

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 09.11.2022 seeking information on the following points:

(i) In Social Science CBSE Syllabus 6th Class Book Page No ninety nine Velirkal Velalar Give photocopies of historical documents of given.

(ii) In Social Science CBSE Syllabus 6th Class Book Page No ninety nine Velirkal Velalar Give photocopies of material meaning.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 10.11.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“The information pertaining to this institute is Not Applicable.”

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 12.11.2022 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 16.11.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“While going through your original application, it is understood that the information sought is not pertaining to IISER TVM which is a higher educational research institute established by Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education, Govt. of India.

Unfortunately, your application could not be forwarded by CPIO of this institute to the concerned public authority i.e., CBSE due to some technical problems, failing which the reply was given by him as Not Applicable. Since there is no provision for FAA to transfer to the concerned public authority online, a hardcopy of your application is being posted to the same.”

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint dated 19.11.2022.

5. The Complainant remained absent during the hearing despite notice and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Hariharan Krishna, Dy. Registrar (IISER) and Mr. Jayram, Assistant Secretary, (CBSE) attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The respondent Mr. Hariharan Krishna, Dy. Registrar (IISER while defending their case inter alia submitted that the RTI application was responded on 10.11.2022. The information sought did not pertain to them. The respondent Mr. Jayram, Assistant Secretary, (CBSE), submitted that the RTI application was forwarded to the NCERT as the information sought pertained to them only.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observed that the RTI application has been responded on 10.11.2022. It was not the case that the respondent had not given any reply. Moreover, the complainant neither filed any additional objection nor presented himself before the Commission to controvert the averments made by the respondent and further agitate the matter. Hence, the submissions of the respondent were taken on record. That being so and the reply having been given to the complainant, there appears to be no merit in the complaint. With this observation, the complaint is closed. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties. (Anandi Ramalingam) ( आनंदी राम लंगमआनंदी राम लंगम ) आनंदी राम लंगमआनंदी राम लंगम Information Commissioner (सूचनासूचना आयुआयु) सूचनासूचनाआयुआयु दनांक/Date: 28.02.2024 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कनल एस एस िछकारा, (रटायड) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 (०११-२६१८०५१८) Addresses of the parties: <br/>

1. The CPIO M/o. Education, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell, Maruthamala PO, Vithura, Thiruvananthapuram-695551

2. The CPIO Central Board of Secondary Education, AS & Nodal CPIO, RTI Branch, Regional Office: Chennai, New No.-13, (Old No.-1633-A), J-Block, 16th Main Road, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-600040

3. Sridharan Nambivayal