के ኚ᭾ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ मागग,मुननरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई नि्ቤी, New Delhi – 110067 नितीय अपील सं्ቅा / Second Appeal No. CIC/CBSED/A/2023/116117 Pramod Lohiya … अपीलकताग/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO:

Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi …्ቚनतवािीगण/Respondent Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

Hon’ble Commissioner _ANANDI RAMALINGAM

O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.09.2022 seeking information on the following points:

(i) “According to your office record, Mahavir Senior Model School registered students of 1l-th class in CBSE in the academic session 2021-22 for LOC of academic session 2022-23, provide certified copy of list of these registered students.

(ii) According to your office record, Mahavir Senior Model School submitted the examination forms of students for Class 12th CBSE Board Exam for academic session 2022-23 for LOC, provide certified copy of the list of these class 12th students who submitted the examination form till 31.08.2022 for LOC.

(iii) According to your office record, Mahavir Senior Model School submitted the examination forms of students for Class 12th CBSE Board Exam academic session 2022-23 for LOC, provide certified copy of the list of these class 12th students who submitted the examination form from 01.09.2022 to 15.09.2022 for LOC.

(iv) According to your office record, Mahavir Senior Model School paid late fee of some students to CBSE for CBSE Board Examination Form academic session

2A22-23 for LOC, provide certified copy of the list of those students.

(v) According to your office record, Mahavir Senior Model School paid readmission fee of some students to CBSE for CBSE Board Examination Form academic session 2022-23 for LOC, provide certified copy of the list of those students…”

etc.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.10.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“As the applicant required the information which pertain to Third Party Information and cannot be provided under section 8 (1) (j) of RTI Act, 2005.”

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 27.10.2022. The FAA vide order dated 04.01.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:

(i) “I have carefully gone through the facts of the case and the relevant provisions of RTI Act, 2005. The reply has been provided to the appellant vide letter No. CBSE/ROD (W)/RTI/ OFFLINE/2022/13464 dated 12.10.2022 and I am to inform you that you are requested to visit the office to go through the file.

(ii) You are requested to confirm the Date and Time to this office in advance on email id 2 rodw.rtigriv@cbseshiksha.in.

(iii) As per "Fees for providing information: - Fee for providing information under sub-section (4) of Section 4 and sub-sections (1) and (5) of Section 7 of the Act shall be charged at the following rates, namely:-

"No fee for inspection of records for the first hour of inspection and a fee of rupees 5 for each subsequent hour or fraction thereof"

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 06.04.2023.

5. The Appellant remained absent during the hearing and on behalf of the Respondent, Santosh, US & CPIO along with Savita, Suptd. attended the hearing in person.

6. The Respondent reiterated the reply provided to the Appellant and submitted that in compliance with the FAA’s order, the Appellant had visited the office and even though the Appellant’s son was one of the 15 students in the averred list, he was advised that the registration/examination records; names and particulars of other students/candidates cannot be shown to him in light of the exemption of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of records, ob