Shri Manoj Kumar, Shamli Vs CBSE, RO, Allahabad
Central information commission in
Shri Manoj Kumar, Shamli Vs CBSE, RO, Allahabad
Decided on 03-12-2013 as below
FACTS
Vide RTI dt 17.7.13, appellant had sought information on 20 points relating to Sarti Beri Rajaram Public School.
2. PIO CBSE Allahabad vide letter dt 13.8.13 observed that the information pertaining to the public school an accordingly the RTI was being referred to them and the appellant was asked to pursue the same with the school.
DECISION
6. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in WP(C) No.7265/2007 dt 25 Sept 2009 had observed as follows:
“8. Information as defined in Section 2(f) means details or material available with the public authority. The later portion of Section 2(f) expands the definition to include details or material which can be accessed under any other law from others. The two definitions have to be read harmoniously. The term held by or under the control of any public authority in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act has to be read in a manner that it effectuates and is in harmony with the definition of the term information as defined in Section 2(f). The said expression used in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act should not be read in a manner that it negates or nullifies definition of the term information in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. It is well settled that an interpretation which renders another provision or part thereof redundant or superfluous should be avoided. Information as defined in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act includes in its ambit, the information relating to any private body which can be accessed by public authority under any law for the time being in force. Therefore, if a public authority has a right and is entitled to access information from a private body, under any other law, it is information as defined in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The term held by the or under the control of the public authority used in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act will include information which the public authority is entitled to access under any other law from a private body. A private body need not be a public authority and the said term private body has been used to distinguish and in contradistinction to the term public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. Thus, information which a public authority is entitled to access, under any law, from private body, is information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and has to be furnished.”
7. The Commission directs PIO to go through the above observation and if the information sought by the appellant is accessible to them, under CBSE Affiliation rules, the same may be collected from the school and furnished to the appellant. If not, a suitable response be provided to the appellant within one month from date of receipt of the order.
File No.CIC/RM/A/2013/000969