Tuesday, February 14, 2012

PM's speech at the inaugural session of the Conference of State Ministers of Welfare and Social Justice


"I am very happy to be in your midst today at the inaugural session of the Conference of State Ministers of Welfare, Social Justice and Empowerment. Ensuring equitable development of all sections of society, particularly the weaker sections is central to the Government's agenda of inclusive growth.
The success of our work will be measured in how far we are able to bring succour to our sisters and brothers of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, Differently-Abled and Senior Citizens. Although successive governments have made progressive laws which protect the basic rights and dignity of those of us who are disadvantaged in one way or another, the real question is how to implement and enforce these laws effectively, and back them up with adequate amount of resources.
It is imperative that we implement the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. We need to ensure that meetings of the Vigilance-cum-Monitoring Committees at the State and District levels are held regularly. I have written on this subject to all the Chief Ministers. I do hope that the State Welfare Ministers will solemnly implement the letter and spirit of these Acts. At the same time, I invite you to take full advantage of central assistance which is available for this purpose, and which includes setting up larger number of exclusive special courts for speedy trial of such offences.
One of the darkest blots on our development process is the fact that even after 64 years of independence, we still have the heinous practice of manual scavenging. Today, I would like you to pledge that this scourge will be eliminated from every corner of our country in the next six months. The conversion of dry latrines must be completed once and for all.
The Ministry of Home Affairs' recent advisories that employing a person of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe as a manual scavenger to carry human excreta would be punishable under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is a strong and prohibitive instrument in your hands. I urge you to make full use of this.
The Post-Matric Scholarship Scheme for Scheduled Caste students was revised in July, 2010. Education, health-care and skill development are the three very important requisites of empowering disadvantaged sections of our community to rise in the development ladder. And therefore, great importance attaches to provision of scholarships to students coming from these categories of our citizens. The Centre will continue to bear the financial liability for the entire twelfth Five Year Plan period. The states' share will become due only in the thirteenth Five Year Plan, i.e. in 2017. The Central Government has willingly undertaken this additional commitment in order to ensure that our Scheduled Caste children do have access to education of the requisite quality.
The State Governments must however, ensure that the benefits of the revised scheme not only reach the Scheduled Caste students but do so in a transparent manner. They should thereby be able to improve their participation in tertiary education, including technical and professional education. As a measure of transparency, the detailed schedule of payment of such scholarships to students must be placed in the public domain.
As (Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment) Mukul Wasnik has mentioned, we also propose to revise the income-ceiling in scholarship rates under the Post-Matric Scholarship Scheme for OBC students as well.
As you all know, the Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan is our strategic instrument to address the developmental gap between the Scheduled Castes and the general population. I know that States are trying to earmark funds under the Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan in proportion to their Scheduled Caste population. But how effective is the effort to convert outlays into outcomes? It clearly needs to be much more concerted and evident. State Governments must with all sincerity prepare and implement their Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan so that benefits actually go to those for whom they are truly intended. Convergence is imperative in augmenting the benefits which will bridge the present developmental gap faster and more effectively.
The central government has launched a pilot Centrally-Sponsored Scheme "Pradhan Mantri Adarsh Gram Yojana" in five States, namely, Assam, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu. This is for integrated development of 1000 villages with Scheduled Caste majority populations. Provided the pilot warrants, and encouraging results are achieved, an expansion of this scheme is being considered in the 12th Five-Year Plan.
Various initiatives are being taken to address concerns of persons with disabilities. But I do recognize that we have to do much more in this regard. The expert group of the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment is drafting a new law in place of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. After consulting State Governments and other stakeholders we propose to introduce the Bill in Parliament.
One of the continuing traumas of our disabled sisters and brothers is obtaining disability certificates. The Central Rules under the Persons with Disabilities Act have been amended in December, 2009 to enable the issue of certificates through a simple and decentralised institutional mechanism. I request that State Governments follow this template on a priority basis. This will to some extent, ameliorate the sufferings of differently-abled persons.
Steps have been taken to provide for the health-care, security and well-being of our senior citizens. But we need to do a lot more in this regard as well. We have increased tax and travel concessions for senior citizens. But as I said, much more needs to be done. We should use the services of Panchayats and Senior Citizens' Associations and other community-based groups to sensitize and re-orient the law enforcement machinery to the vulnerability and special protection needs of older persons.
In cooperation with the corporate sector, the UPA government has taken a number of initiatives to increase affirmative action with regard to employment of our weaker sections. Some of the results are encouraging. Several corporate houses have voluntarily adopted a code to ensure effective affirmative action. Ombudsmen have been appointed to ensure single point accountability. Nearly one lakh, twelve thousand youth have been trained under entrepreneurship development and other programmes. But here too, much more needs to be done.
We are also working together to ensure an annual voluntary disclosure mechanism. The government is planning to earmark a percentage of procurement from the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises which are run by those who are disadvantaged.
Friends, it is significant that this conference is being organised when we are on the threshold of formulating the Twelfth Five Year Plan. I request you all to review the progress made in these matters, which are of critical concern to our agenda of social justice. I would urge you to identify areas which are lacking attention and recommend what you see as the road ahead for the Twelfth Five Year Plan.
With these words, I wish the Conference all success."

Monday, December 5, 2011

SMART CLASSES - UNAIDED SCHOOL DISCRIMINATED EWS STUDENTS


IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C.M. NO.------- OF 2011
IN
W.P. (CIVIL) No. 3156/2002
(PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)


IN THE MATTER OF:

Social Jurist                                        &nbs p;                …… Petitioner

Versus

Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.                          …… Respondents

AND

IN THE MATTER OF :

St. Lawrence Convent Senior Secondary School
Through Principal ,
Geeta Colony, Facility Centre,
Delhi-110031                                               …..…… Respondent


APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC FOR DIRECTIONS

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1.      The petitioner by the present application is highlighting the fact that St. Lawrence Convent Senior Secondary School, Geeta Colony,  Facility Centre, Delhi-110031, hereinafter referred as ‘Respondent/School’, has resorted to discriminatory treatment to as many as 31 Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) students as they  are not allowed to sit with other students in the classes from 17.10.2011 and have been segregated and isolated merely because of the fact that they were unable to pay the Smart Class Fee of Rs.400/- per month to the school.  It is submitted that the demand of the respondent/school for payment of Rs.400/- per month on account of Smart Classes is not only illegal but also in violation of several orders including interim order dated 30.05.2007, passed by this Hon’ble Court in the above PIL.

2.      The petitioner submits that the above stated 31 EWS students were admitted in the respondent/school, in terms of the Orders of this Hon’ble Court having been passed in the above PIL and they are presently studying in Classes I to V.  The details of some of these students are given in a chart enclosed herewith as Annexure –A.   

3.      The petitioner submits that all these 31 EWS students are legally entitled to totally free education and the respondent/school is not entitled to ask for any payment, on any account, from these students.   It is also submitted that the respondent/school is situated at the public land having been allotted to it at concessional rates and in terms of the allotment letter read with the Government Order of 2007, the respondent/school is obliged to provide admission to the extent of 20% to the children belonging to economically weaker sections and grant them free-ship.  

4.      The petitioner submits that while these students were studying in the respondent/school in different classes, the respondent/ school demanded a sum of Rs.1200/-  (@ Rs.400/- per month for 3 months) on account of Smart Classes from all the students including these 31 EWS students in the month of October, 2011 and those who have refused to pay the said amount of Rs.1200/- on account of Smart Classes have not only been segregated in the classes but  have also been subjected to all kinds of humiliation by the school authorities. 

5.      The pe titioner respectfully submits that from 17.10.2011, the respondent/school has divided and separated all students as ‘Educomp’ and ‘Non - Educomp’ Students.  It is submitted that all these 31 EWS students have also been segregated and humiliated by the respondent/school because they were unable to pay the said illegally demanded fees. 

6.      The petitioner respectfully submits that these unwarranted and uncalled for acts on the part of the respondent/school has caused tremendous harassment to the EWS students and also their hapless parents. It is submitted that the said action on the part of the respondent sc hool has caused these students to suffer severe mental harm, insult and depression.

7.      The petitioner submits that the students and parents protested under the banner of All India Parents Association outside the premises of Director of Education on 24.10.2011 as the Education Department was failing in its’ duties to take action against the respondent/school on the complaints of the parents in regard to arbitrary, unjust and illegal demand of fees on account of Smart Classes and those who were not depositing the same, their children were being harassed, humiliated, segregated and insulted by the school staff.  It is submitted th at a representation was also handed over to the Director of Education.  Besides this, parents and students met Shri Diwan Chand, Director of Education and he assured the parents and the students that he would take action in three days but no action has been taken till date.
A copy of the representation dated 24.10.2011 is enclosed hereto as Annexure B.

8.      The petitioner respectfully submits that the respondent/school is not justified in segregating all these EWS S tudents on the ground that they have not paid Rs.400/- per month on account of Smart Classes.  It is respectfully submitted that such a demand on the part of the respondent/school is totally arbitrary, illegal, unjustified and in violation of the orders of this Hon’ble Court having been passed in the above PIL.   In any case, the respondent/school is not entitled to segregate these students on the basis of facilities and further, they are not entitled to humiliate, harass and insult (psychological violence) the students.

9.      The petitioner respectfully submits that the aforesaid a ction on the part of the respondent/school tantamount to commercialization of education.  It is all greed on the part of the respondent/school which has resulted in harassment of the hapless parents/students.  Apart from that the same is in clear violation of Section 17 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 which prohibits physical punishment and mental harassment to the child.  Moreover, the same amounts to cruelty to children and attract punishment under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.  The petitioner invites attention of  this Hon’ble Court  to a Judgment  of U.S. Supreme Court in case of Brown vs. Board of Education 347 US 283 (1954) where it has been held that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” thus, violates the doctrine of equality. The said judgment of the USSC has been referred to by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a recent judgment in case of State of Tamil Nadu and Others v. K. Shyam Sunder and Others (2011) 8 SCC 737.

10.   The petitioner invites attention of this Hon’ble Court to the provisions of Section 8 ( c ) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 which mandates the respondent – government to “ensure that the child belonging to weaker section and the child belonging to disadvantaged group are not discriminated against and prevented from pursuing and completing elementary education on any ground”.

11. The petitioner also invites attention of this Hon’ble Court to the provisions of Clause 3(2) of the Delhi School Education(Free seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections) Order, 2006 which provides, “No separate or exclusive class or shift shall be arranged for imparting education to the students admitted against free seats mentioned in sub-paragraph(1)”.

12.   The petitioner further invites attention of this Hon’ble Court to the provisions of Rule 10 (2) of Delhi Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011 notified vide Notification dated 23.11.2011 that provides, “The school referred to in clauses (iii) and (iv) of clause (n) of Section 2 shall ensure that children admitted in accordance with clause © of sub-section (1) of Section 12 shall not be discriminated from the rest of the children in any manner pertaining to entitlements and facilities such as text books, uniforms, library and information and communication technology  facilities, extra-curricular activities and sports”.

10.    The petitioner submits that the parents have brought these facts vide their representations dated 17.11.2011 and 21.11.2011 but no action has been taken by the Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, till date.
True copies of the said representations are enclosed hereto as Annexures C and D respectively.

PRAYER

It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(a)         re strain the respondent/school from segregating these 31  EWS students from other students and the respondent/school may be directed to restore the classes’ status as prevalent prior to 17.10.2011;

(b)        direct the Director of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi to take appropriate action against the erring officials of the respondent/school in accordance with law; and

(c)       pass any such further  order/direction as this Hon’ble may in the circumstances of the present case think appropriate in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.


(Ashok Agarwal & Khagesh B. Jha)< /strong>
Advocates for the Petitioner
483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003
Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923
Place: New Delhi
Dated: 26.11.2011

Haryana schools under NCPCR scanner for flouting RTE norms


The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has issued a notice to Haryana Government to probe the alleged violation of Right to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act by several private schools in Gurgaon that “conducted” screening tests and “denied” admissions to many.
Acting on a complaint filed by V R One - a civil rights group working on child education - the NCPCR asked the director, Basic Education Department, Haryana to investigate the complaints of “denial of admission” to children by several schools of Gurgaon who allegedly conducted screening tests and profiled children on the basis of education and profession of their parents.
The complainant, president of V R One, Sumit Vohra, alleged that the Scottish High International School, KR Mangalam School, Salwan Montessori, Suncity School and Blue Bells Public School of Gurgaon have denied admission to the children by conducting screening tests and profiling of parents.
The allegations were denied by the heads of these schools.
Assistant vice-president, operations, Scottish High International School, Sharmila Das said, “The allegations are totally baseless. We didn’t conduct any screening test or profiling of parents for admissions.”
Das said, “We have a clear first-come-first-served admission policy. And subject to seat availability is also the clause in admissions here.”
Taking cognisance of the complaint, the Member Secretary, NCPCR, Lov Kumar issued the notice, a copy of which is with The Pioneer, to the Haryana Government to get the matter investigated and report to the Commission within 15 days. However, the Government appeared nonchalant about responding to the NCPCR notice.
When contacted, the director, Basic Education, Haryana, Abhay Singh Yadav, feigned ignorance about the issue.
He said, “As of now, I don’t have any information about the notice issued by the NCPRC.”
Recently, Education Minister Geeta Bhukkal had claimed that the implementation of RTE Act was a success in all private schools of State in letter and spirit.
An official in NCPRC said, “We are waiting for a reply from the Haryana Government. We will issue them a reminder notice in the next two days to know the status of the investigation.”
NCPCR, under Section 13 of CPCR Act, is to inquire into complaints and take suo motu cognisance in relation to deprivation and violation of child rights.
Quoting Section 13 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009, the NCPRC said no school or person shall, while admitting a child, collect any capitation fee and subject the child or his or her parents to any screening procedure.
“Any person or school, if in contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1), subjects a child to screening procedure, shall be punishable with fine, which may extend to `25,000 for the first contravention and `50,000 for each subsequent contraventions,” the NCPRC said quoting the clauses of the Act.
Referring to the admission form of Scottish School, Vohra said, “It is clear from the admission form that school authority is involved in profiling of children on the basis of the educational and professional backgrounds of parents, which is restricted under RTE Act, 2009.”

Thursday, November 24, 2011

14 Delhi govt schools fail to comply with CIC order

As reported by timesofindia.indiatimes.com on Nov 1, 2011:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/c...w/10562746.cms

NEW DELHI: Fourteen Delhi government schools on Monday refused to abide by the Central Information Commission's (CIC) July, 2011 order of allowing inspection of school records under the RTI Act on the last working day of the month. Around 65 people, along with Delhi Right to Education Forum (DREF) activists, visited schools in different areas, right from Shastri Park to Chirag Dilli, for inspection, but were denied entry citing a circular by the Directorate of Education (DoE). It stated that no such inspection has been ordered by any authority.

Following a complaint filed by NGO Josh under the RTI Act, the CIC passed an order on July 29, 2011, in which it allowed inspection of school records, including documents on admission, attendance, budget allocations and disbursement of scholarships, from the last working day of September 2011 by the public.

But the DREF activists and community members who approached the schools on Monday were denied access to records, and in many cases, even entry to the schools.

"The schools cited a circular (a copy of which is with TOI) issued by additional director of education (schools), DoE, Sunita Kaushik on October 28, 2011, which stated that the heads of all government schools are directed to ensure discipline and security on the school premises and that no outsider be allowed entry without permission of the principal to enter the school. It also clarified that no inspection of the infrastructural facilities has been ordered by any authority. and any NGO or any person is not to be allowed to carry out any inspection or interaction without prior authorization of the department.

But the CIC order specifically stated that all schools of the department will have the stated documents/ registers available for inspection by citizens on the last working day of each month - from 8am to 10am and 2pm to 4pm for the first and second shift schools respectively," said Saurabh Sharma, a DREF activist.

Ironically, the public information officer of DoE, Prabhjot Singh, on September 15 wrote to the CIC stating that all the principals and heads of schools have been directed to make available the documents/ registers and that all deputy directors of education of the districts have been asked to ensure compliance with the circular and collection compliance reports from their schools. It further said the compliance reports from all districts have been received and made available for inspection by citizens as directed by the CIC and information regarding inspection timing has been put up on the notice boards of the schools.

The schools visited by the group included Rajkiya Sarvodaya Kanya Vidyalaya in Vijay Inclave, Najafgarh, Shastri Park, Kalyanpuri, East Vinod Nagar, Block 27, Trilokpuri, Pocket 2, Mayur Vihar, Phase I, Jorbagh, Bella Road, Jama Masjid, Sarai Kale Khan, and Rajkiya Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya in Jama Masjid, Chirag Dilli and Lal Kuan. Despite repeated calls the education minister, Arvinder Singh Lovely could not be contacted.

Defying the Central Information Commission's July, 2011 order of allowing inspection of school records on the last working day of the month under the Right to Information Act, as many as 14 Delhi Government schools refused to abide by the ruling on Monday.

Around 65 common citizens accompanied by activists of Delhi Right to Education Forum (DREF) who visited schools in different regions of Delhi right from Shastri Park to Chirag Dilli for inspections were denied entry citing a circular by the Directorate of Education (DoE) which stated that no inspection of the infrastructure facilities has been ordered by any authority.

Following an order passed by the CIC on July 29, 2011 based on a complaint filed under the RTI Act by an NGO, Josh, the information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi in his order allowed inspection of school records such as documents on admission, attendance, budget allocations, disbursement of scholarships and circulars among others from the last working day of September 2011 by the general public.

"The schools cited a circular (a copy of which is with The Times of India) issued by additional director of education (schools), DoE, Sunita Kaushik on October 28, 2011, which stated that heads of all the government schools are directed to ensure proper discipline and security on the school premises and that no outsider be allowed without the permission of the principal to enter the school. It also clarified that no inspection of the infrastructure facilities has been ordered by any authority and any NGO or any person is not to be allowed to carry out any inspection or interaction without prior authorization of the department. But the CIC order specifically stated that all schools of the department will have the stated documents/ registers available for inspection by citizens on last working day of each month, from 8 am to 10 am and 2 pm to 4 pm for the first and second shift schools respectively," said Saurabh Sharma, a DREF activist.

nterestingly, the public information officer of DoE, Prabhjot Singh, on September 15 wrote to the CIC stating that all the principals and heads of schools has been directed to make available the documents/ registers as mentioned in the decision and that all deputy directors of education of the districts have been asked to ensure the compliance of the circular and collect compliance reports from their schools. It further said that the compliance reports from all districts have been received and has been made available for inspection by citizens as directed by the CIC and the information regarding inspection timing has been put up on the notice boards of the schools.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

No dearth of funds for education - Dikshit


November 19, 2011

New Delhi: Delhi Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit on Friday said there will be no paucity of funds for education as it was her government's top priority.

"There would be no dearth of funds for education as this sector is on top of the priority list of the government," Dikshit said while presenting the Indira Awards 2011 to best schools, best teachers and students in the capital.

She said government-run schools have outshone private schools in terms of results and overall development of students.

"The government schools are being preferred because of hard work and commitment shown by the teachers to make their schools much above the schools of other states and other metropolitan cities," said Dikshit.

She said her government was committed to providing necessary infrastructure for education in the capital.

MCD will provide 198,000 computers to school kids

New Delhi: The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) will provide 198,000 computers free of cost to students of class 4 in its schools, a civic agency official said on Thursday.

"The corporation will provide 198,000 computers free of cost to students of class 4 in the current academic year. Each computer will cost Rs.2,000," MCD's Education Committee chairman Mahendra Nagpal said.

He said that MCD will start distributing the computers in next couple of months, adding it will cost the state exchequer a sum of Rs.30 crore.

Nagpal was speaking at a function "Let's make efforts towards Safer Schools", organised by Plan India and Society for All Round development (SARD). November 18, 2011

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Central Information Commission Decision No. 1231 /IC(A)/2007


Central Information Commission
Block-IV, 5th Floor,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067
Website: www.cic.gov.in
(Adjunct to Decision No. 714/IC(A)/2007 dated, 14th May, 2007)
Decision No.  1231 /IC(A)/2007
F. No. CIC/MA/A/2007/00104
Dated, the 12th September, 2007
Name of the Appellant  : Shri D.K. Chopra.
Name of the Public Authority  : Directorate of Education, GNCT of Delhi
Facts:
1. The appellant had asked for certain information, which were furnished,
except the minutes of the Managing Committee (MC) of Purna Prajna Public
School, Vasant Kumj, New Delhi. The Commission  examined the appeal and
made the following observations in it’s decision  No. 714/IC(A)/2007 dated 18th
May, 2007:-
• The PIO is directed to obtain, u/s 2(f) of the Act, the minutes of the
Managing Committee meetings from March 2002 to March 2007 from the
school and provide a copy to the appellant.
• The information sought as above should be furnished within 15 working
days from the date of issue of this decision.
2. Subsequently, the appellant informed the Commission that the PIO has
not complied with the above decision. The PIO, in turn, stated that he had no
legal authority to obtain the information from the school.
3. Both the parties were therefore issued notices for a hearing again in the
matter of non-compliance of above decision. The parties were heard on 20th
August , 2007 and 12th September, 2007. A representative of the PIO reiterated
that under Delhi Education Act, the documents which could be obtained, are
specified under Annexure-II in which the document, namely minutes of the
meeting of the Managing Committee of schools is not included. The Department
of Education was therefore unable to acquire the minutes of the Managing
Committee from the concerned school as  directed by the Commission. Though
an official of the respondent is a member of the MC, the PIO has however no
access to the minutes of MC, it was contended.
1Decision:
4. The main issue that emanate from the foregoing is that the Government of
Delhi has no control on the  functioning of un-aided schools and that it cannot
access the minutes of MCs under any law, which is un-acceptable to the
Commission.
5. A major objective of the RTI Act is to ensure transparency and
accountability in functioning of the institutions, particularly the service providers
that have considerable interface with a larger section of people. The documents,
in question, contain such information that foretell about the health and vitality of
the schools, which are responsible for preparing our children to lead the nation.
Moreover, the information asked for is an outcome of deliberations of the major
stakeholders – school authorities, teachers, representatives of PTA and the
Government of Delhi. The minutes of MCs are thus already in public domain, as
these are circulated among the members. How can it be treated as confidential
or secret?  Unfortunately, the Principal of the school and the PIO have
connived to withhold the minutes of the MCs for reasons that contravene
with the larger purpose of creating an information regime for good
governance.
6. As the activities of the functionaries of the education sector have intense
and pervasive influence on every human activity,  the decisions taken by the
Managing Committees have considerable implications for promoting quality
education and the well-being of the entire society. Such documents, therefore,
cannot be claimed as secret information by any school which performs a
governmental function. The Principal of the school and the PIO have thus failed
to appreciate the intent and purpose of the Act which seeks to promote people’s
involvement in decision making processes and implementation of programs.
7. All the aided or unaided schools are performing governmental functions to
promote high quality of relevant education. An official  of the GNCT of Delhi is
nominated by the Directorate of Education as a member  of the Management
Committee of all the schools.  The nominated member of the Directorate of
Education is therefore the custodian of the minutes of the MCs under
section 5(4) of the RTI Act.  And, there is no reason why such minutes,
reflecting the aspects of governance of  the school, should not be put in public
domain. The Government has the control on the functioning of the schools and,
therefore, it has access to the information asked for. And, so has a citizen.
8. Not only the land allotted to private educational institutes are provided at
subsidized rates, but also the fees paid by the students/parents enjoy income-tax
concession. There is thus some element  of indirect Government funding in the
activities of even private  and un-aided schools. In view  of this, the respondent,
which is represented through its officials on the Managing Committee, is surely
2the custodian of the information asked for by the appellant. The decisions of the
MCs have significant bearing on the life and career of the students as well
as their parents / guardians and, therefore, there is no reason why the
minutes of the Managing Committee should not be disclosed to the
affected persons i.e. the citizens.
9. The PIO’s contention that the minutes of the MCs are not included in
Annexure-II of Delhi Education Act and, therefore, he cannot acquire them is not
acceptable, as Section 22 of the RTI Act, 2005 has an overriding effect on all
such provisions that come in the way of promotion of transparency in
functioning of the schools, the activities of which are governmental in nature. The
PIO is directed again to furnish the information at the earliest under
intimation to the Commission.
10. The then PIO Dr. R. A. Yadav and the present PIO Mrs. S. Kaur, DDE are
also held in violation of  section 7(1) of the Act. They are therefore directed to
show cause as to why a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- should not be imposed on
them us 20(1) of the Act, for their deliberate attempt to deny the information
asked for by the appellant. Inspite the  direction given by the Commission, they
have made no worthwhile effort to acquire the document from the school or the
nominated member of the respondent.   They should submit their written
submission and also appear for a personal hearing before the Commission on
12th October, 2007 at 2.00 p.m. (at 2nd floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji
Cama Place).
11.  In view of lackadaisical attitude of the concerned PIO and the Principal of
the school towards the implementation of the RTI Act, the Commission’s order of
dated 18.5.2007 has not been complied with, which is unfortunate The Director
(Edu.), Directorate of Education, GNCT of Delhi is therefore directed to
initiate appropriate action  against the school, including
cancellation/withdrawl of it’s recognition, as the school has chosen to
function in a manner which is not duly transparent and is, thus, inconsistent with
the ethos and purpose of the RTI Act. An action taken report should be submitted
to the Commission at the earliest.
12. Moreover, because of non-compliance of decision of the Commission of
18th May, 2007, atleast two additional hearing were unnecessarily conducted at
the instance of the respondent. And, the  appellant had to attend the hearing,
which resulted in incurring of avoidable expenditure on travel, loss of resources
and time.  The Director (Education), on behalf of the Directorate of
Education, GNCT of Delhi should explain as to why a suitable
compensation, u/s 19(8)  (b) of the Act, should  not be awarded to the
appellant for the detriment suffered by him. On behalf of the Directorate of
Education, the Director of Education  should explain on the date and time, as
mentioned above, and may also appear for personal hearing in the matter.
313. The Commission is constrained to observe that a large number of officials
of the Directorate of Education, in general, and the PIOs/Appellate Authorities, in
particular, have failed to appreciate the spirit of the Act for promotion of
openness in their functioning. The Director (Edu.), Dte. Of Education is therefore
directed to organize education & training program for its  officials, as mandated
u/s 26 of the Act, in order to equip them for effective implementation of the
provisions of the Act.
14. The compliance of the decision,  as above, would be reviewed by the
Commission in due course.
 
                    Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(L.C. Singhi)
Additional Registrar
Name and address of parties:
1. Shri D.K. Chopra, A/A 1039, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070.
2. Mrs. Salinder Kaur, PIO & DDE(SWE), Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Directorate
of Education, O/o Dy. Director of Education, District South West-A, Vasant
Vihar, New Delhi.
3. Dr. R.A. Yadav, DD(Inspection) (the then CPIO in this case), Directorate
of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Old Secretariat, Delhi-110054.
4. Shri Vijay Kumar, Director, Directorate of Education, Govt. NCT of Delhi,
Old Secretariat, Delhi-110054.
5. Dr. (Mrs.) R. Kohli, Principal, Poorna Prajna Public School, D-III, Vasant
Vihar, New Delhi-110070.