<p>"The issues relating to management and regulation of schools responsible for promotion of education are so important for development that it cannot be left at whims and caprices of private bodies, whether funded or not by the Government," the bench said in its order deciding on disclosure of service records of a teacher employed at a private school.<br /><br />Bindu Khanna, a teacher at Pinnacle School at Panchsheel Enclave, had filed an RTI application with Education Directorate seeking to know her service records. But despite orders of the Directorate to provide the details, the school maintained that it was a private body and hence the Act was not applicable on it. The school cited sections of the law which exempt the disclosure of personal information.<br /> <br />The Commission said various clauses of Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 say that "all records" of a private recognised school are open to inspection by any officer authorised by the Director or the appropriate authority at any time. The records provided to Education Department by the schools can be accessed by an RTI applicant, it said.<br /><br />"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," the Commission said in its order rejecting the claims of the School. Quoting a High Court order in this regard, the bench said the term 'third party' includes not only the public authority but also any private body or person other than the citizen making request for the information.<br /><br />"The School is a private body and a third party under Section 2(n) of the RTI Act. It thus can be concluded that the Pinnacle School is a third party and is under the control of the respondent (Education Directorate) herein," it said. The bench comprising Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi, Satyananda Mishra and M M Ansari held that orders passed by the Education Directorate directing the third party to provide complete information to the appellant are perfectly in compliance with the Provisions of the Act.<br /><br />"The third party (Pinnacle School) is hence obliged to comply with the said orders... In case the School in question fails to cooperate in the matter, appropriate action under relevant rules should be initiated for de-recognition of the school activities," it said.</p>
<p>"The issues relating to management and regulation of schools responsible for promotion of education are so important for development that it cannot be left at whims and caprices of private bodies, whether funded or not by the Government," the bench said in its order deciding on disclosure of service records of a teacher employed at a private school.<br /><br />Bindu Khanna, a teacher at Pinnacle School at Panchsheel Enclave, had filed an RTI application with Education Directorate seeking to know her service records. But despite orders of the Directorate to provide the details, the school maintained that it was a private body and hence the Act was not applicable on it. The school cited sections of the law which exempt the disclosure of personal information.<br /> <br />The Commission said various clauses of Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 say that "all records" of a private recognised school are open to inspection by any officer authorised by the Director or the appropriate authority at any time. The records provided to Education Department by the schools can be accessed by an RTI applicant, it said.<br /><br />"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," the Commission said in its order rejecting the claims of the School. Quoting a High Court order in this regard, the bench said the term 'third party' includes not only the public authority but also any private body or person other than the citizen making request for the information.<br /><br />"The School is a private body and a third party under Section 2(n) of the RTI Act. It thus can be concluded that the Pinnacle School is a third party and is under the control of the respondent (Education Directorate) herein," it said. The bench comprising Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi, Satyananda Mishra and M M Ansari held that orders passed by the Education Directorate directing the third party to provide complete information to the appellant are perfectly in compliance with the Provisions of the Act.<br /><br />"The third party (Pinnacle School) is hence obliged to comply with the said orders... In case the School in question fails to cooperate in the matter, appropriate action under relevant rules should be initiated for de-recognition of the school activities," it said.</p>