Showing posts with label RTI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RTI. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 8, 2015

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI News - NCTE Clarified - TET Wtz is Not Mandatory in Selection Process -

UPTET SARKARI NAUKRI   News - NCTE Clarified - TET Wtz is Not Mandatory in Selection Process 







 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
 Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825  Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

RTI SARKARI NAUKRI News - - आरटीआई नियमावली होगी जारी नियमावली संबंधी प्रस्ताव को कैबिनेट की हरी झंडी

RTI SARKARI NAUKRI   News - 


आरटीआई नियमावली होगी जारी
नियमावली संबंधी प्रस्ताव को कैबिनेट की हरी झंडी


लखनऊ (ब्यूरो)। प्रदेश में सूचना का अधिकार नियमावली-2015 जारी करने का निर्णय लिया गया है। इसमें सूचना मांगने और सूचना देने वाले अधिकारी के लिए स्पष्ट दिशा-निर्देश होंगे। नियमावली संबंधी प्रस्ताव को कैबिनेट ने मंजूरी दे दी।
सूचना मांगने के लिए उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य सूचना आयोग (अपील प्रक्रिया) नियमावली-2006 पहले से ही वजूद में है। सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम-2005 की धारा 18 के तहत किसी आवेदक द्वारा आयोग के सामने पेश शिकायत के निपटारे के लिए प्रस्तावित नियमावली के नियम 6 एवं 7 में व्यवस्था की गई है। शिकायतों और अपीलों की सुनवाई का नोटिस और उसके निपटारे या निर्णय की तामीली की व्यवस्था नियमावली के नियम 8 और 9 में प्रस्तावित है। किसी भी शिकायती वाद की सुनवाई के स्थगन या स्थानांतरण की नई व्यवस्था नियम 10 और 11 में की गई है। नियम 12 में किसी भी वाद में दिए गए निर्णय को रिकॉल करने की व्यवस्था है।
नियम 13 में शिकायत या अपील को वापस लिए जाने की नई व्यवस्था की गई है। उत्तर प्रदेश सूचना का अधिकार (फीस एवं लागत विनियम) नियमावली 2006 में दी गई दंड की राशि जमा कराने और उसकी वापसी के लिए लेखाशीर्षक की अलग से व्यवस्था नहीं थी। इसके लिए नियमावली में नियम 15 जोड़ा गया है। नियम 16 में सचिव की नियुक्ति और उनके कार्य की नई व्यवस्था की गई है। नियम 17 में आयोग में रजिस्ट्रार की नियुक्ति और उनके कार्य की नई व्यवस्था की गई है। राज्य के सूचना आयोग की मुद्रा एवं प्रतीक की नई व्यवस्था नियम 18 में की गई है।
राज्य सूचना आयोग के कामकाज की भाषा का निर्धारण नियम 19 में किया गया है। सूचना मांगने, सूचना देने, अपील दाखिल करने, अपील का निपटारा करने और निर्णय आदि से संबंधित दस्तावेजों की नई व्यवस्था भी नियमावली में की गई है



 UPTET  / टीईटी TET - Teacher EligibilityTest Updates /   Teacher Recruitment  / शिक्षक भर्ती /  SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS  
UP-TET 201172825 Teacher Recruitment,Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), 72825 teacher vacancy in up latest news join blog , UPTET , SARKARI NAUKRI NEWS, SARKARI NAUKRI
Read more: http://naukri-recruitment-result.blogspot.com
http://joinuptet.blogspot.com
 Shiksha Mitra | Shiksha Mitra Latest News | UPTET 72825 Latest Breaking News Appointment / Joining Letter | Join UPTET Uptet | Uptet news | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Latest News | 72825  Teacher Recruitment Uptet Breaking News | 72825  Primary Teacher Recruitment Uptet Fastest News | Uptet Result 2014 | Only4uptet | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet News Hindi | 72825  Teacher Recruitment  Uptet Merit cutoff/counseling Rank District-wise Final List / th Counseling Supreme Court Order Teacher Recruitment / UPTET 72825 Appointment Letter on 19 January 2015A | 29334 Junior High School Science Math Teacher Recruitment,

CTETTEACHER ELIGIBILITY TEST (TET)NCTERTEUPTETHTETJTET / Jharkhand TETOTET / Odisha TET  ,
Rajasthan TET /  RTET,  BETET / Bihar TET,   PSTET / Punjab State Teacher Eligibility TestWest Bengal TET / WBTETMPTET / Madhya Pradesh TETASSAM TET / ATET
UTET / Uttrakhand TET , GTET / Gujarat TET , TNTET / Tamilnadu TET APTET / Andhra Pradesh TET , CGTET / Chattisgarh TETHPTET / Himachal Pradesh TET
 

Saturday, February 28, 2015

News :विभागों को आरटीआई आवेदनों के सही ढंग से निस्तारण के आदेश

News :विभागों को आरटीआई आवेदनों के सही ढंग से निस्तारण के आदेश
Published: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 07:16 PM (IST) | Updated: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 07:20 PM (IST)


**********************************
BLOG VICHAR : Khud DOPT Ne Sarkari Karmchareeyon Ki ACR /APAR - Promotion Se Sambandhit Jankaree Ko Nijta (Privacy ) Par Hanan Karaar De Kar, Janta Ko Yeh Soochna Dene
Se Mana kar Diyaa.

Sarkari Kamcharee Ko promotion Aadi Ke Laabh Unke Boss Ke Dwara Diye Jaane hain, Aur Janta Vaastav Mein Iska Mulyankan Bhee Nahin Dekh Saktee.
Aise mein Chaplusee / Chatukarita Ko Rokne Ke Liye Kuch Vekalpik Pravdhaan To Hone hee Chahiye.

Galat / Bhramak Information Dene Par PIO / FAA Par Sakht karyvahee Honee Chahiye.
 *********************


नई दिल्ली। कार्मिक व प्रशिक्षण (डीओपीटी) विभाग ने अपने एक आदेश में कहा है कि मंत्रालय आरटीआइ के तहत दायर अपीलों और आवेदनों का दिशा-निर्देशों के अनुसार, समुचित तरीके से निपटारा करें। इसके अनुसार, जन सूचना अधिकारी (पीआइओ) को आरटीआइ अर्जी खारिज करते हुए तय समय के भीतर इसकी वजह बतानी चाहिए। उसको बताना चाहिए कि कौन सी अपील दाखिल की जा सकती है। आदेश में कहा गया है कि आवेदनकर्ता को चुकाए जाने वाले शुल्क का विवरण देना चाहिए।

डीओपीटी ने कहा है कि पहली अपील का निपटारा करते हुए प्रथम अपीली प्राधिकार को निष्पक्षता और न्यायिक तरीके से काम करना चाहिए। यह बेहद महत्वपूर्ण है कि प्रथम अपीली प्राधिकार की ओर से जारी आदेश विस्तृत होना चाहिए। इसमें निर्णय पर पहुंचने का तर्क बताया गया हो। अपीली प्राधिकार को यह सुनिश्चित करना चाहिए कि उसके द्वारा दिया गया आदेश आवेदनकर्ता को तुंरत मिले।

- News Sabhar : jagran Sun, 22 Feb 2015 07:20 PM
RTI applications | order | salvage | departments correctly |

Sunday, December 29, 2013

RTI : सूचना न देने पर बीएसए तलब

RTI : सूचना न देने पर बीएसए तलब
Tue, 24 Dec 2013 06:00 PM (IST)

 बरेली : सूचना का अधिकार कानून के तहत सूचना न उपलब्ध कराने पर बीएसए को राज्य सूचना आयोग ने लखनऊ तलब किया।

आवेदक प्रभाकर सिंह निवासी इस्माइलपुर निसोई ने एक सितंबर 2012 को बीएसए से सूचना का अधिकार कानून के तहत सात बिंदुओं पर सूचना मांगी थी। दो बार एडी बेसिक कार्यालय में शिकायत के बाद सूचना न मिलने पर उसने मुख्य सूचना आयोग में एक दिसंबर 2012 को आवेदन किया। इसके बाद 14 जनवरी 2013 को सात बिंदुओं की जगह दो बिंदुओं पर ही सूचना उपलब्ध कराई गई। शेष सूचनाओं के लिए फिर आवेदक ने 29 जनवरी को आवेदन किया लेकिन सूचना नहीं मिली। कई बार आवेदन करने के बाद सूचना नहीं मिली। 11 दिसंबर को भी आवेदक ने सूचना उपलब्ध कराने को लेकर मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त को पत्र भेजा जिस पर बीएसए को लखनऊ तलब किया गया। आवेदक प्रभाकर सिंह ने बताया कि अभी उसे सूचना नहीं मिली है और न ही आयुक्त ने कोई निर्णय दिया है

News Source/ Sabhaar : Jagran (Tue, 24 Dec 2013 06:00 PM (IST) / जागरण संवाददाता

To know more about RTI , Click on below Label of RTI

Sunday, May 19, 2013

RTI Online Application Filing System - Website not working


RTI Online Application Filing 

System - Website not working

बड़े बड़े दावे हुए की आर टी आई एप्लीकेशन फाईलिंग को ऑनलाइन कर दिया गया है 
परन्तु जब इस आर टी आई  ऑनलाइन पोर्टल की जांच की गयी तो देखा कि सब खोखली बातें हैं 
जमीनी हकीकत कुछ और है 
आप खुद ही देखे लीजिये - 
http://www.rtionline.gov.in/

When you try to signup here - 
http://www.rtionline.gov.in/registration.php
(You will see problems and unable to signup, So how will you fill Online RTI Application)

कुछ स्वयं सेवी संस्थाओं ने भी आर टी आई एक्टिविस्ट की सहायता के लिए उनकी और से मुफ्त आर टी आई एप्लीकेशन फाईलिंग की सुविधा शुरू की ,

लेकिन जब जांच की गयी तो ऐसी साइट्स पर लिखा आ रहा था की   आर टी आई एप्लीकेशन बहुत ज्यादा संख्या में आ गयी हैं और फिलहाल ये सुविधा बंद कर दी गयी है 

मेरे ख्याल से आर टी आई एक्टिविस्ट की सुरक्षा के लिए सरकार के केन्द्रीय  सूचना आयोग को स्वयं 
गंभीर आर टी आई एप्लीकेशन प्राप्त करनी चाहिए और इसको केन्द्रीय  सूचना आयोग विभाग की और से स्वयं भेजा जाना चाहिए जिससे गंभीर मुद्दों से सम्बंधित आर टी आई एक्टिविस्ट की सूचना गोपनीय रह सके 

एन जी ओ आदि को भी इस तरह की सूचनाये प्राप्त करने में आर टी आई आवेदक (विशेषकर गंभीर मुद्दों से सम्बंधित आर टी आई एक्टिविस्ट ) की सहायता करनी चाहिए 

आर टी आई एप्लीकेशन से सम्बंधित फीस का प्रावधान ऑनलाइन भी हो तो बेहद अच्छा होगा । 





UPTET / NCTE : RTI Application to NCTE to know Important Information Regarding Teachers Recruitment


UPTET / NCTE : RTI Application to NCTE to know Important Information Regarding Teachers Recruitment


UPTET - Teacher Eligibility Test Updates / Recruitment News

UPTET Activist Shyam Dev Mishra Ji's RTI Application to NCTE,
And he is going to receive complete reply shortly as he has to pay fee for xerox charges and after that he will receive complete reply of his application.



Dated 15.04.2013

To,

The Public Information Officer,
National Council for Teacher Education HQ.
Hans Bhawan, Wing II, 1, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi-110002.

Sir,

Subject: Application for seeking Information under Right to Information Act, 2005.

Kindly provide following information point-wise, as sought by the applicant in exercise of the rights conferred by the Right to Information Act, 2005, within stipulated time-limit;

1. Kindly provide the copy of the proposal of the State Government of Uttar pradesh to NCTE, seeking approval for conducting elementary teacher education programme of two years duration (Diploma in Elimentary Education or whatever name, it may have) through open and distance learning mode for training of untrained graduate 'Shiksha Mitra' appointed by the State Government in elementary schools.

2. Kindly provide the copy of the Order dated 14.1.2011 issued by the National Council for Teachers Education, according approval to the proposal of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh for conducting elementary teacher education programme of two years duration (Diploma in Elimentary Education or whatever name, it may have) through open and distance learning mode for training of untrained graduate 'Shiksha Mitra' appointed by the State Government in elementary schools.

3. Kindly provide Demand and Supply Estimates of Teachers and Teacher Educators at School Stage (2007-08 – 2016-17) in respect of state of Uttar Pradesh.

4. According to the “Norms and Standards for Bachelor of education programme leading to Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) degree” laid-down by NCTE, candidates with at least fifty percent marks either in the Bachelor’s Degree and/or in the Master’s degree or any other qualification equivalent thereto, are eligible for admission to the programme. In case of any proven violation of the same with regard to minimum marks required, what action is prescribed to be taken against the concerned candidate and the institution?

5. Accoring to the “Norms and standards for Diploma in elementary education programme through Open and Distance Learning System leading to Diploma in elementary education (D.El.Ed)” laid-down by NCTE,

(i) Where one of the eligibility criteria for admission to subject programme is “Two years teaching experience in a Government or Government recognized primary / elementary school.”, whether “the tenure of expressly-declared non-employment-oriented, contractual, community-service engagement for teaching pupils of classes 1 & 2 in government-run primary school” may be considered as “teaching experience in a Government or Government recognized primary / elementary school” for the purpose?

(ii) Where, it is provided that the reservation for SC/ST/OBC and other categories shall be as per the rules of the Central Government / State Government, whichever is applicable and there shall be a relaxation of five percent marks in favour of SC/ST/OBC and other categories of candidates,

(a) Can NCTE or the concerned Government offer/sanction/allow, whichever is applicable, admission to more than sixty-thousand candidates with absolute disregard to such provisions?

(b) In case the admissions to such programme are proved to have been offered/sanctioned/allowed with absolute disregard to the applicable reservation and relaxation as provided by NCTE, whether such admission or consequent award of dimploma shall stand void?

6. According to NCTE’s Notification dated 23.08.2010 as amended by notification dated 29.07.2011, one of the minimum qualification for a person to be eligibile for appointment as a teacher is “Pass in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose.”.
For the purpose, NCTE issued “Guidelines for conducting Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) under the Right of the Children to Free and Compulsary Education Act (RTE), 2009” to states vide its Letter No. 76-4/2010/NCTE/Acad dated 11.02.2011, specifying therein also the “Structure and Content of TET” in details, which also stipulates that “All questions will be Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs), each carrying one mark, with four alternatives out of which one answer will be correct. There will be no negative marking. The examining body should strictly adhere to the structure and content of the TET specified below.”
In this regard, please inform,

(i) Whether a state government is required as per the rules or law, to furnish details before the NCTE and seek prior permission before conduction a Teacher Eligibility Test?

(ii) Whether a state government is allowed to conduct Teacher Eligibility Test in deviation and/or contravention to the Guidelines issued by the NCTE for the perpose?

(iii) Whether the NCTE may grant permission to a particular state government to introduce and conduct in Teacher Eligibility Test, an additional Paper (For Language) with comprehension, essay –writing in place of typical NCTE-prescribed Paper with Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) only?

(iv) Whether a state government, at it’s own discretion, is allowed to introduce and conduct in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) a self-designed Paper (For Language), in addition to and totally different from NCTE-prescribed Paper-I (For Classes I-V) and Paper-II (For Classes VI-VII)? Whether such paper and consequent award of certificate shall be deemed valid by NCTE for the purpose of making a person eligible to be appointed as a teacher, as far as the necessity of passing TET is concerned?

7. Whether NCTE or Central Govt. has permitted certail states to consider the candidature of the persons having Gradution, who have neither undergone nor been enrolled in any NCTE-recognized Teacher Tarining Programme, meant for a person to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in class 1-5 and 2, for sitting in respective papers of Teacher Eligibility Test? If yes, kindly provide the copy of letter/circular/ notification/ communiqué, permitting thereby the state government of Uttar Pradesh to this effect.

A postal order of Rs. 10/- bearing No. 278169 dated 02.04.2013 is attached herewith.

Yours sincerely,



Shyam Deo Mishra
Address: NL-1A, Ground Floor, 17/4,
Sector-10, Nerul (W), Navi Mumbai-400706 (Maharashtra)
*******************************************************
According to Shyam Dev Mishra Ji 

1. In response to my RTI application dated 15.04.2013, NCTE sent me 2 letters dated 9th May and 14th May 2013 and asked me to deposit fees for the information which is spead in almost 500 pages.

2. On 17th May, I visited NCTE office, New Delhi and discussed the matter in length with their Officer, Mr. Siddharth.

3. When I explained the issue of Training to Shikshamitras and its legal aspects, issue of conducting a new kind of TET, designed by UP Govt itself, issue of not allowing B.Ed. Candidates for UPTET-2013 (Class 1-5), he expressed serious concern over the issue and assured me to consider it seriously and take necessary steps if I could submit in-writing complaint supported by relevant documents and evidences.

4. With a view to facilitate me , he assured me to share their records and entire file related to UPTET and SM-training including the 200+-paged Proposal sent by UP govt for such training and its sanction by NCTE, so that I can get complete information and point out misleading information and illegality therein, if any.

5. As their entire team was busy in preparation for their important meeting on 24th May, they have invited me on any day in last week of May 2013, so that their staff can spare enough time with me and help me find necessary information and documents.

6. Next week, I will be there again to find out the factual and legal status of the action and stand of UP Govt on the issues, raised in my application.

My sincere appreciation for NCTE RTI Cell for their concern and cooperation. Let's see what follows..

All the friends will be updated timely



Saturday, April 6, 2013

Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) and RTI


Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) and RTI

An Applicant/ Candidate Asks about TET and related clarifications, and when he has not received satisfactory response then he reaches to CIC to file appeal.
CIC directed to provide information to applicant.

See -



 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067
Tel: +91-11-26105682
File No.CIC/DS/A/2011/001619/RM
Appellant: Mr. Kamal Kumar, Udham Singh 
Nagar, Uttarakhand
Public Authority: National Council for Teacher 
Education, New Delhi
Date of Hearing: 27.7.2012
Date of decision: 27.7.2012
Heard today, dated 27.7.2012.
Appellant is present through video conferencing.
Public Authority represented by Ms Mamta Kukreti, PIO, NCTE, Delhi.      
The appellant was heard and records perused.
FACTSVide RTI  dated 27.12.10,  the appellant  had sought  certain information 
from  NCTE,  Delhi  regarding  qualifications  required  for  appointment  as
teachers.
2. PIO vide letter dated 14.2.11, responded to the queries. 
3. An appeal was filed on 14.2.11. 
4. AA vide order dated 22.2.11, held that information in respect of points i &
ii has already been furnished and disposed of the appeal.
5. Not satisfied with the response, he filed the present appeal.
6. The  appellant  submitted  that  he  is  not  satisfied  with  the  responses
provided  by  the PIO NCTE vide their  letter  dated 14.2.11.  The appellant
further  submitted that  he had sought  specific clarifications in his RTI  which
have  not  been  responded  to.  It  is  seen  that  the  queries  sought  by  the
appellant are in the nature of interpretation/clarification/seeking opinion of the
NCTE relating to appointment of Primary Teachers. Even though the PIO has
responded  to  these  queries,  strictly  speaking,  they  do  not  constitute
‘information’ as per the provisions of the RTI  Act.  This was explained to the
appellant.
7. PIO submitted that apart from responding to the RTI, they have already
provided to him copies of gazette notification dated 25.8.10 and amendment
dated 2.8.11 along with a copy of guidelines for conducting teacher eligibility
test dated 11.2.11. 
DECISION

Sunday, October 28, 2012

RTI : No Reply from PIO received, Applicant filed complaint directly in CIC


RTI : No Reply from PIO received, Applicant filed complaint directly in CIC



CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 326, 2nd  Floor, August Kranti Bhavan
 Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi- 110066
Website. www.cic.gov.in

CIC/DS/C/2011/001391/RM
Dated: 11 September 2012

Name of the Complainant : Shri Alok Mishra,
S/o Shri Karuna Shankar Mishra,
Shakun Nagar, Fatehpur,Uttar Pradesh.

Name of the Public Authority : The Appellate Authority at (NRC),
Regional Director,Northern Regional Committee(NCTE)
20/198, Kaveri Path, Mansarover
Stadium, Mansarover, Jaipur,
Rajasthan-302 020.
                                                        ORDER

Shri  Alok  Mishra of  Fatehpur has  complained  to  the  Central  Information Commission that he received no reply/information from the Central Public Information Officer although he had filed his RTI-Application on 23 February 2011. A copy each of the RTI-Application and the complaint are enclosed for ready reference.

2. It is noted that the Complainant did not have an opportunity to go to the Appellate Authority and has directly approached the Commission with his complaint. In exercise of powers vested under Section 18(1) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, we direct the Appellate Authority to enquire into the allegations made by the Complainant and after giving him an opportunity of hearing, to pass an appropriate order without any further loss of time.

3. We also direct the Appellate Authority to obtain the explanation of the CPIO in writing for not providing the information in time and to forward the same to us along with his comments within four weeks.

4. In case the Complainant is not satisfied with the orders of the Appellate Authority, he is free to approach this Commission again in Second Appeal.

5. The Complaint is disposed of with the above directions.
Sd/-
   (Rajiv Mathur)
Central Information Commissioner

Encl:-
Copy of Complaint dated 18-04-2011.
Copy of RTI application dated 23-02-2011.
Authenticated as true copy and forwarded to:-
The Appellate Authority at (NRC),Regional Director,
Northern Regional Committee(NCTE)
20/198, Kaveri Path, Mansarover Stadium,
Mansarover, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302 020.
The CPIO at (NRC), Regional Director,
Northern Regional Committee(NCTE)
20/198, Kaveri Path, Mansarover Stadium,
Mansarover, Jaipur,Rajasthan-302 020.

Shri Alok Mishra,
S/o Shri Karuna Shankar Mishra,
Shakun Nagar, Fatehpur,
Uttar Pradesh.
                   
 (Raghubir Singh)
Deputy Registrar
Ph. No. 011­26105682
Tele Fax 011­ 26161997


Source : http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_DS_C_2011_001391_M_92364.pdf
**********************
One more case : - http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_DS_A_2011_001754_M_87805.pdf

********************************
What I feel is CIC should also check that proper reply has provided by the PIO to Applicant or not ?

RTI : Shiksha Mitra Related Case in CIC


RTI : Shiksha Mitra Related Case in CIC




CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002228/10146
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002228
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant : Mr. Pawan Aggarwal
Jilal Street, Mandi Chowk, Muradabad.

Respondent      : Mr. G. A. Raghuvanshi
PIO & Under Secretary
Min.of Labour & Employment
Shram Shakti Bhawan,New Delhi.

RTI application filed on : 12/05/2010
PIO replied : 11/06/2010
First appeal filed on : 14/06/2010
First Appellate Authority order : Not ordered
Second Appeal received on : 06/08/2010

Information sought:
1) Copy of the order related to the appointment of instructor working in Child Labor Welfare Centre.
2) Details of their service condition and the labor rule under which under which it fell.
3) Whether there was any provision for renewal of the honorarium of Child Labor Welfare Assistants
and details of increment of their honorarium. 
4) Details minimum wages of the labor and whether the salary of the volunteers were less that the
minimum wage. If yes, then the reason of the same.
5) Whether the training of the volunteers was equivalent to other training given by the PT and
Shiksha Mitra. If not then the details of the training given to the Volunteers
6) Whether the induction of the volunteers in any department was under consideration or not. Details
of the department in which they are given seniority.
7) Details of eligibility of Shiksha Mitra in Department Basic Education Department, UP. Date when they were appointed first time and their honorarium.
8) Whether the volunteers will be given smart cards given by the Indian Govt. and details of facilities
being given through smart cards.
9) Details of honorarium being given to the Shiksha Mitra and details of increment given to them with date.  

Reply of the PIO:
“I am directed to refer to your letter dated 9.3.2010 which was received in Ministry of Labour from Prime
Minister’s office vide their letter dated 16.03.2010 on the subject mentioned above and to state that this
Ministry has already taken into consideration the proposal for enhancement of honorarium in respect of
teaching and non-teaching volunteers of Special Schools and the proposal is under active consideration of
the Government. As far as future of teaching and non—teaching volunteers are concerned, it is stated that
as per the extant guidelines, considering the nature of project activities, only such persons arc to be
engaged/appointed for Project Society work who have the inclination, urge and the motivation to serve
with a m zeal to withdraw’ and rehabi1 working children who are otherwise left out of the mainstreameducation. Project Society is responsible for selection, appointment, etc., of the project functionaries.

It s up to the Project Society to decide whom to retain as project functionaries to work in the NCL Project.
Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government of India, does not interfere in the engagement of the
functionaries of the Project Society or the volunteers engaged by the NGOs selected to run Special
Schools under the Project for child labour. The Scheme of National Child Labour Project provides that
“since the project is to be set up for a limited period, neither the project staff nor the staff component of
special schools run by either Project Society or NGOs is to be regarded as permanent. The honorarium of
the teacher/volunteers will be paid as per the guidelines of National Child Labour Project. The teaching
volunteers for the special schools and other staff of the project society should be-engaged with the clear
understanding/agreement that they will be paid a consolidated honorarium for their services which are
more or less voluntary in nature. No  scale of pay should be prescribed for any of the project staff except
for the Project Director who is on deputation from the State Government.”
2. As the information in respect of points 8 & 9 concerns to the State Government of UP., the applicant
may seek the information from them directly.

First Appeal:
Non-receipt of the information from the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
Not ordered.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory response received from the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Absent;
Respondent : Mr. G. A. Raghuvanshi, PIO & Under Secretary;
The Respondent states that information available with him has been provided to the Appellant and
further information has also been provided by PIO at Muradabad.  The Appellant has not specifically
pointed out what information he has not received. A perusal of the information provided by the PIO at
Muradabad with the information provided by the PIO in the Labour Ministry appears to be satisfactory.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
                                                                                                       
Shailesh Gandhi
 Information Commissioner
 24 November 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AK)

Source : http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SG_A_2010_002228_10146_M_46045.pdf


RTI : Applicant seeking information from PIO, NCTE , And not satisfied with reply filed complaint in CIC


RTI : Applicant seeking information from  PIO, NCTE , And not satisfied with reply filed complaint in CIC

See Details : -


CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th  Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi -110 067
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /SG/A/2008/00214/2224
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2008/00214
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
             
Appellant    : Mr. Ravi Saini
Advocate, Court Compound,
Kashipur, Distt. Uddhamsingh
Nagar, Uttarakhand.
Respondent      : The Public Information Officer Northern Regional Committee,
National Council For Teacher EducationA-46, Shanti Path, Tilak Nagar,
Jaipur – 302004.
RTI application filed on  : 09/05/2008
PIO transferred   : 16/05/2008
PIO’s reply NRCNCT                         :            4/06/2008
First appeal filed on   : 19/08/2008
First Appellate Authority order : 28/08/2008
Second Appeal filed on  : 03/10/2008
The appellant had sought following information from NCTE: 
1- The Scholar given by Hindi Sahitya  Sammelan is recognized by U.G.C., Uttaranchal 
2- NCTE has approved B.T.C. training to Shiksha Mitra. 
3- Can these graduates and non-graduates  allowed to get BTC training without approval of NCTE? 
4- Does Uttranchal Government appointed 1000 Shiksha Mitra after BTC training? If not then what action you are going to initiate against these teachers? 
5- Does state government is bound to follow NCTE orders? 
6- Is it necessary to get approval from NCTE of the Scholars given by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Allahabad? 
7- Can the Uttranchal Government appoint without having permissions form NCTE. 
8- Is it necessary to get approval from NCTE by the Deemed Universities? 

PIO’s Reply:
The PIO –NCTE, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi forwarded RTI application to
PIO-NCTE, Tilak Marg, Jaipur on 16th  May 2008 for necessary action. But PIO NCTE, Jaipur did not replied.  Since no reply was received by the PIO-NCTE, Jaipur the appellant fields first appeal
before the First Appellate Authority-NCTE, New Delhi.

The First Appellate Authority ordered:
The First Appellate Authority-NCTE, New Delhi forwarded his appeal to Dr. A.S.Rana, Appellate Authority-NCTE, Jaipur with a request to provide information without any further delay.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present.
Appellant :  Absent
Respondent : Dr. Prabhu Kumar Yadav PIO NRCNCT
The respondent shows that he has provided the answer on 4 June 2008 and then subsequently in a point-wise manner on 18/12/2008. It appears that the information has been provided.

Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
The information has been provided to the appellant.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
           
 Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
16 March, 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(RM


Source : http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/SG-16032009-18.pdf

RTI : Information seeking regarding Teacher's Eligibility Test, Reply of PIO not found satisfacory, Complaint in CIC


RTI : Information seeking regarding Teacher's Eligibility Test, Reply of PIO not found satisfacory, Complaint in CIC

See Details :


 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi-110067
Tel: +91-11-26105682
File No.CIC/DS/A/2011/001619/RM
Appellant:  Mr. Kamal Kumar, Udham Singh
Nagar, Uttarakhand
Public Authority: National Council for Teacher
Education, New Delhi
Date of Hearing: 27.7.2012
Date of decision: 27.7.2012
Heard today, dated 27.7.2012.
Appellant is present through video conferencing.
Public Authority represented by Ms Mamta Kukreti, PIO, NCTE, Delhi.    
The appellant was heard and records perused.
FACTS Vide RTI dated 27.12.10, the appellant had sought certain information from  NCTE,  Delhi  regarding  qualifications  required  for  appointment  as teachers.
2. PIO vide letter dated 14.2.11, responded to the queries.
3. An appeal was filed on 14.2.11.
4. AA vide order dated 22.2.11, held that information in respect of points i & ii has already been furnished and disposed of the appeal.
5. Not satisfied with the response, he filed the present appeal.
6. The  appellant  submitted  that  he  is  not  satisfied  with  the  responses provided  by  the PIO  NCTE  vide their  letter dated 14.2.11.  The appellant further submitted that he had sought specific clarifications in his RTI which have  not  been  responded  to.
 It  is  seen  that  the  queries  sought  by  the appellant are in the nature of interpretation/clarification/seeking opinion of the NCTE relating to appointment of Primary Teachers. Even though the PIO has
responded  to  these  queries,  strictly  speaking,  they  do  not  constitute ‘information’ as per the provisions of the RTI Act. This was explained to the appellant.
7. PIO submitted that apart from responding to the RTI, they have already provided to him copies of gazette notification dated 25.8.10 and amendment dated 2.8.11 along with a copy of guidelines for conducting teacher eligibility test dated 11.2.11.
DECISION
8. The CPIO NCTE Delhi is directed to once again provide a copy of the three documents to the appellant.    
The appeal is disposed of.Sd/-
              (Rajiv Mathur)
Central Information Commissioner
Copy to :
Mr. Kamal Kumar,
S/o Shri Deelip Singh,
Moh.Julan Hospital Road,
Near Purani Holi Choraha,
Village & Post Jaspur,
Janpad- Udham Singh Nagar,
Uttrakhand
The CPIO
National Council for Teacher Education
Wing II, Hans Bhawan,
1 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi – 110002
The Under Secretary and First Appellate Authority
National Council for Teacher Education,
Wing II, Hans Bhawan,
1 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg,
New Delhi – 110002
(Raghubir Singh)
Deputy Registrar



Wednesday, April 11, 2012

RTI Application : How 150000 Posts of Teacher Vaccancy filled in UP

RTI Application : How 150000 Posts of Teacher Vaccancy filled in UP

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000613/13446
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000613
Relevant Facts emerging from the Complaint:
Complainant : Mr. Hariom Sharma
H.No.49/6, Sanik Colony
Kaserukheda, Meerut Cantt.
Uttar Pradesh
Respondent : Mrs. Reetu Singh
Public Information Officer & Under Secretary
North Regional Committee
National Council for Teacher Education
A-46 Shanti Path, Tilak Nagar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan
RTI application filed on : 01/01/2010
PIO replied : 09/02/2010
Complaint received on : 06/05/2010
Information sought:-
The appellant wants the following information:-
1. Under which U.P. Rule/Bye law, direction was given by you for 88000 senior B.T.C. in regard to
appointment of senior teachers.
2. Why stay is ordered by you (U.P. government) for vacancy of 66000 Senior B.T.C. Primary Teachers?

provide information with details
3. At present there is vacancy of 1,50,000 primary teachers. how these vacancies can be filled?
4. Through regular B.T.C. 14,000 teachers, get ready by training within 2 year. Then how vacancy of
1,50,000 post can be filled immediately.

5. without selection by B.T.C. how the policy of “Sarv Siksha Abhiyan” can be made successful.
Ground of the Complaint:
The complainant is not satisfied with the information received from PIO and hence the complaint.

Reply from PIO:-
You can seek information from concerned state government’s educational department.


Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Complainant: Mr. Hariom Sharma;
Respondent : Mrs. Reetu Singh, Public Information Officer & Under Secretary;
The PIO admits that information on query-1 & 2 would be available with the Department. There is no apparent reasons as to why this information was not provided by the then PIO Ms. Nalini Rajotya.
Decision
:
The complaint is allowed.

The present PIO Mrs. Reetu Singh is directed to provide the information to the Complainant on query-1 & 2 as per available record before 30 July 2011.

The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the then
PIO Ms. Nalini Rajotya within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the then PIO is guilty of not furnishing
information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. It appears that the then
PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A show cause notice is being issued to her, and she is directed give her reasons to the  Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on her.
The then PIO Ms. Nalini Rajotya will present herself before the Commission at the above address on
11 July 2011 at 2.30am alongwith her written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be
imposed on her as mandated under Section 20 (1). She will also submit proof of having given the
information to the appellant.

If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the Commission with her.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
14 July 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(SH)
Copy to the then PIO Ms. Nalini Rajotya through Mrs. Reetu Singh present PIO;

Source : http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SG_C_2010_000613_13446_M_60638.pdf
********************

Show cause notice served to PIO for delay /not replying to applicant. And  notice isued to present herself along with the employees who are responsible towards not provideing information within due timeframe.

RTI Application Filed in Basic Education Department UP Regarding ShikshaMitra

RTI Application Filed in Basic Education Department UP Regarding ShikshaMitra

Unsatisfactory response received by applicant, So he filed appeal in CIC office


CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002228/10146
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002228
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Pawan Aggarwal
Jilal Street, Mandi Chowk,
Muradabad.
Respondent : Mr. G. A. Raghuvanshi
PIO & Under Secretary
Min.of Labour & Employment
Shram Shakti Bhawan,
New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 12/05/2010
PIO replied : 11/06/2010
First appeal filed on : 14/06/2010
First Appellate Authority order : Not ordered
Second Appeal received on : 06/08/2010
Information sought:
1) Copy of the order related to the appointment of instructor working in Child Labor Welfare Centre.
2) Details of their service condition and the labor rule under which under which it fell.
3) Whether there was any provision for renewal of the honorarium of Child Labor Welfare Assistants
and details of increment of their honorarium.
4) Details minimum wages of the labor and whether the salary of the volunteers were less that the
minimum wage. If yes, then the reason of the same.
5) Whether the training of the volunteers was equivalent to other training given by the PT and
Shiksha Mitra. If not then the details of the training given to the Volunteers
6) Whether the induction of the volunteers in any department was under consideration or not. Details
of the department in which they are given seniority.
7) Details of eligibility of Shiksha Mitra in Department Basic Education Department, UP. Date when they were appointed first time and their honorarium.