Business Standard: New Delhi: Wednesday, January 27, 2016.
In a stern
order, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has said schools and Education
Department should not disclose information about children under the RTI Act
without consulting their parents.
The
Commission admonished the principal of R D Public School and Central Public
Information Officer (CPIO) of Directorate of Education (DoE) of Delhi
government for disclosing information about a student to his relatives who had
a dispute with the student's family.
Information
Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu said the principal of the school himself told
the DoE that his school does not come under RTI Act and applicant was involved
in a dispute with the school student's family.
"There
are several incidents reported that rivals of the parents or quarreling spouses
take the child from the school. Revealing the details of the child might lead
to kidnap or murder etc.
"During
the stay of child in school, the principal and teachers have a duty of guardian
and any negligence on their part might harm the student," Acharyulu said.
The principal
apprehended disclosure would cause damage to the boy but still gave documents
related to the student, he noted.
"The
school should not have furnished the copies of CBSE certificate of the child.
Another letter from CBSE given to school granting direct admission to ten
students including Nishit Anand was also furnished to appellant," Achayulu
said.
The
Information Commissioner said the CPIO of DDE gave all this information to RTI applicant
Lalit Kapur without applying his mind and not thinking about the security
issues that might arise for the boy.
"The
Commission directs the CPIO and principal not to disclose personal information
of the students to any person, much less to his so called relatives without
following the procedure under Section 11 of the RTI Act," he said.
He said it
was revealed that CPIO did not follow the mandatory process in Section 11 of
the RTI Act to seek opinion of the parents of the child, the third party.
"The
request for information is certainly personal in nature and third party
information of a minor student and its disclosure may not enhance the welfare
of the child. It is interrogative in nature and he is fishing to find basis to
embarrass the child or his family not with a good motive and for some
unspecified purpose, which is certainly not 'public purpose'," Acharyulu
said.
The
Commissioner said irrespective of the opinion given by a third party, the CPIO
has to decide based on his discretion in public interest to fulfil the
objectives of RTI Act.
"The
CPIO can refuse to disclose even if the third party has agreed to disclose or
provide information," he said.
Acharyulu
held that the information exempted under section 8(1)(j) was disclosed because
of which the right to privacy of the child and his parents was violated by the
principal and CPIO.
"The
claim of the public authority that the guardian could not be contacted does not
stand, as the correct course of action would have been to refer to the RTI
Rules or take legal opinion. The CPIO in not doing so has put the student's
safety in jeopardy," he said.
Issuing a
show cause notice to the principal and Directorate of Education CPIO, Acharyulu
asked why maximum penalty should not be imposed on both of them and
disciplinary action be initiated for not complying with the provision of
Section 11 of RTI Act and causing breach of the privacy of the child and his
parents.
In a warning
to the RTI applicant, Acharyulu said, "The Commission records its
admonition against the appellant for misuse of RTI against the school child and
warns him against such misuse in future.
"His
second appeal is extension of abuse and hence rejected. Though the RTI Act has
not provided to impose penalty against the RTI applicant, the Commission
records its contempt against him and imposes a penalty of Rs 10 to be paid to
the principal of the school.