RTI Mode of sending the RTI reply by the PIO
The appellant sought certified copies of registration documents pertaining to Dev Prabhat Samachar Hindi newspaper. His application was transferred under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act to Office of Press Registrar General of India. The respondent claimed that information was denied U/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act vide letter dated 04.07.2024. The CIC enquired about the mode by which the reply dated 04.07.2024 was sent to the complainant. The respondent submitted that the reply was uploaded on website but could not corroborate their submission. The respondent could not confirm whether they had sent the letter dated 04.07.2024 to the complainant by post within stipulated time limit as per the RTI Act. The CIC issued a show cause notice to the then PIO Mr. Suresh Kumar, as to why penalty U/s 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be imposed upon him for not providing reply to the complainant within stipulated time limit.
Comments
Every PIO must reply to the RTI Application as per the time limit prescribed under the RTI Act, and keep the proof of reply.
Citation: Shravan Mishra v. Office of the Press Registrar General of India, File No: CIC/MOIAB/C/2024/127395; Date of Interim Decision: 23-01-2026
Forum CBSE Needs Strong Corrective and disciplinary Action , Not a Change of Education Minister
The controversies surrounding CBSE On screen marking have understandably caused concern among students and parents and dented the image of the government at a time when present PM takes personal interest in students welfare by directly interacting with student community on various platforms. However, fixing responsibility and restoring public trust in CBSE is more important than demanding the resignation of the Education Minister, Dharmendra Pradhan, for matters not under his direct control.It would be unfortunate if an effective minister is made to take the responsibility for operational lapses and carelessness of officials within an autonomous examination body like CBSE.Education Minister is not involved in day-to-day functioning, confidential examination processes, or operational decisions. Further ,In today’s governance environment, with close monitoring and transparent appointments by PMO , the scope for ministerial interference in routine functioning is extremely limited.
The more relevant question is whether the officials directly responsible for examination management and CBSE like chairman, controller of examination, secretary and CVO followed established systems and safeguards.Reports suggest that OSM had faced serious difficulties earlier when implemented by UPA government in 2014 but No minister resigned then but OSM was discontinued after public criticism with same problems. If so, was adequate pilot testing conducted by CBSE before rolling it out again at a national scale for Class 12 examinations? Were past experiences and technological risks properly evaluated by above officials of CBSE and the ministry briefed before being implemented?
Technology and reform are necessary, but they must be introduced cautiously, especially in high-stakes examinations affecting millions of students and political risk involved.The lapses in CBSE appear to be carelessness,operational and human failures. Immediate Disciplinary action against top officials or their transfers would send a far more constructive message than politically targeting the minister.
Students deserve both reform and reliability. The focus now should be on restoring trust in CBSE examination systems through accountability, institutional strengthening, and careful implementation of change.
— A Visitor
