Re: [RTI INDIA] Re: " section 2(h)" substantial , IC want it to be specified

Dear sir

Thanks for the feedback but it is IC only which has constrained me to try
section 2(h). In the month of June Mr SG gave adverse rulling on section 2(f).
Copy attch herewith of landmark decision which has helped PIO's/FAA to shield
misdoing of all private schools. Now these PIO have lots of gratitude towards
CIC for helping them in shielding schools of whatever they want to do.

Surprisingly in full bench decision of CIC in Pinnacle school , section 2(f) was
validated by bench under section 50 of Delhi school act and Mr SG was part of
bench. Even Shri Habibullah in case Shri Abid Khan vs Directorate of
Education ruled in favor of section 2(f) as Delhi school act section 50 allows
Directorate of education to call for any information or inspect any files

Now when i am trying to pursue 2(h) route it is also meeting a deadend.
Surprisingly there are no of CIC rullings by other IC where based on subsidized
land/govt nominee/tax incentive etc schools were declared public. So in my case
no exemption should be done.

Kindly advise what can be done if IC is determined of not recognizing both
section 2(f) and 2(H)

regards
Mohit Goel

----- Original Message ----
From: sroy1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com>
To: "RTI India : Right to Information, CIC" <rti_india@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, 6 October, 2010 10:49:29 AM
Subject: [RTI INDIA] Re: " section 2(h)" substantial , IC want it to be
specified

Dear Mohit

IC Shailesh Gandhi in the Escorts Hospital Case (Rakesh Gupta), gave a
decision
so poorly reasoned that the DHC granted a stay immediately. I think he
has learnt
his lesson properly and will not stick his neck out further.

The only questions you need to answer are as follows:-

1) Was the school established or constituted BY (not under) a
notification
or order of appropriate Govt? I'm certain the answer would be NO !!

2) If NO, then you must show that school is a "non-governmental
organisation"
substantially financed, owned or controlled by appropriate Govt. The
evidences
you are putting up "land at Rs 10", "2 govt nominees" etc do not fall
under these
provisos to 2.h.d. The first is a SUBSIDY (as distinguished from
"finance").
The second one is meaningless. because as per the DSEAR there is a
separation
between the Society and the school's management.

3) Your better option would be 2(f). Insist that the school is a
private body, and that
the Education Dept should lawfully access the info requested to
provide to you If you
persist with 2h (school = PA) then the school will get a stay
promptly,

Sarbajit.

On Oct 6, 9:38 am, Mohit Goel <mr_moh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Respected sirs
>
> I need your advise in one of the below cases which is being adjourned by IC
> asking for certain claissification
>
> I have filed an RTI against private school in delhi . The school has been
>helped
> by govt as follows
>
> 1. 1 acre land is being given at subsidised rate. 2 acre of land is given at
> Rs 10/acre rate for play ground etc
> 2. School has 2 govt nominee on the Management committee.
> 3. Delhi school Act provision give extraordinary powers to Deptt of education
>in
> controlling any recognised private school, to take over its management etc and
> thus Delhi govt exercise control on matter of private recognised school
>
> I filled my application to IC along with my written arugument on each point no
> 1,2,3 and quoted CIC/High court rullling on these 3 points.
> Further i have seperately submitted High court rullings on " Substantial "
> /section 2(h)( see attchment) as recently on 18th aug , Mr SG ruled in favor
of
> a private school who was also given land at substantial rate
> saying substantial means of very great value and importance.
>
> On date of hearing of my case i was ask to specify the apprx amount of
subsidy
> in terms of Rupees that govt has given in form of land.. means IC want me to
> specify value of subsidy on land at time of allocation of land and current
> market value.. i have quoted that 2 acre at Rs 10 itself is very big subsidy
>and
> requested to refer High court rullings on section 2(h0 where it is very clear
> that even iota of help from govt makes entity liable to public but my
arguments
> were set aside and i have been ask to furnish detail of current land
> value.adjourning the matter
>
> now my concerns is that how can i calculate old and current land value and
from
> where to get these figures.
> I am not sure why is it required by CIC to do so when act + High court rulling
> is very clear. even earlier IC's have declared schools as public authority on
> ground of subsidized land +govt controls without asking appellant to specify
> value of land etc.
>
> I request members to help by advising how to work out land value etc and to
> proceed on this matter.
>
> thanking you in advance
>
> regards
> Mohit
>
> 2ndset of argument_HC decision.doc
> 50KViewDownload