Skip to main content

Gujarat govt body seeks private educational institute nod for providing information on free hike under RTI

By Pankti Jog*
In a surprise reply, the Fee Regulatory Committee (FRC), Government of Gujarat, has refused any information to a right to information (RTI) application filed by one Vinodrai Parmar, an ex-employee of a self-financed institute (SFI) of Vasad, Gujarat, regarding the SFI's fee hike proposal, its expenses and budget.
Parmar says, he was “shocked” when he received a three line reply from the public information officer (PIO), FRC, that the information cannot furnished because the SFI concerned has asked “not to disclose it.”
“These private educational institutes are taking huge sum as fees, yet the staff engaged by them are not paid properly. When we wish to seek information of their expenses, the FRC asks for permission from the SFI, which is denied for obvious reason”, says Parmar.
Parmar says, the SFI where he worked is registered as a charitable society, and submits its accounts to Charity Commissioner every year.
“It works for public cause. How can the FRC classify the SFI's expenses and budget as secret? In fact, it should be directly covered under the RTI, in the same way as grant-in-aid educational institutes”, Parmar, who is fighting for his dues from the Valsad SFI, insists.
SFIs have to submit their proposal on fee amount they wish to collect from their students to the state-sponsored FRC, which is supposed to look into the rationale for the proposed fee, details of the courses run, along with the expenditure done by them over the previous five years. They also have to submit the proposed budget for the next year to justify their demand.
The RTI reply
After analysing the proposal, the FRC either decides on whether to allow permission for fee hike. Notably, most SFIs in Gujarat demand huge fees for academic courses, and in return they claim of giving best quality of education and facilities. Yet, little is known in public domain about their functioning.
“Information regarding expenses and budgets of SFIs is not a third party information in the first place. Secondly, the PIO is not supposed to seek permission from any third party, but has to just seek opinion and then give decision with reasons why the information cannot be disclosed”, Harinesh Pandya, an RTI expert, says.
“In this case, the PIO of the FRC seems to be working at the mercy of the SFI, protecting the latter's interests, and this is a complete violation of the Law”, he adds.
In fact, says Pandya, “The information sought by Parmar falls into the proactive disclosure provision. Once decision of allowing fee hike is taken, the entire proposal, annexures, discussion held by FRC on the proposal and the final decision should be uploaded on the website.”
“This is mandatory as per section 4(1) b of the RTI Act. FRC in this case is completely misinterpreting the law. Here, the PIO, after 11 years of enactment of the law, is not aware of the basic provisions of RTI, which is unacceptable”, he adds.
Meanwhile, Parmar has filed an appeal with the First Applet Authority, demanding disclosure of information he had sought from the FRC.
---
*With Mahiti Adhikar Gujarat Pahel, Ahmedabad

Comments

TRENDING

Gujarat refusal to observe Maulana Azad's birthday as Education Day 'discriminatory'

By Our Representative
The Gujarat government decision not to celebrate the National Education Day on !monday has gone controversial. Civil society organizations have particularly wondered whether the state government is shying away from the occasion, especially against the backdrop of "deteriorating" level of education in Gujarat.

Rushdie, Pamuk, 260 writers tell Modi: Aatish episode casts chill on public discourse

Counterview Desk
As many as 260 writers, journalists, artists, academics and activists across the world, including Salman Rushdie, British Indian novelist, Orhan Pamuk, Turkish novelist and recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in literature, and Margaret Atwood, Canadian poet and novelist, have called upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review the decision to strip British Indian writer Aatish Taseer of his overseas Indian citizenship.

Visually challenged lady seeks appointment with Gujarat CM, is 'unofficially' detained

By Pankti Jog*
It was a usual noon of November 10. I got a phone call on our Right to Information (RTI) helpline No 9924085000 from Ranjanben of Khambhat, narrating her “disgraceful” experience after she had requested for an appointment with Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani. She wanted to meet Rupani, on tour of the Khambhat area in Central Gujarat as part of his Janvikas Jumbesh (Campaign for Development).

Violent 'Ajodhya' campaign in 1840s after British captured Kabul, destroyed Jama Masjid

Counterview Desk  Irfan Ahmad, professor at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen, Germany, and author of “Islamism and Democracy in India” (Princeton University Press, 2009), short-listed for the 2011 International Convention of Asian Scholars Book Prize for the best study in Social Sciences, in his "initial thoughts" on the Supreme Court judgment on the Babri-Jam Janmaboomi dispute has said, while order was “lawful”, it was also “awful.”

There may have been Buddhist stupa at Babri site during Gupta period: Archeologist

By Rajiv Shah
A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there "no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

VHP doesn't represent all Hindus, Sunni Waqf Board all Muslims: NAPM on SC ruling

Counterview Desk
India's top civil rights network, National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), even as describing the Supreme Court's Ayodhya judgement unjust, has said, it is an "assault on the secular fabric of the Constitution". In a statement signed by top social workers and activists, NAPM said, "The judgement conveys an impression to Muslims that, despite being equal citizens of the country, their rights are not equal before the law."

Would those charged for illegally demolishing Babri now manage a new Ram temple?

By Fr Cedric Prakash sj*
The long-awaited verdict on the contentious issue of the disputed land in Ayodhya was finally delivered by the Supreme Court on November 9, 2019. The judgement has come after a 70-year-old conflict filled with acrimony, divisiveness, hate and violence between sections of the Hindus and Muslims of the country. At the core of the issue was the Ram Mandir – Babri Masjid dispute: was there a temple on the place where the Masjid was built? To whom should the land be given to?