Central Information Commission
Dr Mohammad Taufique vs Aligarh Muslim University on 23 August, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/ALMUV/A/2023/646060
Dr Mohammad Taufique ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
Aligarh Muslim University ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 15.04.2023 FA : 21.06.2023 SA : 18.09.2023
CPIO : 20.04.2023,
FAO : 18.07.2023 Hearing : 14.08.2024
16.05.2023 & 20.07.2023
Date of Decision: 22.08.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.04.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) What are the essential qualifications needed for the appointment of Associate Professor?
(ii) What are the criteria(s) required for counting of past services for direct recruitment?
(iii) What is the meaning of Accredited Research Institution / Industry with reference to eligibility, required for the post of Associate Professor?Page 1 of 5
(iv) Is Pre Ph, D. experience in any form is considered and counted for the post of Associate Professor? Answer specifically.
(v) How far the length of services of Assistant Professor (Contractual) is counted for the post of Associate Professor (cadre post)?
Dr. Mashkoor Ahmad, who has been appointed as Associate Professor in the Department of Geography, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh vide Advertisement No. 1/2021(T), Dated: 16.07.2021. Kindly furnish the following information, ..., etc./ other related information
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 20.04.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
i-v: The desired information is available on the Public Domain. Same can be accessed on the following link:- https://www.amu.ac.in/offices/council- section/acts-statutes-and-ordinances. .....etc.
3. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 20.07.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
Query No. Reply
11. 2 years 0 Months and 24 days.
12. Yes Indian Institute Of Dalit Studies (IIDS) is a professional Organisation.
13 IIDS taken into Consideration because it is a professional organisation recognized by ICSSR and affiliated with several Ministries Govt. of India.
14 No such information is available as per office record 15 A s per the experience certificate provided by the candidates the said having pay scale of Rs 15600- 39100, AGP 6000 is equivalent to that Page 2 of 5 of Assistant Professor in a university/College/ Institute. Thus. the experience of said has been counted in the total experience.
4. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.06.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 18.07.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
5. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.09.2023.
6. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Ata Ullah Khan Section Officer, Selection Committee Teaching, Mr. Irshad, Section Officer, Search Unit and Mr. Syed Asim Abbas, Section Officer, Faculty of Science, attended the hearing through video conference.
7. The appellant inter alia submitted that the reply furnished by the CPIO on points no, 6 and 7 were not in accordance with the information sought in the RTI application. He requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide the information, as sought.
8. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the information sought on points no. 6 and 7 of the RTI application pertained to the third-party, disclosure of which had no relationship to any public activity or interest. Accordingly, they claimed exemption under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act vide letter dated 16.05.2023.
9. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that appropriate reply has been furnished by the CPIO vide letters dated 20.04.2023, 16.05.2023 & 20.07.2023. The perusal of record further reveals that the appellant has sought on points no. 6 and 7 of the RTI application personal information of the third-party, disclosure of which had no relationship to any public activity or interest, hence denied appropriately by the CPIO under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act. In this regard, the attention of the appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Page 3 of 5 Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner & Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & amp; Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794. The following was thus held:
"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."
10. In view of the above, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the matter. With this observation, the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
आनंदी राम लंगम)
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं म
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 22.08.2024
Page 4 of 5
Authenticated true copy
Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कन ल एस एस िछकारा, ( रटायड )
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26180514
Addresses of the parties:
1. CPIO (Under RTI Act, 2005)
Nodal Officer (RTI Cell)
Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh-202001
2. Dr Mohammad Taufique
Page 5 of 5
Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)