Central Information Commission
Dr.Jasminder Singhdureja vs All India Council For Technical ... on 14 July, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000618/13440
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000618
Relevant Facts emerging from the Complaint:
Complainant : Mr. Jasminder Singh Dureja
H. No. 80, St No. 4
Dashmesh Nagar, Patiala
PIN- 147004
Respondent (1) : Central Public Information Officer,
All India Council for Technical Education
7th Floor, Chander Lok Building
Janapath, New Delhi- 110 001
(2) : PIO & Director
All India Council for Technical Education
Plot no. 1-A, 5th Floor, DTE (Pb.) Building,
Dakshin Marg, Sector-36A,
Chandigarh, Punjab
RTI application filed on : 24/10/2009
PIO replied : Not mentioned.
Complaint received on : 08/02/2011
Information sought:-
The appellant wants the following information:-
1. Whether the experience/service of a person rendered on a Polytecnic of Punjab State (AICTE approved and Govt./ Govt. aided) at the level of lecturer in the pay scale of Rs. 7880- 13500 with initial start of Rs. 8000 w.e.f. 1996, (Rs. 2200-4000 under unrevised scale) would be considered for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme to the level of Sr. lecturer/ Lecturer Selection Scale/ Asst. Professor/ Reader in an Engineering College/ University offering engineering education, provided the person fulfill all other conditions prescribed by AICTE for counting of previous service.
2. Whether the experience/ service of a person rendered in a Polytecnic located in other states except Punjab (AICTE approved and Govt./ Govt aided) at the level of lecturer in the pay scale of Rs. 8000-
13500 would be considered for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme to the level of Sr. lecturer/ Lecturer Selection Scale/ Asst. Professor/ Reader in an Engineering College/ University offering engineering education, provided the person fulfill all other conditions prescribed by AICTE for counting of previous service.
3. Whether the criteria regarding experience of 5 years with M.Tech./ 2years with PhD at the level of lecturer or equivalent for the post of Asst. Professor / Reader in the Engg. College/ University prescribed by AICTE specifically define that the experience of 5 years with M. Tech./ 2years with Phd should be of an Engg. College or the experience of a Polytechnic lecturer is also to be considered.
Ground of the Complaint:
Information not provided by PIO.
Reply from PIO:-
The PIO replied that the information sought by the applicant pertains to the third party and no public interest will be served in the disclosure. In accordance with Section 11 of the Act, a reference was made to the third party i.e., Sunitha Choudhury to make submission in writing or orally whether the information may be disclosed or not. The third party vide letter dated 25/10/2010 has strongly opposed to give any information to the applicant. Therefore, in accordance of sub section (3) of Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005, the information is denied.
Submissions received from the PIO:
1) Vide copy of letter dated 25/01/2010, Mr. C. S. Verma, CPIO, North West Regional Officer, Chandigarh, submitted that with reference to the query for clarification and AICTE notification for pay scale & service condition were enclosed Submissions received from the Complainant:
1. The Complainant, Mr. Jasimder Singh Durega vide letter dated 08/02/2010 submitted before the commission that information was not furnished by the CPIO Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Complainant: Mr. Jasminder Singh Dureja;
Respondent : Absent;
The complainant has sought replies to hypothetical queries and claims that he is highlighting certain missing elements in the guidelines. The Complainant has shown the Commission the information which has been provided to him as per records. The PIO has provided information based on the records but the complainant believes there are some missing elements in the guidelines. For this he will have to go to an appropriate forum. The PIO can only give information that exits on record and not correct any deficiency in the guidelines.
Decision:
The complaint is disposed.
The information available on the record has been provided. This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 14 July 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(SH)