Central Information Commission
Kabita Kumari Shaw vs Indira Gandhi National Open University ... on 25 April, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/IGNOU/A/2024/618835
Kabita Kumari Shaw ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Indira Gandhi National
Open University (IGNOU), ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Kolkata
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 18.03.2024 FA : 18.04.2024 SA : Nil
CPIO : 16.04.2024 FAO : 25.04.2024 Hearing : 23.04.2025
Date of Decision: 24.04.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.03.2024 seeking information on the following points:
I, Kabita Kumari Shaw, Enrollment no: 2353422443, Course DECE, RC:
KOLKATTA, Part of the Final Year Seeking Information Under Right to Information Act 2005.
1. Provide me the copy of Training / Placement / Acknowledgement letter from the University giving permission to do the project in the school which Comes under my Study Center, Paper Code DECE-4 Page 1 of 4
2. Provide me the Name of the Academic Counsellor and Guide respectively along with Contact number against the paper code, DECE -4
3. Provide me Copy Attendance Schedule For Academic Counsellor and guide for April 2024 and May 2024 in Study Center against paper code DECE-4
4. If these Paper Code - DECE-4 Contains synopsis in the project then please provide me mail id to approve the synopsis
5. What will be the Academic qualification of guide which the IGNOU/University Provide against Paper Code -DECE-4
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 16.04.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-
1. Please refer to the project guide for DECE-004 (The project guide is also available online at the following link: https://www.egyankosh.ac.in/handle/ 123456789/43979) and follow the instructions regarding training / placement and approach the coordinator of your study centre for necessary permission to do your project in the nursery school. In case of any difficulties, you may contact the Regional Director/Assistant Regional Director at Regional Centre Kolkata.
2. The list of the approved academic counselor is available at the Regional Centre website at the following link: http://rckolkatta.ignou.ac.in/Ignou-RCKolkata/ userfiles/file/ONLINE%20APPROVED%20AC%20DATA%20AS%20ON%2011_ 12_2023_WEBSITE.pdf.
3. Not applicable
4. You can approach the coordinator of your study centre for necessary approval of your synopsis. In case of any difficulties you may contact the Regional Director/Assistant Regional Director at Regional Centre Kolkata
5. The qualification and eligibility needed for a nursery teacher working in the nursery school/preschool/kindergarten school is the academic qualification of the guide for the Project Work DECE -004."Page 2 of 4
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.04.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 25.04.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
5. The appellant's representative Kundan Prasad and on behalf of the respondent Dr. Jyotirmaya Shaw, CPIO, attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The appellant's representative inter alia submitted that the appellant was not provided with the copy of permission/training letter for carrying out the project in the assigned course. He insisted on the information sought in point no. 1 of the RTI application.
7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant was required to follow the project guide and seek the permission letter from the Regional Office. However, the appellant had directly sought the same from the CPIO, through an RTI application.
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the respondent replied on 16.04.2024. The reply given in response to point no. 1 of the RTI application appears to be misleading and evasive. As per the provisions of the RTI Act, the CPIO is under an obligation to either furnish the information or deny the same by invoking relevant exemption clauses provided under the Act. The CPIO has not resorted to either of the options and has advised the appellant to obtain a copy of the document by following a prescribed procedure under the project guide. It is also noted that the counsel accompanying the representative of the CPIO misled the Commission and was unable to assist the Commission efficiently. In case, the permission letter was not issued to the appellant, the CPIO was at liberty to affirm the said fact in their reply. However, the respondent has given a perfunctory and incorrect reply. In view of the above, the Page 3 of 4 respondent is directed to re-visit point no. 1 of the RTI application and furnish the information to the appellant, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. The reply given with respect to remaining points in the RTI application appear to be in order and no further intervention is called for tot hat extent. The Commission further records its admonition against the unpreparedness of the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent and cautions the CPIO to appear before the Commission in future hearings, without fail. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 24.04.2025 Authenticated true copy Sharad Kumar (शरद कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1 The CPIO Senior Regional Director, IGNOU, Regional Centre, Bikash Bhavan, North Block, 4th Floor, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700091 2 Kabita Kumari Shaw Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)