Central Information Commission
Dr.Pramila Sharma vs Daulat Ram College on 7 July, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
22 Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001315/4022
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001315
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Dr.Pramila Sharma
40, Arjun Marg,
DLF Phase-I, Gurgaon (Haryana).
Respondent : Principal & PIO
Daulat Ram College
(University of Delhi)
4, Patel Marg, Maurice Nagar,
Delhi-110007.
RTI application filed on : 21/01/2009
PIO replied : 03/03/2009
First appeal filed on : 20/03/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 24/04/2009
Second Appeal received on : 20/05/2009
Information sought: -
The Appellant had sent representation dt. 23/01/2001 addressed to the Vice Chancellor, University of Delhi from Banasthali Vidyapith, Rajasthan regarding arbitrary conversion of EOL(Academic) into EOL(Private) by Daulat Ram College, which was forwarded by Delhi University to Daulat Ram College along with letter dt. 19/02/200. Under RTI (Act) 2005, Provide certified copy of the following:
Sl. No. Information sought PIO's reply 1. University letter dt. Duly attested copy of University letter dt.
19/02/2001 sent to Daulat Ram 19.02.2001 had already been supplied to College. the Appellant.
2. The reply received from The college has sent a reply to Dy.
Daulat Ram College. Registrar (Colleges) vide college letter No. DRC/82(HN) dt. 26.4.2001. The signed office copy is not traceable in the files. However, an unsigned copy of reply sent in response to college branch letter dt. 19.02.01 has been traced in the file, an attested copy of which has already provided to the Appellant.
3. The decision of the University The question pertains to the University of of Delhi of Appellant's Delhi.
representation Grounds for First Appeal:
PIO Daulat Ram College has provided incomplete information vide letter dt.3/03/2009 for the following reasons:
1) The reply dt. 26/4/2001, no. DRC/82(HN) from the Principal, Daulat Ram College to Dy. Registrar Delhi University sent by College does not contain any signature of the then Principal. An unsigned document has no authenticity.
2) The information regarding the decision of the University on his representation made vide letter 23/1/2001 (addressed to Vice Chancellor) regarding conversion of my EOL (Academic) to EOL (Private) has not been provided.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
"Appellant's original application (OA) was transferred to Daulat Ram College where the Appellant was employed. The record shows that the college had provided information vide their letter dt. 3rd March, 2009. In case the Appellant is not satisfied with the response received from the college, the Appellant Authority designated under the Act by the college may be contacted. Regarding point 3 of the OA, it was intimated by the PIO vide letter dt. 2nd April, 2009 that the information was not available with the section concerned. Under these circumstances, there is no further actionable point in the matter."
Grounds for Second Appeal To Direct PIO of University of Delhi to impart with desired information without any further delay. The Appellant also appeal to impose penalty for the delay under section 20(I).
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Dr.Pramila Sharma Respondent: Mr. P.L. Nayar, PIO The Appellant is perturbed by the fact that signed of his copy of letter of 19.02.2001 is stolen /lost. As to query 3 the information is with Delhi University according to the PIO since the papers have sent to Delhi University on 19.02.2001. The PIO of Delhi University has also stated that the paper is not available. In view of this the information cannot be provided. It would be impossible for the Commission to pin the blame anywhere for the loss of a paper after nearly a decade has elapsed.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed.
The information is not available.
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 cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 7 July 2009 (In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.) AK