Central Information Commission
Mrs.Humaira Alam vs Ministry Of Human Resource Development on 23 August, 2011
1
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama
Place, New Delhi110066
Telefax:01126180532 & 01126107254 websitecic.gov.in
Appeal : No. CIC/DS/C/2011/001050
Appellant /Complainant : Mrs. Humaria Alam,
Aligarh
Public Authority : Aligarh Muslim
University, Aligarh
(Dr. Salik A. Siddiqui, CPIO,
Dr. Amanullah
Khan & Sh. S.M. Rizwanu
Rehman, FAA -
Through videoonferencing)
Date of Hearing : 23 August 2011
Date of Decision : 23 August 2011
Facts:
1. Applicant submitted RTI application dated 28 June 2010 before the CPIO, office of the Controller of Admission, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh to obtain information pertaining to marks of the candidate who was placed last on the merit list (Alumni category - CA) along with question paper, answer sheet, OMR sheet etc., of her daughter who had appeared for class 9 in Abdullah Girl's High School, AMU, Aligarh - enclosed herewith as Annexure A.
2. Vide CPIO order dated 26 August 2010, point wise information in respect of 3 points was provided to the appellant, in which it was clearly mentioned that, "the cutoff marks of candidates (girls) selected under alumni category are 55 (fifty five only)".
3. Appellant preferred 2nd appeal before the Commission.
4. Matter was heard today via videoconferencing from Aligarh where both parties were present as above. Appellant repeated several times that the CPIO/Assistant Controller (Admissions), in response to her RTI application had clearly informed that the Appeal : No. CIC/DS/C/2011/001050 2 cutoff marks of candidates (girls) selected under Alumni category was 55 ( fifty five only). This information was further confirmed by note dated 26 August 2010 whereon noting is made by Coordinator, class 9 Admission in which also the cutoff marks for girls admission under Alumni category is given as 55. Respondent has admitted both these letters. Commission also places on record letter dated 20/25 August 2010 signed by Deputy Controller (Admissions) in which he has informed the appellant that, "Cut off merit under CA category is 56 marks (9th rank) and the marks of R no. 14214 is 55 (10th rank)".
Decision notice
5. Both parties have been heard. It is amply clear that as per the averments of the respondent CPIO in his letter dated 26 August 2010 addressed to the appellant in response to her RTI application and also confirmed in the noting made by the Coordinator class IX, admissions, dated 26 August 2010 the cutoff marks for girls selected under Alumni category is 55 marks.
6. The information provided in letter dated 20/25 August 2010 to the appellant by the Deputy Controller (Admissions ) only pertains to the marks of the last candidate who was given admission under CA category which was 56 marks. Commission cannot accept the plea of the respondent that the sentence conveys that the cutoff marks for being eligible for admission under CA category was 56 and not 55 marks as per their correspondence dated the 26 August 2010.
7. Through this RTI application, the appellant has focused on the issue of denial of admission to her daughter under the CA category even though she secured the required marks of 55 which was the minimum prescribed marks for admission under this category. The appellant has also submitted a copy of the answer sheet in respect of her daughter which she had received from the respondent in support of her averments. Respondent has faxed letter dated 23 Appeal : No. CIC/DS/C/2011/001050 3 August 2011 to the Commission after the conclusion of the hearing today vide which they have forwarded letter dated 14 September 2010 addressed to the appellant in which it is stated that the CPIO had inadvertently mentioned the number 55 instead of 56 while referring to the prescribed cutoff marks for admission to class IX. The Commission notes the averments of the appellant at the hearing that she has never received any letter dated 14 September 2010 from the respondent.
8. We also find it difficult to accept the averments of the respondent that the CPIO has inadvertently recorded 55 as the eligibility cutoff level instead of 56 on the grounds that this figure of 55 has been mentioned twice by the respondent, once in typed form and the other in the handwriting of the Coordinator, class IX admission in their letters/notings dated 26 August 2010 which are placed on record. The letter of 14 September 2010 appears to be an afterthought.
9. Therefore in the interest of transparency in the matter of admissions to the school and also to render accountable the school management for the decisions that they have announced and which affect the young candidates seeking admission to the school, the Commission refers this case to the Chairman of the Aligarh Muslim University Board so that they can enquire into the matter further so that a fair decision can be taken in the matter of admission of a young child.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu) Information Commissioner (DS) Authenticated true copy:
(T. K. Mohapatra) Under Secretary & Dy. Registrar Tel. No. 01126105027 Copy to:
1. Mrs. Humaira Alam Appeal : No. CIC/DS/C/2011/001050 4 W/o Mr. Aftab Alam Naby Nagar, Jamalpur Near Markazi Masjid, Jamalpur, Aligarh (UP)
2. The CPIO The Controller of Examination Admission Section, Aligarh Muslim University Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh)
3. The Appellate Authority The Controller of Examination Admission Section, Aligarh Muslim University Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh)
4. The Chairman Aligarh Muslim University Board Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh) Appeal : No. CIC/DS/C/2011/001050