Central Information Commission
Kanwar Pal vs Central University Of Haryana on 28 December, 2021
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/CUVRH/A/2020/127273
Kanwar Pal .....अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Central University of Haryana,
RTI Cell, Village:Jant-pali,
Distict-Mahendergarh - 123029, Haryana. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 06/12/2021
Date of Decision : 24/12/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 05/06/2020
CPIO replied on : 06/07/2020
First appeal filed on : 25/07/2020
First Appellate Authority's order : 26/08/2020
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 05/09/2020
1
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.06.2020 seeking the following information:
1. "Provide me copy of Selection Criteria (including marks of Academic, Cultural, Sports, Research, Interview etc) for the post of regular Assistant Professor In various Department (Arts, Science, Engineering, Management, Commerce etc) separately from 2013 onwards.
2. Provide me copy of Selection Criteria (including marks of Academic, Cultural, sports, Research, interview etc) for the post of Guest faculty/Contractual faculty/Temporary faculty/Visiting faculty/extension faculty etc in various Department (Arts, Science, Engineering, Management, Commerce etc) separately from 2013 onwards.
3. Provide me copy of merit lists for the selection of regular Assistant professor/Guest faculty/Contractual faculty/Temporary faculty/Visiting faculty/extension faculty etc in Computer Science (Engg. Application and all Departments where computer is a subject thought by the teacher of computer science) department from 2013 onwards.
4. Provide me copy of Advertisement for the selection of regular Assistant Professor/Guest faculty/Contractual faculty/Temporary faculty/visiting faculty/extension faculty etc In Computer Science (Engg. Application and all Departments where computer is a subject thought by the teacher of computer science) department from 2013 onwards,
5. Provide me candidates who joined duty for the post of regular Assistant Professor/Guest faculty/Contractual faculty/Temporary faculty/visiting faculty/extension faculty etc In Computer Science (Engg. Application and all Departments where computer is a subject thought by the teacher of computer science) department from 2013 onwards."
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the appellant on 06.07.2020 stated as follows:-
"Points No.01 and 02:-As per UGC Norms, updated time to time and available on UGC website Points No.03 to 05:- Information asked is not specific." 2
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.07.2020. FAA's order dated 26.08.2020 upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio conference.
Respondent: Rajeev Kumar Singh, Astt. Professor & CPIO present through audio conference.
The Commission at the outset remarked upon a perusal of the facts on record that the information sought for in the RTI Application is largely very unspecific and cumbersome in nature and the Appellant was asked to clarify what information he is seeking particularly on points 3-5.
The Appellant vehemently challenged the observations of the Commission and insisted for relief to be ordered in the matter as he has sought for information regarding the department where Computer Science is taught as a subject.
The CPIO submitted that there are three different computer departments and they have only contractual and regular faculty, details of whom is already available on their website along with their resume.
Upon repeated query from the Commission, the Appellant stated that he wants the information regarding the school of engineering where computer science is taught as a subject but harped on the fact that he has sought for specific information in the RTI Application which should be provided to him in totality.
Decision:
The Commission based on the proceedings during the hearing and considering the insistence of the Appellant directs the CPIO to revisit points 3-5 of the RTI Application to ascertain the availability of the relevant information. The revised reply of the CPIO incorporating the available information shall be provided to the Appellant subject to the exemption of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, wherever applicable with respect to the third parties.3
The above direction shall be complied with by the CPIO within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 4