Central Information Commission
Moorthi vs University Grants Commission on 15 May, 2019
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
Decision no.: CIC/UGCOM/A/2017/609728/00657
File no.: CIC/UGCOM/A/2017/609728
In the matter of:
Moorthi
...Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
University Grants Commission (UGC)
Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi - 110 002
... Respondent
RTI application filed on : 01/11/2017 CPIO replied on : 20/11/2017 First appeal filed on : 24/11/2017 First Appellate Authority order : 19/12/2017 Second Appeal filed on : 27/12/2017 Date of Hearing : 15/05/2019 Date of Decision : 15/05/2019 The following were present:
Appellant: Not present Respondent: Smt. Manju Nagpal, Section Officer and Representative of the PIO Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information:
1. The appellant has completed PG Maths English medium in 2004 and qualified SET in 2016. Now he is studying the same PG Maths in Tamil medium in distance education. Is he eligible for the post of Assistant professor for the 1 same PG studied in Tamil Nadu government gives preference for who studied in Tamil medium.
2. Whether he is eligible for Assistant Professor in Mathematics in Universities, Government Arts and Science Colleges and Government Engineering Colleges with the previous experience where he worked as an Assistant professor in Mathematics at an Education college.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The CPIO did not provide the desired information. Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant did not avail of the opportunity of being present for the hearing despite duly served notice on 02.05.2019, vide speed post tracking no. ED317179978IN.
The CPIO submitted that an appropriate reply was already provided on 20.11.2017 and 19.12.2017. She further submitted that vide letter dated 13.05.2019 additional information was given to the appellant by stating that the information with regard to medium of qualification is not available under UGC regulations.
Observation:
Based on a perusal of the records, it is seen that the appellant sought clarifications which is not covered u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act. The CPIO however provided a reply as per record and gave whatever information was available on the subject.
Decision:
In view of the submissions of the CPIO, the Commission finds no scope for any intervention in the matter. The Appellant has not availed of the opportunity to plead his case. The Commission accordingly upholds the submissions of the CPIO. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयु त) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) 2 File no.: CIC/UGCOM/A/2017/609728 A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 3