Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mrc S Kalra vs University Of Delhi on 18 December, 2015

                  CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                     (Room No.315, B­Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)



                    Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)

                                            Information Commissioner


                                         CIC/RM/A/2014/000595­SA

                                C. S. Kalra v. PIO,Delhi University.

                                            Important Dates and time taken:



     RTI: 27.06.2013                      Reply: 02.07.2013                         Time: 05 days

     FAA: 09.09.2013                      FAO: 21.10.2013                           Time: 42 days

     SA: 23.01.2014                       Hearing: 09.11.2015                       Decision: 18­12­2015

     Result:  Disposed of.




Parties Present:


1.      Appellant   is  present.   Mr.   Gopal   Krishan,   Mr.   Rajendra  Singh  and  Mr.   Jagbir   Singh 

represent Public authority.


FACTS:

2. Appellant by his RTI application sought to know the name & designation of the officials  of   the   university   who   were   associated   with   execution/completion   or   handling   of   Common  wealth Games 2010, certified copy of the proceedings of the relevant committee, copy of letter  dated 22.11.2011 from Mr. Prabodh Kumar, IPS, Joint Director of CBI etc. CPIO replied on  2.7.2013 stating that the IPO was not correctly marked. Being unsatisfied, appellant filed First  Appeal. FAA by his Order dated 21.10.2013 directed the appellant to pay requisite fee and  collect the information. Being unsatisfied, appellant approached the Commission. Proceedings Before the Commission:

3. The appellant stated that Delhi University filed defamation case against him. He needs  to   have   certain   information   to   defend   himself   in   the   court.   He   served   as   a   teacher   in  Economics  department.   After   serving  for   37  years,   he  was   retired  in  2005.   The  appellant  stated   that   he   wants   reply   for   point   1   to   10.   He   also   stated   that   institution   cannot   file  defamation case, only the individual can file defamation case. Registrar has to defend the  defamation case, but the Registrar himself filed defamation case against the appellant in the  Hon'ble High court. 

5. The officer representing Engineering Deptt of the University stated that question No. 1,  2 & 5 pertain to their section. He said that he needs 30 days time to picking up the all the  relevant documents and providing certified copies of the same.  Decision:

6. Having heard the submissions, Commission directs the Engineering section of Delhi  University to provide certified copies of documents related to point No. 1, 2 & 5 to the appellant  within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The Commission also directs the CPIO to  provide certified copies of information of point No. 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 10 to the appellant, within  one month from the date of receipt of this order.

7.     The Commission orders accordingly.

(M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner  Authenticated true copy (U. C. Joshi) Deputy Secretary Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO under RTI, O/o Dy. Registrar, University of Delhi, Delhi­110007 (RTI Cell).
2. Shri C. S. Karla, 770, Vikas Kunj, Vikaspuri, New Delhi­110018.