Central Information Commission
Prof Swapan Garain vs University Grants Commission on 22 October, 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/UGCOM/A/2020/665996
Prof Swapan Garain ....अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
University Grants Commission,
RTI Cell, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi 110002
CPIO,
Tata Institute of Social Sciences,
RTI Cell, PO No. 8313, Deonar,
Mumbai-400088 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 18/08/2021
Date of Decision : 18/08/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 11/09/2019
1
CPIO replied on : 10/12/2019
First appeal filed on : 29/11/2019
First Appellate Authority's order : 21/01/2020
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 12/03/2020
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 11.09.2019 with UGC seeking certified copy of the TISS Memo/letter with internal notings/comments, and inward/outward entries if any, by the TISS Appointing Authority approving his suspension with effect from 29.03.2016.
The CPIO, UGC furnished a reply to the appellant on 10.12.2019 enclosing the reply dated 15.11.2019 of PIO, TISS addressed to the Appellant wherein the following information was provided:
1. " A confidential note by the Registrar, TISS dated March 29, 2016 along with the comments of the Director, TISS.
2. The information of Whats app group created by Dr. Garain.
In the meantime, the Appellant had already filed a First Appeal dated 29.11.2019 with UGC on the following grounds against the reply provided by TISS on 15.11.2019:
"(b) The CPIO has not provided any information document related to approval of suspension by TISS Appointing Authority. It may be noted that as per my knowledge, according to TISS Bye-Laws, TISS Governing Body is the Appointing Authority for the Faculty/Professor like Dr Swapan Garain.
(c) The Confidential Note referred by CPIO in his Reply point-1 is purportedly about illegal use of TISS logo. This is not the approval of suspension by the Appointing Authority for Dr. Garain.
(d) The CPIO has misled and provided false information vide his Reply point 2, by referring to a WhatsApp Group Chat log."
Based on the said contentions, the Appellant sought for the following information from the FAA:
2"(a) The name of the specific Appointing Authority for the Faculty/Professors at TISS Mumbai, as per Bye-Laws service rules applicable, citing specific section/clause of the Service Rules referred.
(b) Certified copy of the Memo/letter with internal noting/comments from the Appointing Authority for Dr Swapan Garain approving his suspension.
(c) Certified copy of the email from the Appointing Authority for Dr Swapan Garain, approving his suspension.
(d) Certified copy of inward/outward entries in related register, for the Memo/letter from the Appointing Authority for Dr Swapan Garain, approving his suspension.
(e) Certified copies of the complete, specific and true Information, as requested herein above in this section, within one week, at free of charge."
FAA's order dated 21.01.2020 upheld the reply of CPIO, UGC.
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 No.1: Rajesh Kumar, Section Officer (CPP-I/DU) & Rep. of CPIO present through audio conference.
Respondent No.2: Shahji Chavan, Admin. Officer & CPIO present through audio conference.
The Commission remarked upon a perusal of the facts on record that the instant case is similar to another case of the Appellant which was heard on the same day vide File No. CIC/UGCOM/A/2020/665879 and therefore no separate line of adjudication was deemed warranted in the matter.
The Appellant objected to the observations of the Commission to state that the instant case is distinguishable by the fact that here he has sought for the approval of the Governing Board as the appointing authority for his suspension while in the earlier case he had sought for the approval of the competent authority.3
Respondent No.2 submitted that the point-wise clarification along with the relevant bye laws provided to the Appellant in relation to File No. CIC/UGCOM/A/2020/665879 applies to the facts of the instant case also and there is no additional information available to be provided.
The Appellant insisted that the CPIO should state categorically that there is no approval of the Governing Body for his suspension.
Decision:
The Commission observes that the Appellant is merely expressing conjecture through the two similar RTI Applications dealt with in the instant case as well as in File No. CIC/UGCOM/A/2020/665879 to agitate upon his grievance that his suspension was not approved by the Governing Board of TISS.
Having observed as above, the instant case is squarely covered by the decision in File No. CIC/UGCOM/A/2020/665879 and therefore no separate relief is being ordered in the instant case.
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