Central Information Commission
Lalit Kumar Grover vs Association Of Indian Universities on 20 October, 2020
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
File No.: CIC/ASINU/A/2019/640118+642916+644973+647755
In the matter of:
Lalit Kumar Grover
... Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Association of Indian Universities,
16 Comrade Indrajit Gupta Marg, Opposite
National Bal Bhawan, Near I.T.O., New Delhi, Delhi 110002
...Respondent
Date of Hearing : 20/10/2020
Date of Decision : 20/10/2020
File Nos. RTI application CPIO First Appeal FAA's Second
filed on replied on filed on Order on Appeal
Dated
640118 04/04/2019 24/04/2019 24/04/2019 08/05/2019 08/05/2019
642916 24/04/2019 09/05/2019 09/05/2019 12/06/2019 14/06/2019
644973 24/04/2019 09/05/2019 09/05/2019 12/06/2019 09/07/2019
647755 09/05/2019 17/06/2019 17/06/2019 Not on record 08/08/2019
Note: The above listed cases of the appellant cover similar issues as well as the arguments advanced by both the parties during the hearing were the same for both the cases. Hence, for the sake of brevity, all the cases were clubbed and adjudicated by a common order. The hearing too was conducted in a similar fashion.
The following were present:
1Appellant : Present over telephone as VC was not possible at USA Respondent: Shri Shivam Dixit, Software Engineer and CPIO, Shri Kuldeep Dagar, Deputy Secretary, present over VC Information Sought:
File No: CIC/ASINU/A/2019/640118+642916+644973+647755 The appellant has completed his MS degree from USA. He has sought information with regard to Indian equivalence for his educational qualification, for the purpose of pursuing higher education in India. The Appellant has lodged grievances also in this regard and has sought the status of his below mentioned grievances:
1. DSEHE/E/2019/00850; 2. DSEHE/E/2019/00618; 3. DSEHE/E/2018/01391; 4.
DSEHE/E/2018/02787; etc. Grounds for Second appeal The CPIO has not provided the sought for information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the replies of the CPIO as the desired information was not provided to him and rather his request was rejected without giving justified reasons for the same. He further submitted that he did a Diploma course in Engineering for 4 years from Panipat, Haryana, India and he is entitled to get an equivalence certificate. The CPIO submitted that they are aware of the 4 years diploma being done by the appellant from India and the same was also informed to the concerned authorities and comments were sought from AICTE and NIELT. Accordingly, the matter was placed before the highest authority and it was decided that the diploma cannot be considered as equivalent to the degree course. He further submitted that to examine the case of the appellant, the matter was placed before the AIU'S Equivalence Committee Meeting wherein a final decision was taken by the members after seeking clarification from the National Electronics and Information Technology that in the absence of Bachelor of Engineering degree and in the absence of any Institutional instruments in this regard, equivalence cannot be established and this was also communicated to the appellant vide their letter dated 08.08.2019.2
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that the appellant is highly aggrieved as according to him a proper reply was not given to him by the CPIO and also that his request was rejected without any justifiable reason despite the fact that he had filed numerous complaints and grievances and had sent several correspondences in this regard. Through his present RTI applications he wanted to know the status of his 18 grievances which were filed by him to know the status of his current education in India and about the equivalence for his educational qualification obtained in USA and India, for the purpose of pursuing higher education in India. The Commission finds that while considering all the grievances of the appellant and his subsequent reminders, a unanimous decision was taken by the competent authority to place the matter before the AIU'S Equivalence Committee meeting wherein a final decision was taken by the members after seeking clarification from the National Electronics and Information Technology. In the meeting, as can be seen from the records, it was decided that in the absence of Bachelor of Engineering degree and in the absence of any Institutional instruments in this regard, equivalence cannot be established and this was also communicated to the appellant vide their letter dated 08.08.2019. The Commission does not find any deficiency in the letter dated 08.08.2019 and the final decision of the Committee was also informed to the appellant. The Commission finds that the appellant is aggrieved by the said decision for not providing the equivalence as was desired by him. The appellant was explained in detail during the hearing that the grievance he is having cannot be settled through the RTI as the Commission has a limited role to ensure dissemination of information and any issue regarding giving equivalence to his educational qualifications is purely an administrative matter which should be taken up separately by the appellant with the concerned authority. Hence, no relief can be given to the appellant.
Decision:
In view of the above, the Commission does not find any scope for further intervention in the matter as it is purely a grievance matter that needs to be taken up separately by the appellant. As far as the reply of the CPIO is 3 concerned the Commission finds it appropriate and no further action is warranted.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आय! ु त) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 4