Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Santosh Sivan G. M. vs University Grants Commission on 28 April, 2025

                                  के ीय सूचना आयोग
                           Central Information Commission
                                बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                            Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                             नई िद    ी, New Delhi - 110067
िशकायत सं      ा / Complaint No. CIC/UGCOM/C/2024/608177

Santosh Sivan G.M                                        ...िशकायतकता/Complainant

                                       VERSUS
                                        बनाम
CPIO: University Grants
Commission, New Delhi                                     ... ितवादीगण /Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the complaint:

RTI : 10.01.2024            FA       : 15.01.2024             Complaint : Nil

CPIO : 15.01.2024           FAO : 15.02.2024                  Hearing   : 28.04.2025


Date of Decision: 28.04.2025

                                       CORAM:
                                 Hon'ble Commissioner
                               _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                      ORDER

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 10.01.2024 seeking information on the following points:

 I (Santosh Sivan G M, Reg. No: 15209005) would like to inform you that I have finished my UG programme B.Tech (Civil Engineering) in The Gandhigram Rural Institute Deemed to be University from 2015-2019.I request the University administration to provide detailed explanations for the following questions regarding scholarship matters. Forward this petition to above mentioned university.

1. Under which scheme is a scholarship awarded to B.Tech Civil Engineering students

2. Whether the scholarship scheme comes under the Central Government Or State Government

3. Describe how the Scholarship process flows from govt to university and from University to students

4. Under the Central Government scheme, how much scholarship is provided to engineering students per year

5. Under the State Govt Scheme, how much scholarship is provided to engineering students per year.

Etc.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 15.01.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-

"Kindly see NSP Portal with their guidelines in this regard."

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 15.01.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 15.02.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint dated Nil.

5. The Complainant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Ms. Poonam Arora, Under Secretary attended the hearing in person.

6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they have provided the information regarding the scholarship schemes available with them. In a written submission dated 24.04.2025 received by the Commission, the respondent, while elaborating on their response to the queries raised by the complainant, stated as follows:

"It is to inform that UGC is implementing various scholarship/fellowship schemes to encourage higher education by providing financial assistance. For undergraduate students, UGC is implementing Ishan Uday scholarship for NER students. The scheme exclusively caters to the students having domicile of northeast states. The details of the scheme are available in public domain. Apart from this, UGC does not implement any scholarship scheme for undergraduate students."

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that the complainant has not specified the provision (either Section 18 or 19 of the RTI Act) under which he had approached the Commission praying for relief. Further, in the absence of the complainant, the Commission was unable to ascertain the same. Nonetheless, the respondent has appropriately furnished the requested information, and the reply does not suffer from any legal infirmity. There appears to be no deliberate or mala fide denial or concealment of information by the respondent. In the absence of the complainant to argue his case or rebut the CPIO's submissions, the Commission finds no basis for intervention. Accordingly, the complaint stands closed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 28.04.2025 Authenticated true copy O.P. Pokhriyal (ओ.पी. पोख रयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO University Grants Commission, CPIO, RTI CELL, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi -110002

2. Santosh Sivan G.M Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)