Central Information Commission
Atul Nijhawan vs Dr. Harisingh Gaur Vishwa Vidyalaya on 28 June, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. (As per Annexure)
Atul Nijhawan ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Dr. Harisingh Gaur
Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal(s):
Sl. Second Date of Date of CPIO Date of Date of FA Date of
No. Appeal RTI reply First order Second
No. application Appeal Appeal
1 149244 01.09.2023 05.10.2023 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
2 148986 29.08.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
3 148222 19.08.2023 04.09.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 12.12.2023
4 149095 01.09.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
5 149094 31.08.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
6 149093 29.08.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
7 149092 31.08.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
8 149091 31.08.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
9 149090 02.09.2023 13.10.2023 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
10 149089 01.09.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
11 149088 02.09.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
12 149087 02.09.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
13 149013 31.08.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
14 149012 01.09.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
15 149014 31.08.2023 Not on record 12.10.2023 Not on record 18.12.2023
16 148605 23.08.2023 29.09.2023 12.10.2023 Not on record 13.12.2023
17 148603 24.08.2023 13.10.2023 12.10.2023 Not on record 15.12.2023
18 147718 19.08.2023 12.10.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 05.12.2023
Page 1 of 44
19 148574 23.08.2023 13.10.2023 12.10.2023 Not on record 14.12.2023
20 148274 22.08.2023 24.08.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 12.12.2023
21 147894 22.08.2023 17.10.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 08.12.2023
22 147577 22.08.2023 12.10.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 06.12.2023
23 147927 22.08.2023 12.10.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 08.12.2023
24 147909 19.08.2023 13.10.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 05.12.2023
25 147649 19.08.2023 13.10.2023 09.10.2023 Not on record 05.12.2023
26 146434 02.08.2023 11.09.2023 25.09.2023 Not on record 22.11.2023
27 146312 02.08.2023 11.09.2023 25.09.2023 Not on record 22.11.2023
28 146039 19.08.2023 12.09.2023 26.09.2023 Not on record 20.11.2023
29 146038 28.07.2023 11.09.2023 25.09.2023 Not on record 20.11.2023
30 146025 19.08.2023 12.09.2023 26.09.2023 Not on record 20.11.2023
31 146024 20.08.2023 13.10.2023 26.09.2023 Not on record 20.11.2023
32 146020 20.08.2023 13.10.2023 26.09.2023 Not on record 20.11.2023
33 146076 19.08.2023 12.09.2023 26.09.2023 Not on record 20.11.2023
34 146128 01.08.2023 11.09.2023 25.09.2023 Not on record 21.11.2023
35 146130 14.08.2023 28.08.2023 25.09.2023 Not on record 21.11.2023
36 146133 01.08.2023 12.09.2023 25.09.2023 Not on record 21.11.2023
37 146134 01.08.2023 11.09.2023 25.09.2023 Not on record 21.11.2023
38 145949 20.08.2023 Not on record 26.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
39 145948 14.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
40 145947 16.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
41 145946 20.08.2023 Not on record 26.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
42 145945 09.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
43 145764 09.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
44 145765 29.07.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
45 145832 09.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
46 145831 01.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
47 145830 09.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
48 145828 09.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
49 145826 09.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
50 145825 16.08.2023 Not on record 25.09.2023 Not on record 17.11.2023
51 145208 31.07.2023 Not on record 05.09.2023 30.10.2023 09.11.2023
52 142889 21.07.2023 01.08.2023 28.08.2023 29.09.2023 20.10.2023
Note: The above referred appeal(s) have been clubbed for decision as these relate to
the same subject matter.
Page 2 of 44
Date of Hearing: 27.06.2024
Date of Decision: 28.06.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149244
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.09.2023 seeking the following information:
" ीमती फरहत िस ीक ारा दनांक 10.08.2023 को Registrar office म ी संतोष कु मार धानक के िव अवैध प से गौर "मारक ि"थत आवास का उपयोग कया जा रहा है इसक िशकायत क गयी थी उस िशकायत का िशकायती आवेदन प*, क गयी काय+वाही तथा उस िशकायत से स,बंिधत सम"त द"तावेज. ली 0मािणत 0ितिलिप 0दान करे ।
1.1 The CPIO replied vide letter dated 05.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"1. गौर "मारक काया+लय म उ3 से स,बंिधत कोई 5रकॉड+ उपल8ध नह9 है।
2. प* :. /गौर "मा. / 2023 /546 दनांक 09/10 अग"त 2023 सुलभ स=दभ+ हेतु पेज क छाया0ित संल? है।
1.2 Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. 1.3 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023. Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148986
2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.08.2023 seeking the following information:Page 3 of 44
"ह5र@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर म वत+मान म कतने िनयिमत, कतने संिवदा, कतने क=टनज सी, कतने दैिनक वेतन भोगी, कतने outsource कम+चारी काय+रत है उससे स,बंिधत सभी कम+चा5रय. क संEया पृथक पृथक 0दान करे ।"
2.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
2.3 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148222
3. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.08.2023 seeking the following information:
"Institute of Engineering and Technology के Director in charge ी आशीश वमा+ क िवAिवBालय म िनयुि3 दनांक से संघा5रत सेवा पुि"तका क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप 0दान करे ।"
3.1 The CPIO replied vide letter dated 04.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"आवेदक ारा चाही गई जानकारी सूचना का अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 क धारा 8 क उपधारा 1(j) अथा+त तृतीय पI से संबंिधत है एवं Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 titled in Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subbash Chandra Agarwal regarding Right to information Act, 2005 के प5र0ेKय म 0दान नह9 क जा सकती है (आदेश संल? है)।"
3.2 Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Page 4 of 443.3 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 12.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149095
4. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.09.2023 seeking the following information:
"डॉ. ह5र@संह गौर िवAिवBालय म िपछले दस वषN म अथा+त 01.01.2013 से कतने अनुक,पा िनयुि3 आदेश जारी Oए, उनक सूची और सम"त जारी कये गए आदेश क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप 0दान करे ।"
4.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
4.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149094
5. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.08.2023 seeking the following information:
"Registrar, Dr. Harisingh Gaur Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar को ीमती फरहत िस ीक ारा दनांक 10.08.2023 को ी संतोष कु मार धानक के िवQ अवैध प से गौर "मारक ि"थत आवास म िनवास करने क िशकायत क गयी थी उस िशकायत पर िशकायती प* क गयी काय+वाही तथा उससे स,बंिधत सभी जानकारी 0दान करे ।"
5.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
5.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Page 5 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149093
6. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. ह5र@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर से वष+ 01.01.2013 से आज दनांक तक सेवािनवृत होने वाले कम+चा5रय. क सूची 0Rयेक वष+ क पृथक पृथक 0दान करे । 6.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA order, if any, is not available on record. 6.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023. Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149092
7. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.08.2023 seeking the following information:
"Registrar Office म ीमित फरहत िस ीक ारा दनाँक 30/06/2023 को गौर "मारक शनीचरी म काय+रत MTS - Outsource कम+चारी क िशकायत क गई थी उस पर Registrar महोदय ारा Tया काय+वाही क गई उसक सम"त जानकारी, िशकायती आवेदन, संल? द"तावेज, क गई काय+वाही से संबंिधत सम"त जानकारी।"
7.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA order, if any, is not available on record.
7.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149091
8. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 6 of 44"Registrar office म ीमित फरहत िस ीक क इं "टीUूट ऑफ इं जीिनयWरं ग एXड टेYॉलॉजी म कम+चा5रय. ारा Tया कोई िशकायत क गई है य द हाँ तो उस िशकायती आवेदन प* क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप, क गई काय+वाही क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप, इस िशकायत से संबंिधत (य द क गई हो तो) सम"त द"तावेज।"
8.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA order, if any, is not available on record.
8.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149090
9. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.09.2023 seeking the following information:
"इं "टीUूट ऑफ इं जीिनयWरं ग एXड टेYॉलॉजी म "थापना दनाँक से आज दनाँक तक Tया All India Council for Technical Education क Team ारा कोई िनरीIण कया गया, य द हाँ, उस िनरीIण के उपरांत Team ारा दी गई 5रपोट+ क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप ।"
9.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023.
9.2 The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"The concerned respondent has provided the information to the appellant vide letter dated 15.09.2023 & 13.10.2023 and the same is attached herewith."
The contents of these letter(s) read as under:
"उपरो3 िवषयानुसार सूचना का अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 के तहत ी अतुल िनझावन 311. गु गोिव=द @संह वाड+ सागर म०0० से 0ाZ आवेदन प* दनांक 04.09.2023 के िब=दू :मांक 06 क जानकारी िन[ानुसार है:Page 7 of 44
िवभाग म COVID-19 के समय से अभी तक AICTE, New Delhi ारा ": @नंग क जाती है यह ऑन लाइन मा\यम से होती है। यह 5रपोट+ गोपनीय होने के कारण AICTE, New Delhi के पास ही संरिIत रहती है।
वांिछत जानकारी इस काया+लय म उपल8ध नह9 ह]।"
9.3 The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149089
10. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.09.2023 seeking the following information:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म अनुक,पा िनयुि3 के िलये कतने आवेदन लि,बत ह], उनक सूची, आवेदन के साथ संल? मृRयु 0माण प*. क भी 0मािणत 0ितिलिप ।"
10.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
10.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149088
11. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.09.2023 seeking the following information:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म काय+रत सम"त कम+चा5रय. म से आज दनाँक तक कसी भी कम+चारी ने अपने आि त. अपने आि त. के संबध ं म गलत जानकारी दी है. तथा लाभ 0ाZ कया है, य द हाँ तो उन कम+चा5रय. क सूची तथा उन पर क गई काय+वाही क गई काय+वाही का िववरण ।"Page 8 of 44
11.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
11.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149087
12. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.09.2023 seeking the following information:
"गौर "मारक, शनीचरी, सागर ि"थत भवन के दु पयोग के संबंध म िपछले पाँच वष_, (वष+ 2019 से) म 0ाZ िशकायत. क सम"त जानकारी, िशकायती आवेदन, क गई काय+वाही, संल? सम"त द"तावेज इRया द क जानकारी ।"
12.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
12.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149013
13. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म वत+मान म काय+रत कतने कम+चा5रय. पर आपरािधक मुकदम दज+ ह], िजसक जानकारी िवAिवBालय 0शासन को है, उससे संबंिधत सभी उपल8ध द"तावेज, संधा5रत क गई पंजी क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप तथा उससे संबंिधत सम"त जानकारी।"
13.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Page 9 of 4413.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149012
14. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.09.2023 seeking the following information:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म अपने काय+काल के म\य मृRयु को 0ाZ Oए अथा+त मृत Oए कम+चा5रय. के आि त. के िलये अनुक,पा िनयुि3 के िलये बनाये गये िनयम. क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप, सम"त 0ावधान. क ।"
14.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
14.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149014
15. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म वत+मान म काय+रत कतने कम+चा5रय. म से कतने कम+चा5रय. क िवभागीय जाँच हो रही है, उससे संबंिधत सम"त उपल8ध जानकारी तथा संधा5रत क जाने वाली पंजी क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप ।"
15.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
15.2 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.12.2023.
Page 10 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148605
16. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 23.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"Institute of Engineering & Technology के वष+ 2021-22, 2022-2023 के आय `य के िलये संधा5रत क जाने वाली Cash Book तथा Audit report क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप ।"
16.1 The CPIO replied vide letter dated 29.09.2023and the same is reproduced as under:-
"वष+ 2021-22, 2022-2023 म कोई भी आय 0ाZ नही Oई है ।"
16.2 Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
16.3 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 13.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148603
17. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.08.2023 seeking the following information:
"Institute of Engineering & Technology म काय+रत Guest Faculty के िशIक. को उनक िनयुि3 दनांक से आज दनांक तक अथा+त िनयुि3 दनांक से इस माह के 0ारं भ तक मािसक से 0Rयेक िशIक के भुगतान कये गये रािश क सम"त उपल8ध जानकारी ।"
17.1 The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.10.2023 enclosing the following replies received from the deemed PIOs vide letter(s) dated 30.08.2023 and 29.09.2023 "DOAA काया+लय से अितिथ िशIक. क सूची 0ाZ होने पर भुगतान क जानकारी 0दान क जा सकती है I"
Page 11 of 44"उपरो3 िवषयानुसार सूचना का अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 के तहत ी अतुल िनझावन 311. गु गोिव=द @संह वाड+ सागर म०0० से 0ाZ आवेदन प* दनांक 22.08.2023 के िब=दू :मांक 06 क जानकारी िन[ानुसार है।
िवभाग म Guest Faculty म िशIक. क िनयुि3 दनांक से आज दनांक तक मािसक भुगतान क रािश से संबंिधत जानकारी िव.िव. के अकाउ=ट सेTशन से 0ाZ क जा सकती है।"
17.2 Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
17.3 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 15.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147718
18. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) Institute of Engineering and Technology म वतमान म अ नरत छा ों म िलए ा scholarship सुिवधा उपल है यिद हाँ तो scholarship दान करने की िनयमवली की मािणत ितिलिप I 18.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.10.2023 enclosing the following replies received from the deemed PIOs vide letter(s) dated 13.09.2023 and 14.09.2023 "स% 2022-23 म ऑनलाइन छा वृि) MPTAAS पोटल म Institute of Engineering & Technology Dr. H.S.Gour University Sagar बी.टे क िवषय के िव-ािथयों के िलये ऑनलाइन छा वृि) आवेदन प कराने एवं ऑनलाइन छा वृि) 0ीकृित िकये जाने हे तु फीस की जानकारी ऑनलाइन दान की गई ह5 । म. के ऑनलाइन अनु. जाित/अनु.जनजाित और िपछड़ा वग के पोटल MPTAAS म शासन के अनुसार ऑनलाइन छा वृि) आवेदन करने हे तु िनयमवली एवं अ:
जानकारी पोटल म िव-ािथयों से संबंिधत अंिकत है ।"
Page 12 of 44
"उपरो3 िवषया=तग+त संदbभ+त प*ानुसार चाही गई जानकारी इस शाखा म स* 2023 - 24 अ=तग+त कोई भी छा*/छा*ा का छा*वृिd हेतु आवेदन छा*वृिd शाखा को 0ाZ नह9 Oआ है।" 18.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.10.2023. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. 18.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 05.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148574
19. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 23.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) Institute of Engineering and Technology म िनयु< िकये गए guest faculty के िश=कों को िकस अनुबंध के तहत िकया गया है उन अनुबंध की मािणत ितिलिप ।
19.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 12.10.2023.
19.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
" Institute of Engineering and Technology म िनयु< िकये गये Guest Faculty के िश=कों से संबंिधत अनुबंध की मािणत ितिलिप डोफा कायालय के ?रकाड म उपल नहीं है ।"
19.3. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 14.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148274
20. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 13 of 44(i) "लोक सूचना अिधकारी कायालय म संधा?रत की गई आवक-जावक पंजी की िदनां क 15/07/2023 से आज िदनाँ क तक की मािणत ितिलिप ।"
20.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 24.08.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"िवषयां तगत ले ख है िक RTI Act 2005 की धारा 5 (4) के तहत केCीय कायालय म DEत लोक सूचना कायालय (RTI Cell) म िदनां क 31.08.2023 को समय (दोपहर 03.00 बजे से 04.00 बजे तक) उपDEत होकर आवक-जावक पंजी का अवलोकन करने का कF करे ।"
The same reply was reiterated to the Appellant vide letter dated 16.11.2023.
20.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.10.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
20.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 12.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147894
21. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर अ यन कH मे िपछले पां च वषI म छा ों के िलए Jय िकये गये समाचार प ों की सूची उनका मािसक मूK अविध जै से दै िनक / साLािहक / मािसक इMािद Mेक समाचार प की दै पृथक पृथक I"
21.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 09.10.2023.
21.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 17.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
i. "गौर अ यन केC से िपछले कौन से पाँ च वषI की जानकारी मां गी गई यह QF नहीं है, अतः जानकारी िदया जा पाना संभव नहीं है ।Page 14 of 44
ii. गौर अ यन केC म वतमान म समाचार प ों की जानकारी िनUानुसार है :-
दै िनक-दै िनक भाXर, नवदु िनया, पि का, आचरण, नवभारत, दे शबYु, दै िनक जागरण, राज एZ ेस, नईदु िनया, दे श टु डे, सागर सरोज, The Hindu, Times of India, साLािहक - रोजगार िनमाण, इं िडया टु डे ।
मािसक - ितयोिगता दपण, घटना चJ ।
iii. कुल मािसक hय i. 2219.50 I"
21.3. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 08.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147577
22. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) गौर oारक, शिनचरी, सागर (म. .) म संधा?रत आवक-जावक पंजी की िदनाँ क 01/01/2020 से 15/07/2023 तक की मािणत ितिलिप ।
22.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 09.10.2023.
22.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
उपरो< िवषयां तगत लेख है िक लोक सूचना अिधकारी pारा सम लोक सूचना अिधकारी समqयक गौर अ यन केC एवं गौर oारक को प अंत?रत िकया गया था। प कं./गौ.अ यन कं. /2023/547 िदनां क 14 िसतrर 2023 एवं कं./गौर oारक/2023/561 (संलs) से िबtदु कमां क 06 से गौर oारक एवं गौर अ यन केC की आवक-जावक पंजीयो की दोनो जगहो की चाही गई सMािपत जानकारी लोक सूचना कायालय को 113 पृuों म ाL vई है ।
Page 15 of 44 RTI Act 2005, & RTI Rules 2012, का िनयम 06 के तहत ित कापी 2/- iपया के िहसाब से 113 पuों म जानकारी की रािश 226/- iपया का ब5क चालान आई.डी.बी.आई. ब5क / एZे स ब5क या ब5क डw ाx कुलसिचव डॉ. हरीिसंह गौर िवzिव-ालय सागर म. . के नाम से बाहर के आवेदक प के मा म से एवं लोकल के आवेदक 0ंय चालान जमा करके लोक सूचना कायालय म ेिषत कर, रािश ाL होने के उपरां त एक सLाह के भीतर चाही गयी जानकारी आपके पते पर Qीड पो{ pारा ेिषत की जावगी, उपरो<ानुसार करण का िनराकरण िकया जाता है । सूचनाथ ेिषत।
Subseqeuntly on 01.11.2023, the copy of the documents was sent to the Appellant. 22.3. The FAA's order, if any, is available on record. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 06.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147927
23. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर अ न कH, कटरा, सागर (म. .) म संधा?रत आवक-जावक पंजी की िदनाँक 01/01/2020 से आज िदनां क तक की मािणत ितिलिप ।"
23.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 09.10.2023.
23.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"उपरो< िवषयां तगत ले ख हैिक लोक सूचना अ िधकारी pारा सम लोक सूचना अ िधकारी समqयक गौर अ यन केC एवं गौर oारक को प अ ंत?रत िकया गया था। प कं./गौ.अ यन कं. /2023/547 िदनां क 14 िसतrर 2023 एवं कं./गौर oारक/2023/561 (संलs) से िबtदु कमां क Page 16 of 44 06 से गौर oारक एवं गौर अ यन केC की आवक-जावक पंजीयो की दोनो जगहो की चाही गई सMािपत जानकारी लोक सूचनाकायालय को 113 पृuों म ाL vई है ।
RTI Act 2005, & RTI Rules 2012, कािनयम 06 के तहत ित कापी 2/- iपयाके िहसाब से 113 पuों म जानकारी की रािश 226/- iपयाकाब5क चालान आई.डी.बी.आई. ब5क / एZे स ब5क याब5क डw ाx कुलसिचव डॉ. हरीिसंह गौर िवzिव-ालय सागर म. . के नाम से बाहर के आवेदक प के मा म से एवं लोकल के आवेदक 0ंय चालान जमाकरके लोक सूचनाकायालय म ेिषत कर, रािश ाL होने के उपरांत एक सLाह के भीतर चाही गयी जानकारी आपके पते पर Qीड पो{ pारा ेिषत की जावगी, उपरो<ानुसार करण कािनराकरण िकयाजाताहै । सूचनाथ ेिषत।"
Subseqeuntly on 01.11.2023, the copy of the documents was sent to the Appellant.
23.3. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 08.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147909
24. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"Institute of Engineering & Technology की Eापनाके िलये िकये गये आवेदन प , संलs द|ावेज, आवेदन प के साथ जमािकयागयाशु } तथाEापनाके िलये आवेदन करने के िलए अिधकृत hD< कानाम, तथाउनसे संबंिधत सम| जानकारी।"
24.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 09.10.2023.
24.2 The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"चाही गई जानकारी अकादिमक शाखाम उपल नही ह5 । संबंिधत शाखाInstitute of Engineering & Technology से ाL की जासकती है ।" Page 17 of 44
24.3. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 05.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147649
25. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरीिसंह गौर िवzिव-ालय, सागर (म. .) म संधा?रत दान दाताओं की पंजी की मािणत ितिलिप कब-कब िकसनेडॉ. हरीिसंह गौर िवzिव-ालय, सागर को ा- ादान 0iप िदया उसकी सम| उपल जानकारी ।"
25.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 09.10.2023.
25.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"िव) एवं ले खाकायालय सेसंबंिधत नही है ।"
25.3. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 05.12.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146434
26. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर अ यन केC, कटरा, सागर (म. .) म ितवष गौर जयंती कायJम केिलयेआवंिटत की गई रािश की वषानुसार वष 2017-18 सेआज िदनाँक तक की जानकारी की मािणत ितिलिप।"
26.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 11.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
Page 18 of 44"चाही गयी जानकारी अQF है । य-िप सूिचत करना है िक गौर अ यन केC कटरा गौर जं यती हे तु अलग से कोई रािश नही दी जाती । यदि- गौर अ यन केC से जानकारी जी जा सकती है ।"
26.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
26.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 22.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146312
27. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर oारक, शिनचरी, सागर (म. .) होने वाले वािषक गौर जयंती कायJम के िलये िपछले पाँ च वषI म अथात वष 2017-18 से 0ीकृत की रािश की जानकारी वषानुसार Mेक वष की पृथक- पृथक जानकारी की मािणत ितिलिप ।"
27.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 11.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"चाही गयी जानकारी अQF है । यपि- सूिचत करना है िक गौर जयंती हे तु गौर oारक, शनीचरी सागर को अलग से कोई रािश नहीं दी गयी है । यपि- जानकारी गौर oारक से भी ली जा सकती है ।"
27.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
27.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 22.11.2023.
Page 19 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146039
28. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"Institute of Engineering and Technology म Guest Faculty की िनयुD< केिलए जारी िकयेिव•ापन केउपरां त ाL आवे दन प ों , सं लs प ोंतथा ाL आवे दकोंकी जानकारी सं धा?रत करनेवाली पं जी / रिज{र या फाइल की मािणत ितिलिप तथा इससेसं बंिधत सम| जानकारी।"
28.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"चाही गई जानकारी डोफा कायालय केअिभले ख म उपल नहींहै ।
28.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record. 28.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 20.11.2023. Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146038
29. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.07.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर oारक, शिनचरी, सागर (म. .) म िपछलेिदनां क 01/01/2017 सेआज िदनां क तक पदE कमचा?रयोंका वे तन प क (मािसक) की मािणत ितिलिप ।"
29.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 11.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"गौर oारक, शनीचरी / Eापना कायालय से ाL की जा सकती है ।"
29.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Page 20 of 4429.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 20.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146025
30. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"Institute of Engineering & Technology म Eापन सेआज िदनां क तक Jय िकयेगये Furniture, Computer, Printer, Electrical Appliances इMािद का ?रकाड रखनेकेिलयेसं धा?रत की जानेवाली {ाक पं जी (Stock Register) की मािणत ितिलिप ।"
30.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"चाही गई जानकारी Institute of Engineering & Technology सेसं बंिधत है । अतः इस िबtदू सेसं बंिधत जानकारी सं बंिधत िवभाग से ाL की जा सकती है ।"
30.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
30.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 20.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146024
31. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरीिसं ह गौर िवzिव-ालय म आउटसोस एजे €ी िनयु< करनेकेिलयेिपछलेदस वषI म जारी िकयेगयेिव•ापनोंकी मािणत ितिलिप Mे क िव•ापन की पृ थक-पृथक जानकारी।"
31.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Page 21 of 4431.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"डॉ. हरीिसं ह गौर िवzिव-ालय म आउटसोस एजे €ी को िनयु< करने के िलये िदये गये िव•ापन (िनिवदासूचना) िवzिव-ालय की वेबसाइट www.dhsgsu.edu.in, www.dhsgsu.ac.in (Old) पर उपल है ।
अ िपतु कायालय ?रकाड अ नुसार िवzिव-ालय म आउटसोस एजे €ी को िनयु< करने के िलये (वष 2022 म) िदये गये िव•ापन की ित 02 पृu संलs ेिषत ह5 ।"
31.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 20.11.2023. Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146020
32. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरीिसंह गौर िवzिव-ालय, सागर (म. .) pारािपछले तीन वषI म 26 नवrर गौर जयंती के कायJम आयोजन हे तु 0ीकृत िकये गए बजट की जानकारी वष 2020-21,2021-22, 2022-23, Mेक िव)ीय वष की पृथक-पृथक िकतनी रािश 0ीकृत की गई, उसकी सम| जानकारी ।"
32.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record 32.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"संबंिधत िवभाग से जानकारी ाL की जासकती है ।"
32.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 20.11.2023.
Page 22 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146076
33. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरीिसंह गौर िवzिव-ालय, सागर (म. .) की परी=ाशाखाम संधा?रत की जानेवाली पंजी की जानकारी िकतनी पंजी संधा?रत की जाती है , उनकी सूची।"
33.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"उपरो< िवषयांतगत अवगत करायाजाताहै िक िबtदु Jमांक 06 के अनुसार चाही गई जानकारी QF न होनेकेकारण दी जानासंभव नहीं ह5 ।"
33.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
33.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 20.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146128
34. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरीिसं ह गौर िवzिव-ालय, सागर (म. .) pारावतमान म चयिनत Outsource Agency कानाम, पतातथाउसकेसंचालन करनेवालेhD< कानाम तथापताI Outsource Agency pारा वतमान म िवzिव-ालय म िदयेगयेकमचा?रयों की सूची । "
34.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 11.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"डॉ. हरीिसंह गौर िवzिव-ालय, सागर (म. .) pारावतमान म कोई भी Outsource Agency को चयिनत नहीं िकयागयाहै ।Page 23 of 44
Outsource Agency सिवस के चयन हे तु िनिवदा Jमां क / GEM/2023/B/3300535 िदनां क 27.03.2023 जारी की गई थी। उ< िनिवदा से संबंिधत न|ी वतमान मे िJयाधीन है ।
अिपतु उ< जारी िनिवदा के िJयाधीन होने से, पूव म वष 2017 म चयिनत M/s Endeavour Systems & Consultancy Services, Bhopal pारा सेवाय दान की जा रही है ।"
34.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
34.3 Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 21.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146430
35. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर "मारक, शनीचरी, सागर (म.0.) म पद"थ ी संतोष कु मार धानक MTS, Outsource ारा िपछले पाँच वष_ म िलये गये अवकाश क जानकारी माह अनुसार 0Rयेक माह क पृथक- पृथक दनाँक 15/08/2023 से आज दनाँक तक। "
35.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 28.08.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"उपरो3 अनुसार गौर "मारक, शनीचरी सागर (म.0.) म पद"थ ी संतोष कु मार धानक एम टी.एस आऊट सोस+ क जानकारी तृतीय पI क होने के कारण देना सबंध नह9 है।"
35.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
35.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 21.11.2023.
Page 24 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146133
36. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. 0दीप ितवारी, 0भारी सहायक रिज"eार (परीIा) क Service Book (सेवा पुि"तका) िनयुि3 प*, शैIिणक योfयता, तथा वत+मान म कतने िवभाग. के 0भारी, उससे संबंिधत सम"त उपल8ध द"तावेज. क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप । "
36.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"चाही गयी िब=दु 01 क जानकारी सूचना का अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 क धारा 11 (3) के अंतग+त तृतीय पI से संबंिधत होने के कारण 0दान नह9 क जा सकती है। इस संबंध म डॉ० 0दीप ितवारी ारा जानकारी न देने हेतु एक प* 0ेिषत कया गया है जो संल? है।"
36.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
36.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 21.11.2023 Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146134
37. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म Outsource पर कम+चारी रखने के िलये िपछले दस वष_ म कतनी बार िनिवदा आमंि*त क गई, उन िनिवदाg के समाचार प*. म 0काशन क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप, िनिवदाg के िनयम व शतh क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप, िनिवदा चयन सिमित के Page 25 of 44 सद"य. क जानकारी तथा चयन क गई Outsource - Agency क जानकारी तथा उपरो3 िनिवदा से संबंिधत सम"त उपल8ध द"तावेज. क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप।"
37.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 11.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"उपरो3 िवषया=तग+त संदbभ+त प* ारा आवेदक ी अतुल िनझावन, सागर के 0ाZ आवेदन प* म चाहे गये िब=दू 6 से संबिं धत जानकारी वृहद है, जो क आवेदक को काया+लयीन समय म अवलोकन पiात िच=हां कत 0ितयां दी जा सकती है।"
37.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
37.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 21.11.2023 Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145949
38. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर "मारक, शनीचरी, सागर म काय+रत सम"त, कम+चा5रय. क िपछले पाँच वष_ म संधा5रत क गई उपि"थित पंजी क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप ।"
38.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 26.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
38.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Page 26 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145948
39. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म काय+रत OUT-SOURCE को कम+चा5रय. को दये जाने वाले अवकाश क जानकारी अथा+त Casual Leave, Medical Leave, Earn Leave या अ=य कसी भी 0कार के अवकाश क पा*ता है। तथा उनको कौन से अवकाश दये जाते ह]। । "
39.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
39.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145947
40. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"OUT-SOURCE कम+चा5रय. के िलये य द कोई िनयम बनाय गये ह] तो उनक 0ितिलिप जैसे अनके अवकाश, "थाना=तरण, काय+ मु3 करने इRया द के िलये।"
40.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
40.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Page 27 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145946
41. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, म वत+मान म काय+रत OUTSOURCE-AGENCY जो िवAिवBालय के िलये कमj उपल8ध कराती है, को कसी भी 0कार का Extension अविध समाZ होने के बाद दया गया, तो उस आदेश क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप।"
41.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 26.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
41.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145945
42. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर "मारक, शनीचरी, सागर (म.0.) ि"थत आवास का िपछले पाँच वष_ म रखरखाव के िलये कये गए `य से संबंिधत सम"त द"तावेज तथा उ3 आवास म िवAिवBालय ारा मािसक िबजली िबल का कये गये भुगतान संबंिधत सम"त द"तावेज जानकारी उपल8ध कराने के िलये।"
42.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
42.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Page 28 of 44Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145764
43. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"गौर "मारक, शनीचरी, सागर (म.0.) ि"थत आवास गृह के िपछले पाँच वष_ म भुगतान कये गये िबजली िबल क सRय0ित तथा इससे संबंिधत सम"त द"तावेज ।"
43.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
43.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023 Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145765
44. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.07.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. 0दीप ितवारी, 0भारी सहायक रिज"eार (परीIा) को समय-समय पर िपछले दस वष_ म दये गये अ=य िवभाग. या प5रयोजनाg के 0भार क सम"त उपल8ध जानकारी/आदेश. इRया द क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप ।"
44.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
44.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145832
45. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 29 of 44"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, म िविभk पद. क संEया 0Rयेक पद "वीकृ त संEया के अनुसार अथा+त 0Rयेक पद क कतनी संEया "वीकृ त है, उसक सम"त जानकारी।"
45.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
45.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA' s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145831
46. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म Outsource कम+चारी िनयु3 करने वाली Outsource Agency को िपछले दस वष+ अथा+त् 01/01/2013 से माह अनुसार कये भुगतान क जानकारी, आज दनाँक तक ।"
46.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
46.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145830
47. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 30 of 44"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म िविभk काय+ के िलये कbम+य. क पूbत+ करने वाली वत+मान म काय+रत OUTSOURCE AGENCY को 0Rयेक पद के अनुसार दये जाने वाली रािश ( पय. म ) क सम"त जानकारी जो िनिवदा म "वीकृ त क गई।।"
47.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
47.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145828
48. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म 5र3 पद. क संEया पद के अनुसार इससे संबंिधत सम"त जानकारी ।"
48.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
48.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145826
49. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 31 of 44"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म कतने िनयिमत, कतने दैिनक वेतनभोगी, कतने कि=टनजे=सी, और कतने OUTSOURCE पर कम+चारी वत+मान म काय+रत ह]. सम"त क पृथक-पृथक संEया क जानकारी ।"
49.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023 FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
49.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023 Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145825
50. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म काय+रत कम+चा5रय. के आि त. (प5रवार के सद"य.) क जानकारी रखने के िलये संधा5रत क जाने वाली पंजी (Register) क वत+मान म उपल8ध जानकारी क सRय0ित।"
50.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 25.09.2023. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
50.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145208
51. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.07.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 32 of 44" दनाँक 30/06/2023 को ीमित फरहत िस ीक , तRकालीन क,mयूटर ऑपरे टर, आऊटसोस+ गौर "मारक, शनीचरी सागर (म.0.) ारा ी संतोष कु मार धानक MTS, Outsource, गौर "मारक, शनीचरी सागर (म.0.) के िव क गई िशकायत पर क गई काय+वाही क सम"त जानकारी क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप, िशकायत का आवेदन प*, संल? द"तावेज, क गई काय+वाही इRया द क सम"त जानकारी क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप।"
51.1. Having not received any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 05.09.2023. The FAA vide order dated 30.10.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
51.2. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 09.11.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/142889
52. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.07.2023 seeking information on the following points:
"डॉ. हरी@संह गौर िवAिवBालय, सागर (म.0.) म काय+रत सम"त िनयिमत, संिवदा दैिनक वेतन भोगी, कि=टनज सी, आऊटसोस+ एवं अ=य कसी भी 0कार के कम+चारी, िजनका भुगतान िवAिवBालय ारा कया जाता हो सम"त कम+चारी क सूची क 0मािणत 0ितिलिप नाम, पद, पद"थापन का "थान िनयुि3 क दनांक सिहत।"
52.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 01.08.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"चाही गयी िब=दु 01 क जानकारी सूचना का अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 क धारा 11 (3) के अंतग+त तृतीय पI से संबंिधत होने के कारण 0दान नह9 क जा सकती है। " Page 33 of 44
52.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.08.2023. The FAA vide order dated 29.09.2023 directed the Establishment Section to provide the information, if any, available to the appellant within 10 days.
52.3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the desired information, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 20.10.2023 Hearing Proceedings & Decision
53. The Appellant was present during the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the Respondent, Brij Bhushan Singh, Law Officer & In charge-CPIO along with 25 deemed PIOs attended the hearing through video conference.
54. The Commission at the outset informed the parties that the instant matter(s) have been clubbed for the hearing and decision based on a preliminary finding that the nature of the information sought for in the instant RTI Application(s) or the grounds of second appeal do not warrant any relief to be ordered, rather it appears to be an attempt of the Appellant to vindicate some angst against the public authority under the garb of exercising his right to information. It was remarked that the substantive part of these RTI Application(s) either seek for the personal service-related information of third parties, all of which stands squarely exempted under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act or seek for information based on hypothetical, interrogative and speculative questions that fall outside the ambit of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Pertinently so, some of the RTI Applications even appear to be containing the same query with a sly interplay of words.
55. The Appellant did not appear convinced with the observations of the Commission and argued that if the Respondent had provided him with the requisite information in his first few RTI Applications like the one referred under CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/142889, he would not have felt compelled to file these many RTI Applications. Moreover, the CPIO even failed to comply with the FAA's directions contained in some of these initial cases, therefore he was compelled to file more RTI Application(s) and subsequent second appeal(s). He further stated that in most of these cases, the CPIO has merely informed that Page 34 of 44 the concerned PIO is not giving the information or the deemed PIOs ask him to approach the concerned sections, all of which is a curtailment to his right to information.
56. The Respondent submitted that the Appellant was provided with replies that were received from the concerned record holders and there has been no deliberate concealment of any information per se as can be evinced from the individual case submissions filed before the Commission prior to the hearing. He further submitted that the Commission may appreciate that for attending to these second appeal(s), as many as 25 deemed PIOs are present in the NIC studio leaving their regular duties, which is not conducive to the functioning of the University. It was furthermore emphasized that the Appellant's wife was an outsourced employee with the University and when the tender of the concerned outsourced agency was changed, the services of some of the outsourced employees were not required and they were removed, it is subsequent to this incident that the Appellant has been filing a trail of RTI Applications. That, the count ranges from 5-10 similar RTI Applications being filed in a day and upto 31.05.2024, a total of 281 RTI Application(s) received from the Appellant and his wife have been disposed off and with respect to about 238 First Appeal(s), the FAA had requested for advice from CIC vide their letter(s) 04.12.2023 and reminder dated 31.05.2024. Furthermore, the CPIO relied upon the following case law to support their case:
"As held by hon'ble Mr, Justice Manmohan in W.P.(C) 406/2016 of Delhi High Court in case of Shail Sahni vs Smt Vals Sara Mathew & Ors. 19th January, 2016"-
"...Keeping in view the width and amplitude of the information sought by tile petitioner, it is apparent that the RTI application of the appellant is nothing short of an abuse of process of law and motivated if not an attempt to intimidate the respondent Indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under the RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption,) would be counterproductive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the non- productive work of collecting and furnishing information." Page 35 of 44
And, added that the CIC vide decision issued with reference to RTI & Appeal reference no. CIC/CC/A/2015/003383 & CVC/RTI/MISC/16/006 has observed as under:
"5. The PIO alleged that the appellant and her husband are bent upon misusing the RTI for their personal purposes as stated by the PIO. Hence, the Commission, closes the appeal and advises the couple-Vishal Saini and this appellant not to harass the educational institution anymore, and also warns them that if they repeat, the respondent authority has every power to reject repeated RTI Requests in public interest and in the interest of smooth functioning of the institute."
57. The Commission, in furtherance of the hearing proceedings and perusal of the facts on record (which includes the copy of replies sent to all of the RTI Applications under reference as gathered from the written submissions of the CPIO) reiterates that the instant matter(s) do not warrant any relief to be ordered to the Appellant. It is emphasized that these cases either seek personal information of third parties that stands exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and no larger public interest has been argued or appears pertinent from such disclosure or these are cases wherein the queries cannot be construed as "information" as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act or are such cases, where the CPIOs have already parted with the personal information of third parties or the available information or factual replies.
58. Now, as far as the absence of any scope of relief to be ordered in the matters with respect to RTI Application(s) seeking for information related to other employees is concerned, the attention of the Appellant is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner & Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & amp; Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794. The following was thus held:
Page 36 of 44"59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."
59. Similarly, for better understanding of the mandate of the RTI Act, the Appellant shall note that outstretching the interpretation of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act to include deductions and inferences to be drawn by the CPIO is unwarranted as it casts immense pressure on the CPIOs to ensure that they provide the correct deduction/inference to avoid being subject to penal provisions under the RTI Act. For the sake of clarity, the provision of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act is reproduced hereunder:
"2. Definitions.--In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,--
(f) "information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force;.."
In this regard, the Appellant's attention is drawn towards a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the scope and ambit of Section 2(f) of RTI Act in the matter of CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. [CIVIL APPEAL NO.6454 of 2011] wherein it was held as under:
Page 37 of 44"35. At this juncture, it is necessary to clear some misconceptions about the RTI Act. The RTI Act provides access to all information that is available and existing.........A public authority is also not required to furnish information which require drawing of inferences and/or making of assumptions. It is also not required to provide `advice' or `opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any `opinion' or `advice' to an applicant. The reference to `opinion' or `advice' in the definition of `information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority. Many public authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act." (Emphasis Supplied)
60. The Commission cannot lose sight of the fact that even as the Appellant while filing these RTI Application(s) has raised brief queries but in effect, he has been asking for mostly scattered and voluminous data, which is another factor that works to his disadvantage in the instant matters under reference. Here, the Appellant is reminded of the fact that his right to information is far from being absolute and unconditional. That, it is rather unfortunate that even the best of intentions has to not only stand the test of procedural requirements and fetters laid down in the RTI Act but also stand the test of practicality, a notion well recognised by the superior Courts in a catena of judgments such as the Hon'ble Supreme Court's observation in the Aditya Bandopadhyay (supra) matter stating that:
'37. The right to information is a cherished right. Information and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability. The provisions of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging corruption. But in regard to other information,(that is information other than those enumerated in section 4(1)(b) and (c) of the Act), equal importance and emphasis are given to other public interests (like confidentiality of sensitive information, fidelity and fiduciary Page 38 of 44 relationships, efficient operation of governments, etc.). Indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counter-productive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the non- productive work of collecting and furnishing information. The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to obstruct the national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquility, and harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of honest officials striving to do their duty. The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of a public authorities prioritizing 'information furnishing', at the cost of their normal and regular duties.'
61. The findings of the Commission in the instant set of matter largely point towards a misuse of the RTI Act being perpetuated by the Appellant. Here, the Appellant's attention is again invited towards certain precedents set by the superior Courts recognizing the misuse of the RTI Act:
In ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya, (2011) 8 SCC781, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:-
'39. We however agree that it is necessary to make a distinction in regard to information intended to bring transparency, to improve accountability and to reduce corruption, falling under Sections 4(1)(b) and (c) and other information which may not have a bearing on accountability or reducing corruption. The competent authorities under the RTI Act will have to maintain a proper balance so that while achieving transparency, the demand for information does not reach unmanageable proportions affecting other public interests, which include efficient operation of public authorities and the Page 39 of 44 Government, preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information and optimum use of limited fiscal resources.' In the matter of Rajni Maindiratta- Vs Directorate of Education (North West - B) [W.P.(C) No. 7911/2015] the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has held that:
'8. Though undoubtedly, the reason for seeking the information is not required to be disclosed but when it is found that the process of the law is being abused, the same become relevant. Neither the authorities created under the RTI Act nor the Courts are helpless if witness the provisions of law being abused and owe a duty to immediately put a stop thereto.' And, in the matter of Shail Sahni vs Sanjeev Kumar [W.P.(C) 845/2014] the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has held that:
'...xxx 'This Court is also of the view that misuse of the RTI Act has to be appropriately dealt with, otherwise the public would lose faith and confidence in this "sunshine Act". A beneficent Statute, when made a tool for mischief and abuse must be checked in accordance with law.'
62. Adverting to the foregoing observations, the Commission dismisses the appeal(s) as bereft of merit.
63. In the above backdrop, the Appellant is strongly advised to desist from filing repetitive RTI Applications and to make judicious use of his right to information in the future as Appeal(s) emanating from the same or similar nature of RTI Applications are liable to be summarily dismissed henceforth. The Respondent CPIO & FAA are also advised to take reference of the instant decision while dealing with any future RTI Applications or First Appeal(s) of the Appellant on the same subject matter.
64. The Appeal(s) are dismissed accordingly.
Page 40 of 44Caution Note for the Respondent Notwithstanding the above decision, having considered the replies of the CPIOs available on record mostly dated 25.01.2024, wherein it has been informed to the Appellant that the concerned Section/deemed PIO have not provided the information to the CPIO in response to the assistance sought for under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act, the Commission takes grave exception and strongly rebukes providing such response to the RTI Applicants in the future. The RTI Applicants cannot be expected to make peace with the fact that their right to information stand curtailed in a scenario where, the CPIO decides to inform the applicant that non-receipt of information from the deemed PIO be accepted as the reply to their RTI Application. There ought to be a system of checks and balances instituted in the Respondent University, whereby, the CPIO invests reasonable efforts to ensure that the deemed PIOs work in tandem with the CPIO to enable proper disposal of RTI Applications in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act. Similarly, the deemed PIOs are also cautioned against their inaction or mindless disposal of RTI Applications by asking the RTI applicant to approach another Section. The deemed PIOs ought to restrict their replies to the provision of the available information or categorically stating unavailability of information. Similarly, in cases where the RTI Application does not even conform to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, the CPIO should exercise their wisdom and apply their mind before forwarding the RTI Application mechanically to all deemed PIOs. It is also pointed out that in cases where the CPIO or the deemed PIO have parted with the personal information of the third parties, it ought to be ensured in future that such disclosures are made only after following the due process of law laid down under Section 11 of the RTI Act. As it follows, the FAA is also expected to adopt a proactive approach in such cases where the CPIOs claims that the deemed PIOs are not tending to their request seeking assistance under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act to ensure that the public authority is not portrayed in a questionable scenario leading to aspersions being cast upon its administrative functioning and tenets of transparency & probity. Here, the FAA is also strictly advised to ensure disposal of all Page 41 of 44 the First Appeal(s) received by them as it is the statutory duty cast upon the FAA to decide First Appeal(s) and the same cannot be evaded under any circumstance.
The CPIO shall ensure service of this order to each of the designated deemed PIOs in the University to take note of the caution note stated above and to ensure timely and proper disposal of RTI Applications in the future.
A copy of this order is also marked to the FAA to take note of the adverse observations of the Commission and to ensure proper sensitization of the CPIO & the deemed PIOs regarding the mandate of the RTI Act.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
आनंदी राम लंगम)
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं म
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 28.06.2024
Authenticated true copy
Col S S Chhikara (Retd) (कन ल एस एस िछकारा, ( रटायड )) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Dr. Harisingh Gaur Vishwavidyalaya, Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell, Distt- Sagar, M.P- 470003
2. All Deemed PIOs Dr. Harisingh Gaur Vishwavidyalaya
--(Copy to be served through the CPIO) Page 42 of 44
3. FAA (under RTI Act) Dr. Harisingh Gaur Vishwavidyalaya, Distt- Sagar, M.P- 470003
--(For taking note of the caution note)
2. Atul Nijhawan ANNEXURE Sl. No. Second Appeal No. 1 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149244 2 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148986 3 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148222 4 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149095 5 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149094 6 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149093 7 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149092 8 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149091 9 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149090 10 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149089 11 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149088 12 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149087 13 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149013 14 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149012 15 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/149014 16 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148605 17 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148603 18 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147718 19 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148574 20 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/148274 21 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147894 22 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147577 23 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147927 24 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147909 25 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/147649 26 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146434 27 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146312 28 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146039 29 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146038 30 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146025 31 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146024 32 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146020 Page 43 of 44 33 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146076 34 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146128 35 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146430 36 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146133 37 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/146134 38 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145949 39 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145948 40 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145947 41 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145946 42 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145945 43 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145764 44 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145765 45 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145832 46 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145831 47 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145830 48 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145828 49 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145826 50 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145825 51 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/145208 52 CIC/DHGVV/A/2023/142889 Page 44 of 44 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)