Central Information Commission
Kamlesh Gautam vs Ministry Of External Affairs on 21 July, 2022
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली,
ली New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2021/603175
Shri Kamlesh Gautam ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Ministry of External Affairs ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Through: Shri Gagan Gupta - Advocate with Shri
Rajender Kumar- CPIO
Date of Hearing : 20.07.2022
Date of Decision : 21.07.2022
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 07.11.2020
PIO replied on : 18.11.2020
First Appeal filed on : 18.11.2020
First Appellate Order on : 08.01.2021
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 03.02.2021
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.11.2020 seeking information on the following points:-
SPDC was introduced in 2006-07 to make higher education accessible to the children of Persons of Indian Origin PIO/OCI. A third category of children of Indian workers in ECR countries was included under the Scheme in 2015-16. Since 2006-07 till 2016-17, under this Scheme, OCI students were getting awarded with scholarship, who were having passports of applicable and selected 66 countries. In 2017-18 Guidelines - Unusual clause added to harm Rights/injustice to PIO/OCI. That clause is 4. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:
(f).
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI, Judgment delivered on: 24.08.2018, W.P.(C) 4746/2018 against wrong stopping of SPDC scholarship to a OCI student joined college in 2016. In 2018-19 - This disputed clause removed. In 2019-20 - Again contrary/conflicting clause added for OCI/PIO in
3.ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA d) Children of Indian worker, who are left behind in India are eligible then why they removed OCI?
Page 1 of 4In 2020-21 - Again contrary clause added for OCI/PIO. All actions of changing Original SPDC scheme in (2017-18, 2019-20 and 2020-21) are contrary to the purpose of scheme launched by MEA/ MHRD for PIO/OCI holders. It is hampering rights of OCI for SPDC as already OCI children pays higher fee of USD 8000 per annum. Original scheme says that for scholarship, main eligibility for OCI category is that they should have passport from one of 68 selected countries and have PIO/OCI card with having income as per the set criteria by SPDC.
The PIO, Ministry of External Affairs vide letter dated 18.11.2020 replied as under:-
Government of India's Scholarship Programme for Diaspora Children was introduced in the Academic Year 2006-07 to make higher education in Indian Universities/Institutes in different fields (except Medical and related courses in India) accessible to the Children of Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs) and Non-resident Indians. Under SPDC Scheme, since 2006-07 to 2014-15, 100 scholarships were offered under which 50 were reserved for PIOs and 50 were reserved for NRIs.
In 2015-16, the SPDC Scheme was revamped and the main features of revamped SPDC are as follows:
(i) The Scheme was extended to the Children of Indian Workers in the 17 Emigration Check Required (ECR) countries (ECR countries are : Afghanistan, Bahrain, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, United Arab Emirates and Yemen).
(ii) The number of Scholarship slots were increased from 100 to
150. Out of the 150 scholarships, 50 for PIOs, 50 for NRIs and 50 for Children of Indian Workers in the 17 ECR countries are earmarked. Out of the 50 scholarship reserved for Children of Indian Workers in the 17 ECR countries are earmarked, 1/3 scholarship slots (17)are reserved for Children of Indian Workers whose children are left behind in India.
(iii) The number of countries covered under had been increased from 40 to 66. Presently 69 countries covered under SPDC Scheme (List of countries can be seen at SPDC website https://spdcindia.gov.in). There is no hampering of the original Scheme of SPDC.
There is no hampering of the original Scheme of SPDC.
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.11.2020. The FAA vide order dated 08.01.2021 disposed of the first appeal upholding the reply of the CPIO/DS(OIA-I) as the subject matter of RTI application is related to the other CPIO the application to whom has already been forwarded by the nodal officer.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Page 2 of 4Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A written submission dated 19.07.2022 has been received from the Respondent
- CPIO(OIA-II), US, MEA wherein apart from reiterating the abovementioned facts, the Respondent has stated as under:
Hearing was scheduled through video conference after giving prior notice to both the parties. Respondent alone is present for the hearing, while the Appellant has neither attended hearing held today nor sent any submission in support of his case, despite service of hearing notice in advance.
Decision:
It is noted that the written submission dated 190.07.2022 filed by the Respondent further elucidates the response already sent by the PIO on 18.11.2020. It is comprehensive and self explanatory as such. Since copy of the said submission dated 19.07.2022 has not been sent to the Appellant, it is hereby directed that a copy of the same must be supplied to the Appellant, within two weeks of receipt of this order and Respondent/CPIO- Shri Rajender Kumar shall submit a compliance report before the Commission in this regard by 15.08.2022.
The appeal is disposed off on the above terms.
Y. K. Sinha (वाई.
वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Page 3 of 4 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 of 4