Central Information Commission
Alok Asthana vs Ministry Of Human Resource Development on 29 May, 2017
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
website-cic.gov.in
Appeal No. CIC/SA/A/2015/002073/MP
Appellant : Shri Alok Asthana, Thane
Public Authority : Association of Indian Universities, IGNOU, MHRD,
New Delhi and University of Madras, Chennai
Date of Hearing : May 15, 2017
Date of Decision : May 26, 2017
Present:
Appellant : Present - through VC
Respondent : Dr. Bharat Bhushan, Deputy Director, IGNOU, Shri
Shivam Dixit, PIO, Shri Pradeep Kumar, Shri
Sambhav Srivastava, AIU - at CIC and Shri M.
Gajendran, University of Madras - through VC
RTI application : 24.07.2015/NIL
CPIO's reply : 07.09.2015
First appeal : 19.09.2015
FAA's Order : 07.10.2015
Second appeal : 16.11.2015
ORDER
1. Shri Alok Asthana, the appellant, sought information as to whether or not IGNOU or any of its Departments, since 2012, sought information from AIU regarding the eligibility of army officers to pursue Ph.D. course on being awarded M.Sc. degree by Madras University, on successful completion of one year residential course at Defence Services Staff College, Wellington; copy of the query, if any, made by IGNOU, or any of its departments, since 2012, regarding the validity of M.Sc. degree of Colonel Alok Asthana along with the reply of the respondent authority; whether or not the M.Sc. degree awarded to the appellant by Madras University made him eligible to apply for Ph.D. course in IGNOU in 2012-13.
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) informed the appellant that his RTI application was being transferred to the CPIO, University of Madras, u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005, for providing reply to his queries, directly. The appellant, being dissatisfied with inadequate response of the CPIO, AIU, approached the first appellate authority (FAA), stating that the CPIO should have replied to his queries 1 & 2 of his application, as it pertained to AIU and requested the FAA to provide the information requested by him. The FAA intimated the appellant that AIU did not accord equivalence to degrees awarded by Indian Universities and the same was either done by the degree awarding University or the admission giving University and since the appellant's matter related to University of Madras and IGNOU, his application was being transferred u/s 6(3) of the Act, to the CPIO, Madras University, CPIO, IGNOU, CPIO, Ministry of Defence and the CPIO, MHRD, for providing reply to his queries, directly. Aggrieved with the FAA's response, the appellant came in appeal before the Commission and requested the Commission to direct the CPIO, AIU, to provide the requested information on point 1 & 2 of his application as the matter pertained to AIU.
3. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant stated that he had sought information from Association of Indian Universities on three points and all the points were distinct and independent but the CPIO, AIU, did not reply to any of his queries and instead transferred his application to the University of Madras for providing the information, directly. The appellant further submitted that he was refused information on points 1 & 2 of his application, particularly, that pertained to AIU as he sought copies of correspondence made between IGNOU & AIU regarding the eligibility of army officers to pursue Ph.D. course on being awarded M.Sc. degree by Madras University and copy of query, if any, made by IGNOU, or any of its departments, since 2012, regarding the validity of M.Sc. degree of the appellant. The appellant expressed his grievance that correspondence between AIU and SOVET, IGNOU was made for the first time in August, 2015, only after filing of his RTI applications with the AIU and IGNOU.
4. The respondent stated that they were unable to trace the letter relating to the correspondence between IGNOU and AIU on points 1 & 2 of his RTI application and had therefore, transferred the appellant's RTI application u/s 6(3) to the CPIOs concerned of University of Madras, IGNOU and Dept. of Higher Education, MHRD for providing the desired information to the appellant, directly. The CPIO, AIU however, did not inform the appellant that no information was available with them in this regard, as sought by him in his RTI application. However, the FAA had informed the appellant that AIU did not accord equivalence to degrees awarded by Indian Universities and the same was done by the Indian Universities, themselves, in accordance with their Acts & Statutes and in adherence to UGC guidelines/rules prescribed in this regard. The PIO, IGNOU submitted that the appellant had applied for admission to Ph.D. program in School of Vocational Education and Training (SOVET) of IGNOU, in 2012, one of the 11 schools that offer Ph.D. program to students and the Research Unit of IGNOU was the nodal agency for coordinating the Research Degree Programs of the University. The PIO further stated that appellant was awarded M.Sc. degree by Madras University of one year duration only while, as per the norms/guidelines prescribed by UGC in 2007, all Indian Universities were bound to award degrees for its Post Graduation programs for a minimum duration of two years so as to enable a student to seek admission in a Ph.D. program of IGNOU and therefore, he was not found eligible for the program. However, the appellant had been seeking clarifications from IGNOU as well, to know the status of his admission in the Ph.D. program offered by SOVET. The PIO informed the Commission that SOVET had sought clarification from AIU on eligibility of the appellant for admission to the Ph.D. programme offered by the School and forwarded those correspondences/letters to the Research Unit, IGNOU which were provided to the appellant on 15.03.2016, as sought by him in his RTI application on points 1 & 2, by the PIO, IGNOU.
5. On hearing both the parties, the Commission finds that available information has been provided to the appellant by the CPIO, IGNOU on 15.03.2016, as per the records, and no information could have been provided by the CPIO, AIU in this regard as, no letters were exchanged or correspondence made between AIU & IGNOU relating to his eligibility for admission to the Ph.D. programme in SOVET, at the time of his RTI application as a public authority is not supposed to create or collate non-available, non-existing information for the satisfaction of the appellant u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay, has observed as follows:-
"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. This is clear from a combined reading of Section 3 and the definitions of 'information' and 'right to information' under Clauses (f) and (j) of Section 2 of the Act. If a public authority has any information in the form of data or analyzed data, or abstracts, or statistics, an applicant may access such information, subject to the exemptions in Section 8 of the Act. But where the information sought is not a part of the record of a public authority, and where such information is not required to be maintained under any law or the rules or regulations of the public authority, the Act does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to collect or collate such non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant."
6. The Commission however, observes that though, IGNOU has provided the information sought by the appellant on points 1 & 2 of the RTI application, the CPIO, AIU, did not deal with the appellant's application, appropriately, to whom the application was addressed, originally. The Commission therefore, directs the CPIO, AIU to submit his explanation for not replying to the appellant's RTI application in an appropriate manner, within a week of the receipt of the order of the Commission. The appeal is disposed of.
(Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
Dy Registrar Copy to:
The Central Public Information Officer The First Appellate Authority Association of Indian Universities, Association of Indian Universities, CPIO, AIU House, 16, Comrade Secretary General, Indrajit Gupta Road, Kotla Marg, AIU House, 16, Comrade Indrajit New Delhi - 110 002 Gupta Road, New Delhi - 110 002 The Central Public Information Officer University of Madras, Navalar Nagar, Chepauk, Triplicane, Chennai, Tamil Nadu - 600 005 Indira Gandhi National Open University, Shri Alok Asthana, CPIO, RTI Cell, Maidan Garhi, A 601, Caviana, HIranandani Estate, New Delhi - 110 068 Patlipada, Thane (W) - 400 607 Ministry of Human Resources Development, CPIO, Department of Higher Education, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 001