Central Information Commission
Naseem Alam vs Aligarh Muslim University on 24 February, 2026
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/ALMUV/A/2025/607562
Naseem Alam .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, RTI
CELL, DISTT-ALIGARH, U. P.-202002 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 17.02.2026
Date of Decision : 17.02.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Sudha Rani Relangi
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 17.12.2024
CPIO replied on : 06.01.2025
First appeal filed on : 09.01.2025
First Appellate Authority's order : 06.02.2025
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 11.02.2025
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.12.2024 seeking the following information:-
"Query No-01- provide the copy of Office memo of AMU, Aligarh for the adoption & implementation of Office Memo No-220-11/3/76-Estt(D), Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Personal & IR, New Delhi dated 24th Dec, 1980 (Copy enclosed) Page 1 of 5 Query No-02-Provide the copy of Office memo of AMU, Aligarh for the adoption & Implementation of Office Memo No-220-11/9/98-Estt(D), Govt. of India, Ministry of Personal, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personal and Training) North Block, New Delhi dated September 8, 1998 (Copy enclosed) Query No-03-Provide the copy of Office memo of AMU, Aligarh for the adoption & implementation of Office Memo No-220-11/9/98-Estt(D), Govt. of India, Ministry of Personal, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personal and Training) North Block, New Delhi dated Oct 13, 1998 (Copy enclosed) Query No-04-Provide the copy of Office memo of AMU, Aligarh for the adoption & implementation of Office Memo No-220-11/9/98-Estt(D) Pt, Govt. of India, Ministry of Personal, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personal and Training ). New Delhi dated 21September 2006 (Copy enclosed).
Query No-DS-Provide the copy of Office memo of AMU, Aligarh for the adoption & implementation of Office Memo No-220-11/4/2013-Estt(D), Govt. of India, Ministry of Personal, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personal and Training), New Delhi dated 8 May 2017 (Copy enclosed) Query No-06- Provide the copy of Office memo of AMU, Aligarh for the adoption & implementation of Office Memo No-220-11/1/2021-Estt(D), Govt. of India, Ministry of Personal, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personal and Training) North Block, New Delhi dated 27.08.2021 (Copy enclosed)."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 06.01.2025 stating as under:-
"1.The Office Memo dated 24 12.1980 too old and hence is not traceable.
2.The Office Memo dated 08.09.1998 too old and hence is not traceable.
3.The Office Memo dated 13.08.1998 too old and hence is not traceable.Page 2 of 5
4.Such information is not available in the Office Record. This Office process only those Office Memos for adoption which are received from UGC
5.Such information is not available in the Office Record. This Office process only those Office Memos for adoption which are received from UGC
6.Such information is not available in the Office Record. This Office process only those Office Memos for adoption which are received from GC."
3. Aggrieved by the decision of the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.01.2025. The FAA vide its order dated 06.02.2025, upheld reply of the CPIO.
4. Challenging the FAA's order, Appellant is before the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Shri NaseemAlam, present through video conference. Respondent: Shri Nasir Qamar, AR/PIO present through video conference.
5. The Appellant while reiterating the contents of RTI application in question stated that he is aggrieved by the fact that information was denied by the CPIO. Appellant alleged that the University cannot run in violation to the UGC and DoPT norms without conducting the DPC on an annual basis. Appellant prayed the Commission to intervene in the matter by directing the CPIO to provide complete information.
6. Written statements of the CPIO are taken on record.
7. CPIO averred that University's office was bifurcated in 2018 in two parts, namely, teaching and non-teaching posts. In the said process many of the records were misplaced and not traceable. This factual position of non- availability of records was informed to the Appellant in the first instance. However, CPIO clarified to the Commission that circulars of DoPT are received in their office through UGC only for implementation of any policy and no Page 3 of 5 guidelines are directly issued to them through DoPT. This fact was informed to the Appellant initially.
Decision:
8. Heard the parties.
9. Upon perusal of facts of records, the Commission notes that as far as RTI application is concerned suitable replies were provided by the CPIO intimating the factum of non-availability of records, which is in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
10. It is noteworthy, the CPIO is only a provider of information based on the records held in the office at the relevant time and he/she is not expected to create information as per the desire of the Appellant. In this regard, the Commission relies on a judgement passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi dated 04.12.2014 in the case of The Registrar, Supreme Court of India vs. Commodore Lokesh K. Batra and Ors. [W.P.(C) No. 6634/2011], wherein the Court has held as under:
"11.In so far as the question of disclosing information that is not available with the public authority is concerned, the law is now well settled that the Act does not enjoin a public authority to create, collect or collate information that is not available with it. There is no obligation on a public authority to process any information in order to create further information as is sought by an applicant......."
11.Having observed as above, intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matter, at this juncture.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Sudha Rani Relangi (सुधारानीरे लं गी) Information Commissioner (सू चनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy Page 4 of 5 (अिभ मािणतस ािपत ित) (Anil Kumar Mehta) Dy. Registrar 011- 26767500 Date Shri NaseemAlam Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)