Central Information Commission
B Bharathi vs Directorate Of Higher And Technical ... on 5 March, 2019
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/DHEDU/A/2018/184049/DHTED/SD
B Bharthi ....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
O/o Superintendent,
Chief Secretariat (Higher and Technical Education),
Government of Puducherry,
Puducherry - 605008.
CPIO,
CENTAC,
PEC Campus,
Puducherry - 605008. ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
RTI application filed on : 25/09/2017
CPIO replied on : 16/10/2017
First appeal filed on : 10/11/2017
First Appellate Authority order : No order
Second Appeal dated : 09/12/2017
Date of Hearing : 25/02/2019
Date of Decision : 25/02/2019
Information sought:
The Appellant sought certified copies of file noting(s), documents, approval given by competent authorities for appointment of members of CENTAC committee for selecting students for undergraduate and postgraduate medical courses for academic years 2015-16 and 2016-17; list of names and designation of Chairman/President and members of the CENTAC committee; list of names of members appointed from private medical colleges in CENTAC committee and related rules.1
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent (1): Gunalan Satish, Supdt. & PIO and Ms F.P. Verbina Jayaraj, FAA, O/o Chief Secretariat (Higher and Technical Education), Government of Puducherry, Puducherry Respondent (2): S. Manickadeepan, Convenor & PIO and Ms F.P. Verbina Jayaraj, FAA, CENTAC,PEC Campus, Puducherry present through VC.
Respondent No.1 submitted that whatever information was available with them has been provided to the Appellant. It was further submitted that since Appellant's dissatisfaction with the reply provided on paras 1 and 2 of the RTI Application is that information regarding the Post-Graduate courses has not been provided; the same should be available with Respondent No.2 as CENTAC deals with PG Courses.
Respondent No.2 submitted that they provided a reply on 31.10.2017, wherein the then Convenor had provided the relevant rule position sought at para 4 of the RTI Application.
Decision Commission observes from the proceedings during hearing that Respondent No.2 has not provided any information on para 3 of the RTI Application and the information provided on paras 1 and 2 is also incomplete.
Now, Commission directs Respondent No.2 to provide available and relevant information regarding the PG course as sought in paras 1 & 2 of the RTI Application. Further, on para 3 of the RTI Application, specific and available information should also be provide to the Appellant. In dping so, if information on any of the paras has to be procured in parts or as a whole from any other office/Section, Respondent No.2 will procure and provide the same directly to the Appellant.2
File No : CIC/DHEDU/A/2018/184049/DHTED/SD The aforesaid information should be provided free of cost within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and a compliance report to this effect shall be duly sent to the Commission by Respondent No.2.
A copy of this order is also marked to the FAA to ensure that information on the aforesaid paras is provided to the Appellant as directed above by Respondent No.2.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Divya Prakash Sinha ( द काश िस हा )
Information Commissioner ( सूचना आयु )
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
Haro Prasad Sen
Dy. Registrar
011-26106140 / [email protected]
हरो साद सेन, उप-पंजीयक
दनांक / Date
Copy to:
First Appellate Authority
Chief Secretariat (Higher and Technical Education), Government of Puducherry, Puducherry - 605008
--(To ensure compliance of directions as above) 3