Central Information Commission
Lalit Narayan vs University Grants Commission on 5 October, 2021
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/UGCOM/A/2020/661903
Lalit Narayan ....अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
University Grants Commission,
RTI Cell, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi - 110002. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 11/08/2021
Date of Decision : 01/10/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 25/09/2019
CPIO replied on : Not on record
First appeal filed on : 01/11/2019
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 28/01/2020
1
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 25.09.2019 seeking the following information:
"I had qualified B.Com from IGNOU after passing 10th from NOS, New Delhi. Whether I am eligible for higher studies from other universities in India. If your submission is in affirmation then name the courses I can apply kindly reply in written submission. If a candidate not passed 12th standard and directly took admission in B.com after passing a eligibility course namely Bpp from IGNOU and now he will pass 12th after graduation.
Whether he can apply for govt. Jobs. Submit your answer in writing. Whether any university can deny the candidate to take admission in higher studies courses even if a candidate has a valid Bachelor degree from IGNOU. Kindly submit your answer in writing.
Whether IGNOU Bachelor degree is sufficient to apply in government jobs kindly submit your written submission. If the IGNOUs degree is not valid for any government jobs and debars the candidate to took admission in any other universities. Then the IGNOUs policy has not infringe the right to education and equal opportunity for employment for Indian citizen. Kindly submit your submission in writing."
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 01.11.2019. FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio conference.
Respondent: Neethu Thulasi, Education Officer(DEB)& CPIO present through audio conference.
The Appellant stated that he has not received any material information till date.2
The CPIO submitted that the RTI Application was transferred online to IGNOU on 01.05.2020 for providing a reply. Upon a query from the Commission, the CPIO regretted that the delay was on account of multiple transfers of the RTI Application within UGC.
The Commission took grave exception to the fact that the RTI Application was unnecessarily shuffled between multiple officers without heeding to the fact that the Appellant has not sought for any information as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act as he has merely sought for a clarification regarding eligibility of his B.Com degree earned post Class 10th from IGNOU.
The CPIO tendered unconditional regret for not having deciphered the requirement of the Appellant or for not having applied the provisions of the RTI Act properly in the matter. She further urged to condone the omission of the concerned then CPIOs and prayed for taking a lenient view in the matter.
The Commission further noted that since no reply was provided to the Appellant, the CPIO ought to clarify on the issue raised in the RTI Application, to which the CPIO submitted that IGNOU is exempted from the ODL Regulations, 2017 of UGC and therefore she is not in a position to comment on the technicalities involved in the issue raised by the Appellant.
At the behest of the Commission, since the subject matter involved the larger public interest of similarly placed students the CPIO was directed to send a detailed written submission on the decision of UGC to exempt IGNOU from ODL Regulations, 2017.
The CPIO sent a comprehensive note on the averred subject on 18.08.2021 which has been duly taken cognizance of by the Commission.
Decision:
The Commission considering the serious nature of the concern raised by the Appellant in the RTI Application and the fact that a proper reply to the same was never sent to him by UGC or IGNOU directs the CPIO, UGC to now provide a detailed clarification to him.In doing so, the CPIO is directed to adequately liaise with IGNOU and provide a reply sufficing the query of the Appellant along with any relevant supporting documents that can be disclosed under the RTI Act.3
The above information shall be sent to the Appellant free of cost through speed/registered post and via email within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 4