Central Information Commission
Praveen Kumar vs Satyajit Ray Film & Television ... on 30 October, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/SRLTI/A/2024/622699
Praveen Kumar .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute,
EM Bye Pass Road, PO - Panchasayar,
Kolkata - 700094 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 29.10.2025
Date of Decision : 30.10.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 08.03.2024
CPIO replied on : 08.04.2024
First appeal filed on : 08.04.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 29.05.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.03.2024 (online) seeking the following information:
"1. Is there any active students association in the institute currently? The date when it was former ?
2. What has been the mode of nomination/election to various posts in the students association?Page 1 of 4
3. The name of the authority who had approved the names of the present office leaders of the student association and the name of various office bearers of various post holder of the association?
4. The batches of 3 years films courses and 2 years EDM courses who are eligible to become the ordinary members of the association and vote, in case of any election, and occupying the various posts in the association separately.
5. The detail of the rules, procedure for forming, functioning, responsibilities, duties, rights of the office leaders and members of the association.
6. The detail of any specific notice board, site on net, message group where the activities and decision of the association are fresh accessible to its members, if any."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 08.04.2024 stating as under:
"No details of procedure / information regarding the Students' Association of this Institute is officially available with this Institute.
However, an unsigned office bearer list of the said Association is available with the Tutorial Section of this Institute (copy enclosed herewith)."
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.04.2024. The FAA order is not on record.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through video conference. Respondent: Shri Shantanu Pal, Associate Professor/CPIO along with Ms. Sanjukta Ray Pahari, Librarian-cum-the then CPIO present through video conference.Page 2 of 4
5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondent while filing the same in CIC is not available on record. The Respondent confirms non- service.
6. The Commission at the outset, confirmed the parties that twelve Second Appeals of the Appellant against the same Public Authority is listed today for hearing before the Bench. Commission also asked the Appellant if he is interested in the information of both the FTII Pune and SRFTI Kolkata, he clarified that he is interest in the information only for the Kolkata Institute. His application was transferred by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to both the Institutes which are under their jurisdiction.
7. As regards the instant Appeal, the Appellant restricted his arguments to the fact that list of association bearers as given by the CPIO with the reply is unsigned and not certified. He prayed the Commission to direct the respondent to provide certified copy of relevant information.
8. The Respondent submitted that information as is received from the Tutorial Section has been given to the Appellant. As the list of association bearers was not signed by the concerned officer, therefore, the replying Respondent did not certify the copy of extract. He is not sure that if the original also does not have any signature of any authority. Decision:
9. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and considering the limited prayer of the Appellant directs the Respondent to obtain a certified copy of extract of list as given earlier with the initial reply from the concerned custodian of records and provide the same to the Appellant. In doing so, the Respondent is at liberty to take assistance of the concerned department under Section 5(4) of the RTI Act, if need be. This information should be provided to the Appellant, free of cost within one week of the date of receipt of this order.
10. FAA to ensure compliance of the directions.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Page 3 of 4 Copy To:
Director and FAA, Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute, EM Bye Pass Road, PO - Panchasayar, Kolkata - 700094 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)