Central Information Commission
Dr Pradeep Kumar vs Indian Institute Of Technology, Kanpur on 11 September, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/IITKP/A/2023/643959
Dr Pradeep Kumar ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 03.07.2023 FA : 07.08.2023 SA : 10.09.2023
CPIO : 26.07.2023 FAO : 30.08.2023 Hearing : 03.09.2024
Date of Decision: 09.09.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.07.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Please provide the information under the RTI Act 2005 of Prof. S. A. Ramakrishna (Physics) and at present Director CSIR-CSIO Chandigarh for the following:
(i) Details of all industry sponsored projects, industry sponsored collaborative projects, industry sponsored consultancy work, etc. undertaken by IIT Kanpur since 01.01.2011. Also provide the Name of Authorized Person from the Industry and Name of team members from IIT Kanpur, Cost of the project, Duration of the project, Date of Start & End/Completion of the project.Page 1 of 4
(ii) Details of all MoUs, and Agreements signed with Industries by IIT Kanpur since 01.01.2011.
(iii) List of all technologies developed by IIT Kanpur since 01.01.2011. Also provide the name of team members who developed such technologies.
(iv) List of the technologies transferred to Industry since 01.01.2015 on exclusive basis. Also provide the name of industry, date of transfer of technology, and cost of technology fee received from the industry, firm or company. Also provide the copy of agreement signed with industry to transfer the technology on exclusive basis.
(v) List of the technologies transferred to Industry since 01.01.2015 on non-
exclusive basis. Also provide the name of industry, date of transfer of technology, and cost of technology fee received from the industry, firm or company, etc./ other related information
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 26.07.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
1. There are no industry projects executed by. Prof. S.A. Ramakrishna.
2. One MoU was signed between Raksha Supreme Comouflage Pvt. Ltd. and IIT Kanpur signed on 09th June 2020 for Prof. S.A. Ramakrishna. The validity of the MoU was until 8th June 2023.
Further, Details of other MoUs and agreements cannot be disclosed under section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, as it contains trade secrets, intellectual property etc. related information, which would harm the competitive position of a third party.
3, 4, 5 & 7. Information sought under these points would prejudicially affect the scientific and economical interests of the Institute and, it would also harm the competitive position of third party. Hence, same cannot be revealed under section 8(1)(a) and 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005, etc. Page 2 of 4
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 07.08.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 30.08.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 10.09.2023.
5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Prakalp Sharma, CPIO, attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the respondent authority had entered into a joint-NDA (MoU) with Raksha Supreme Comouflage Pvt. Ltd. and the agreement contained commercially sensitive information and disclosure of the same could harm the competitive position of the third-party involved. However, they had furnished information disclosable, as per provisions under Section 4 (1) of the RTI Act, against point nos (i), (ii), and (vi) of the RTI application, vide their letter dated 26.07.2023.
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO has provided an appropriate reply to the RTI Application as per the provisions of the RTI Act. Further, in the absence of the Appellant to plead his case or contest the CPIO's submissions, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
आनंदी राम लंगम)
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं म
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 09.09.2024
Authenticated true copy
Col S S Chhikara (Retd) (कन ल एस एस िछकारा ( रटायड )) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, Assistant Registrar - Legal, IIT Kanpur, UP-208016
2. Pradeep Kumar Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)