Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Dr Nilay Kumar vs University Grants Commission on 21 July, 2022

                                               CIC/UGCOM/A/2021/606955

                              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/UGCOM/A/2021/606955

In the matter of:

Dr Nilay Kumar                                               ... अपीलकता/Appellant
                                       VERSUS
                                        बनाम

CPIO,                                                      ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
University Grants Commission
Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi- 110002

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI Application filed on                  :   05.02.2021
CPIO replied on                           :   12.02.2021
First Appeal filed on                     :   18.02.2021
First Appellate Authority order           :   23.02.2021
Second Appeal received on                 :   26.02.2021
Date of Hearing                           :   20.07.2022

The following were present:

Appellant: Dr. Nilay Kumar, participated in the hearing through video
conference from NIC East Siang

Respondent: Smt. Shashi Malik, Under Secretary-Pay Scale Division &
Shri. Shyam Bahadur, Section Officer from University Grants Commission
participated in the hearing in person



                                                                     Page 1 of 5
                                               CIC/UGCOM/A/2021/606955

                                  ORDER

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an online RTI Application dated 05.02.2021 seeking information as under:
"Clarification regarding the inclusion of study leave period availed for pursuing Ph.D. degree will be counted for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) and recruitment to higher post. Study leave had been granted by competent authority of University after completion of 5 year of continuous service."

The CPIO vide online reply dated 12.02.2021, informed to the Appellant as under:

Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.02.2021. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 23.02.2021, informed as under:
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. Appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
Page 2 of 5
CIC/UGCOM/A/2021/606955 The Appellant stated that information as provided by the Respondent is not satisfactory since it is not clarifying his query.
The Respondent submitted that the information as provided is adequate since the relevant extant provision appropriately covers the query of the Appellant but the same is subject to certain conditions. Further, no further information is available with the office.
The Respondent further submitted that the notification dated 05.09.2018 issued by UGC with respect to clarification regarding methodology for calculating API score during leave period of teachers has also been sent to the Appellant and the contents of the same are as under:
Page 3 of 5
CIC/UGCOM/A/2021/606955 A written submission has been received by the Commission from Shri Shashi Malik, Under Secretary & CPIO, University Grants Commission vide letter dated 19.07.2022, and the same has been marked to the Appellant wherein the commission has been apprised as under:
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that though the instant RTI Application is clarificatory in nature, the Respondent has adequately attended to the same. The Commission further observes that as per the provisions of the RTI Act, the Respondent is only required to furnish the requisite document as available on record and they are not supposed to create information. In view of the above, the Commission finds no further scope of intervention in the instant matter. With the above observations, the instant Second Appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
The Appeal, hereby, stands disposed of.
Amita Pandove (अिमता पांडव) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date: 21.07.2022 Page 4 of 5 CIC/UGCOM/A/2021/606955 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) University Grants Commission Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002
2. The Central Public Information Officer University Grants Commission Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002
3. Dr Nilay Kumar Page 5 of 5