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

N Maruti Rao vs Guru Ghasidas Vishvidyalaya, Bilaspur on 11 May, 2022

                                               CIC/GGVBP/A/2020/694591

                              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/GGVBP/A/2020/694591

In the matter of:

N Maruti Rao                                                  ... अपीलकता/Appellant
                                       VERSUS
                                        बनाम

CPIO,                                                    ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Guru Ghasidas Vishvidyalaya,
RTI Cell, C.G. Koni, Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh495009

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI Application filed on                  :   17.07.2020
CPIO replied on                           :   Not on Record
First Appeal filed on                     :   01.09.2020
First Appellate Authority order           :   Not on Record
Second Appeal received on                 :   02.12.2020
Date of Hearing                           :   10.05.2022

The following were present:

Appellant: Absent (Despite being given hearing notice)

Respondent: Dr. Sampoornananda Jha, Deputy Registrar & Public
Information Officer (Examination), participated in the hearing through video
conference from NIC Bilaspur




                                                                     Page 1 of 6
                                                 CIC/GGVBP/A/2020/694591

                                ORDER

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an online RTI Application dated 17.07.2020 seeking information on the following three points:
1) "List of MBA (Distance) students of Dr. C V Raman University Science, Technology, Commerce and Management, Raipur appeared for examination conducted by Guru Ghasidas University from 2004-05 to 2008-09.
2) Result sheets of MBA (Distance) course of Dr. C V Raman University Science, Technology, Commerce and Management, Raipur conducted by Guru Ghasidas University from 2004-05 to 2008-09.
3) Copy of Government letter issued to Guru Ghasidas University, Bilaspur to conduct examination of MBA (Distance) course offered by Dr. C V Raman University Science, Technology, Commerce and Management, Raipur."

Having not received any information from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 01.09.2020, which has not been adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority as per available records.

Grounds for Second Appeal:

The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of non- receipt of information from the Respondent. Appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.
Page 2 of 6
CIC/GGVBP/A/2020/694591 Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The Appellant did not participate in the hearing despite being served the hearing notice.
The Respondent submitted that Dr. C V Raman University Science, Technology, Commerce and Management, Raipur does not come under the ambit of Guru Ghasidas Vishvavidyalaya. He further submitted that Dr. C.V Raman University of Science and Technology was a private university and after a Hon'ble Supreme Court's verdict the same was closed down, therefore the examination of students of Dr. C.V. Raman University was conducted by the Guru Ghasidas University, Bilaspur. Hence the information sought by the appellant in the instant RTI Application is not available with them.
Upon being further queried by the Commission, the respondent submitted that the required information may be available with All India Society for Electronics and Computer Technology. The commission interjected that if this is the case then the RTI Application should have already been transferred to the concerned custodian of information, for which the respondent was not able to provide a cogent reply.
The Commission further asked the respondent, whether any response has been given to the appellant so far, to which the respondent submitted that a reply has been given to the appellant on 06.01.2022.
Page 3 of 6
CIC/GGVBP/A/2020/694591 Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that the respondent did not provide any adequate and timely response to the RTI application of the appellant. The respondent submitted that they have furnished a reply on 06.01.2022, which evidently reflects prolonged delay for which the commission takes very serious view and strictly reprimands the respondent.

Also, it is observed that the respondent has furnished an improper, undated and unaddressed letter to the commission. Therefore, the Commission strictly admonishes the conduct of the Respondent for not providing any reply to the Appellant within the stipulated time-frame as mandated in the RTI Act.

Hence, the Commission directs the Respondent to provide a written explanation to the Commission for not providing any reply to the Appellant within the stipulated time-frame as mandated in the RTI Act and the aforesaid written explanation should reach the Commission within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which ex-parte action will be initiated by the Commission against the present CPIO. The commission firmly directs the respondent to furnish properly formatted and duly addressed responses to the commission.

In light of the submissions provided by the respondent, the commission hereby directs the respondent to provide a point wise, categorical and appropriate response to the appellant. If required, obtain the same from the concerned custodian of information and furnish it to the appellant. If the averred information are still not found in the official records of the Respondent, the Commission deems it fit to direct the concerned CPIO to Page 4 of 6 CIC/GGVBP/A/2020/694591 submit an appropriate affidavit, on non-judicial stamp paper deposing the factum of non-availability of the same. The said affidavit should be submitted to the Commission with its copy duly endorsed to the Appellant, within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. Notwithstanding the above, the Commission expresses severe displeasure against Dr. Sampoornananda Jha, Deputy Registrar & Public Information Officer (Examination), for appearing before the Commission completely unprepared and unaware of the facts of the instant case. Hence, he is being warned on this count and is advised not to repeat the same. 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: 11.05.2022 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Page 5 of 6 CIC/GGVBP/A/2020/694591 Addresses of the parties:

1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Guru Ghasidas Vishvidyalaya, C.G. Koni, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh - 495009
2. The Central Public Information Officer Guru Ghasidas Vishvidyalaya, RTI Cell, C.G. Koni, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh - 495009
3. Mr. N Maruti Rao Page 6 of 6