Central Information Commission
Suresh Kumar Gupta vs All India Council For Technical ... on 30 August, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/AICTE/A/2023/147988
Suresh Kumar Gupta ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: All India Council for
Technical Education, New Delhi ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 31.07.2023 FA : 09.09.2023 SA : 14.12.2023
CPIO : 28.08.2023 FAO : 31.10.2023 Hearing : 19.08.2024
Date of Decision: 29.08.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.07.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) इलाहाबाद ए)ीक*चरल डी,ड यूिनविसटी वतमान म. सैम िह01न बाटम यूिनविसटी ऑफ ए)ीक*चर, टे 5ोलॉजी एं ड साइं सेज, नैनी यागराज को एम०एस०सी० (आई०टी०) 2002 से 2005 तक के िलये िड)ी जारी करने की मा<ता/अनुमोदन/मंजूरी अ0खल भारतीय तकनीकी िशAा पBरषद ने कब दी थी ? AICTE मा<ता/अनुमोदन/ Jाव/मंजूरी की मािणत ितिलिप िदनां क माह व वष सिहत मािणत मूल ित। Page 1 of 3
(ii) इलाहाबाद ए)ीक*चरल डी,ड यूिनविसटी, यागराज को एम०एस०सी० (आई०टी०) वष 2002 से2005 तक केिलयेिड)ी जारी करनेकी मा<ता/ अ नुमोदन/मंजूरी का U.G.C िवOिवPालय अ नुदान आयोग/अ 0खल भारतीय तकनीकी िशAा पBरषद व DEC दू रR Aा पBरषद की संयुS सिमित ारा की गमT मंजूरी की मािणत ित।
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 28.08.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"सूचना उपलW नहीं है ।"
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.09.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 31.10.2023 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 14.12.2023.
5. The appellant remained present in Person and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Amit Kumar Singh PIO remained present in Person.
6. The appellant inter alia submitted that the information sought has not been provided.
7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the Appellant has sought information about Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences (SHUATS), formerly Allahabad Agricultural institute. In this regard it is to inform that AICTE grants approval for courses pertaining to Engineering & Technology, Planning, Applied Arts and Crafts, Design. Hotel Management and Catering Technology, Computer Application & Management. AICTE does not accord approval for Bachelor of Science (B.Sc) courses of Institutions. The letter pertaining to extension of approval for the Sarn Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences formerly Allahabad Agricultural institute, Allahabad for AY 2002-05 is provided to the Appellant vide letter dated 16.08.2024.
Page 2 of 38. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that an appropriate reply has been provided by the Respondent. Therefore, no intervention of the commission is required in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनां क/Date: 29.08.2024 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) (कनल एस एस िछकारा (Bरटायड) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO All India Council for Technical Education, CPIO, RTI Cell, Head Office: Delhi, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070
2. Suresh Kumar Gupta Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)