Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

B. Surendar vs University Of Delhi on 24 July, 2025

                                     के ीय सूचना आयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                  बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                              Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                नई िद     ी, New Delhi - 110067
िशकायत सं       ा / Complaint No. CIC/UODEL/C/2024/637140

B. Surendar                                                  ...िशकायतकता/Complainant

                                          VERSUS
                                           बनाम

CPIO: School Of Open Learning,
Delhi                                                         ... ितवादीगण /Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the complaint:

RTI : 28.05.2023               FA       : Not on record           Complaint : 22.08.2024

CPIO : 12.06.2023              FAO : Not on record                Hearing   : 15.07.2025


Date of Decision: 24.07.2025

                                         CORAM:
                                   Hon'ble Commissioner
                                 _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                        ORDER

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 28.05.2023 seeking information on the following points:

 I am submitting application U/s 6(1) of RTI Act 2005 to Public Information Officer of School of Open Learning, University Information about equivalence certificate, eligibility certificate and to obtain the same.

Please note, Association of Indian Universities (AIU) had evaluated the credentials of education and issued equivalence certificate programme examination recognized by university of south pacific, fiji EC dt 2/3.3.84 (total 12 Page 1 of 4 years academics and study as e in India completed under new pattern) and the same is listed and indicated in CBSE examination by laws. In the same metho had completed 2 years foundation course programme with 6 school elective subjects (English and Tamil), Pre-Universi academics and study recognized by Annamalai University (State - Tamil Nadu) during the UGC recognized period.

I have joined and completed the 2yrs Foundation Programme after passing 10th Std/SSLC through school public examination Govt Exams respectively. Also, I have scanned and attached my original 10th Std /SSLC school Public examination mark sh foundation course, transfer certificate and two separate 11th, 12th Std mark sheets 2007-2009 recognised and approved by Government authorities for your kind persual .

1. I sincerely request PIO to evaluate the credentials of education and provide 12th standard equivalence certificate for examination recognized by Annamalai University with 6 school elective subjects course approved in UGC, DEC prospectus for employment/for promotions and services as necessary information

2. I sincerely request PIO of School of Open Learning, University of Delhi to provide 12th standard eligibility certificate for certificate conferred Annamalai University with 6 school elective subjects programme approved under UGC-DEC recognized information

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.06.2023 and the same is reproduced as under :-

1. The School of Open Learning neither evaluates the credentials of education nor provides 12th standard equivalence certificate for 2-year Foundation Course exam of any University.

2. The SOL cannot provide 12th standard eligibility certificate for 2 years Foundation Course from Annamalai University. The SOL is not authorized to issue such kind of certificates.

3. Aggrieved with the response received from the CPIO, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint dated 22.08.2024.

4. The Complainant attended the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the respondent Sanjay Agarwal, CPIO, attended the hearing in-person.

5. The Complainant inter alia submitted that the respondent did not provide the requisite information sought for in the RTI application.

6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia endorsed their initial reply that the information requested for was neither maintained with the respondent authority, nor was held under their custody at any given point in time.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that an appropriate response has been given by the CPIO, as per records available under their custody. That being so, the Commission finds no lapse on the part of CPIO. Accordingly, in absence of any merit in the complaint, the same is closed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 24.07.2025 Authenticated true copy 0- O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ. पी. पोख रयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO School Of Open Learning, CPIO, RTI Cell, (Campus Of Open Learning), University Of Delhi, 5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007

2. B. Surendar Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)