Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Daljeet Singh vs All India Council For Technical ... on 12 May, 2021

Author: Saroj Punhani

Bench: Saroj Punhani

                               के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                            बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                          नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067


File No : CIC/AICTE/A/2019/651154

Daljeet Singh                                      .....अपीलकता /Appellant


                                      VERSUS
                                       बनाम


CPIO,
All India Council for
Technical Education, RTI Cell,
Nelsonn Mandela Marg, Vasant
Kunj, New Delhi - 110070.                          .... ितवादीगण /Respondent


Date of Hearing                   :   12/05/2021
Date of Decision                  :   12/05/2021

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :            Saroj Punhani

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on          :   29/03/2019
CPIO replied on                   :   26/04/2019
First appeal filed on             :   06/05/2019
First Appellate Authority order   :   29/05/2019
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated        :   Nil



                                        1
 Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 29.03.2019 seeking information regarding 7th CPC, including inter-alia as follows-

1. ".....whether the post of Foreman Instructor is at the rank/level of Lecturer of Polytechnics/Diploma level technical Institutions for granting all the benefits at par with lecturers. If not so, provide the certified copies of relevant orders/documents/letters/circulars etc. issued so far by AICTE for the post of Foreman Instructor xxxxx.

2. As despite the representations of Foreman Instructors, our Association (AGOTE) also submitted representation on 15.01.2019 to AICTE. Even after the post of Foreman Instructor is not covered in AICTE notification dated 1st March, 2019 therefore, in order to know the current status provide the certified copy of the decision taken/observations recorded by pay review committee or such other committee or AICTE on Associations (AGOTE) representation dated 15.01.2019 and FIs.

3. ........Informed that the current pay scale and carrier Advancement Scheme (CAS) are applicable to the post of Foreman Instructor at par with Lecturer of Diploma level Technical Institutions. If not so, provide the certified copies of the orders/documents/letters/circulars etc. issued so far by AICTE to this effect.

4..........whether current age of F.I. of superannuation is at par with Lecturers. If not so, provide relevant certified copies of orders/documents/letters etc. issued so far by AICTE in this regard xxxxx.

5. ........provide certified copies of documents/letters/orders/circulars etc. based upon which AICTE now not considering this post at par with the Lecturer."

The CPIO replied to the Appellant on 26.04.2019 stating as follows:-

"Point No. 1, 2 & 3:- The clarifications given in the notification dated 01.03.2019 are self-explanatory.

Point No. 4 &5:- No information is available."

Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 06.05.2019. FAA's order dated 29.05.2019 stated as under:-

"Reply :- Point No. 1,2 & 3: No information is available. Point No. 4: A copy of Court order dated 5.04.2019 is annexed for information."

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present through audio-conference.

Respondent: Bavinder Singh, Assistant Director & CPIO present through audio- conference.

The Appellant expressed his dissatisfaction with the CPIO's reply and stated that in response to similar RTI application, CPIO has furnished the desired information to the other applicants; however the information was denied to him.

The CPIO submitted that timely point wise reply has been provided to the Appellant, as per the RTI Act. He further submitted that in response to the queries raised by the Appellant in instant RTI application, the gazette notification dated 01.03.2019 as given with the reply was self-explanatory. He further submitted that a detailed submission dated 10.05.2021 was also uploaded on the CIC's website now on receipt of hearing notice and he agreed to provide a copy of the same to the Appellant.

Decision:

The Commission based upon a perusal of facts on record observes that the queries raised by the Appellant in the RTI application are rather speculative and seeking clarifications from the CPIO which do not conform to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act; yet the reply and written submission given by CPIO adequately suffices the information sought by the Appellant, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, leaving behind no scope of further relief in the matter.

However, to allay the apprehension of the Appellant, the CPIO is directed to send an entire set of his written submission dated 10.05.2021 along with annexures to the Appellant, free of cost through speed/ registered post. The said direction should be complied by the CPIO within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स"यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 4