CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi -110 066.
Tel.: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /OK/A/2008/01139/SG/0906
Appeal No. CIC/OK/A/2008/01139/
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Ms. Sunita Chhabra,
17/52, Geeta Colony,
New Delhi-110017.
Respondent 1 : Mr. M. S. Negi,
PIO
Indira Gandhi National Open University,
Maidan Garhi,
New Delhi-110068.
RTI filed on : 27/09/2006
PIO replied : 30/10/2006
First appeal filed on : 19/05/2008
First Appellate Authority order : 26/06/2008
Second Appeal filed on : 06/08/2008
Details of information required:
S.No Information sought The PIO's reply
1. The Copy of the CD was never provided by anyone, including the complainant,
video CD based on to any member of the inquiry committee, or to the current
which the whole Chairperson, CPSHW.
episode is based
upon?
2. The laid down An inquiry committee was appointed under the Chairpersonship
procedure and of Prof. Madhulika Kaushik (previous chairperson, CPSHW).
methods of A copy of the minutes relating to the setting up of the inquiry
conducting the committee and as well as a copy of the letter indicating the
enquiry. names of the members of the said inquiry committee is
enclosed.
The procedure and method of conducting the inquiry itself are
listed on page 1-2 of the report that was submitted by the
Convenor of the Inquiry Committee, Prof. Parveen Sinclair, to
Prof. Madhulika Kaushik on 24th August, 2006. The report was
submitted by Prof. Kaushik to VC on 01-09-06 and accepted by
the VC on 03-09-06. It was forwarded by VC and received by
current Chairperson. As instructed by VC, a copy of the report
was sent to Registrar (Admn.) on 05-09-06 for further action on
the recommendations at 1 and 2. A copy of the said report is
attached.
3. The list of the These are provided in the first paragraph of the enclosed report.
officials deputed for
the enquiry.
4. All the reports The previous CPSHW under the Chairperson of Prof.
submitted by the Madhulika Kaushik set up an Inquiry Committee to examine
individual/officials the Complaint. As per information, there was only one Inquiry
and the committees Committee therefore only one report will submitted (copy
involved in the case. enclosed).
5. The details of the As indicated above, recommendations at 1 and 2 of report were
action taken, if any, forwarded to Registrar (Admn.) for further action.
against the identical Recommendation at 4, which concern and Awareness
defaulters’ culprits. Campaign for IGNOU employees, is currently being planned
by the CPSHW. The campaign is being envisaged on a
University wide basis and will take place over the next few
months. At its last two meetings 3rd October, 2006 and 17th
October, 2006, the CPSHW has drawn up an outline of
activities planned for the Awareness Campaign. According to
this plan, distribution of fliers and brochures will be begin in
November which will be followed by interactive group
workshop for IGNOU employees to be held over during the
succeeding months. These activities are contingent on approval
of the VC and availability of external facilitators.
6. Any complaints The CPSHW has no information on this subject as no such
filed by others complaints have been received by CPSHW.
against me in
connection with the
case and the action
taken
The First Appellate Authority Order:
Relevant Facts emerging during hearing:
Appellant: Ms. Sunita Chhabra
Respondent: Mr. K.K.Sharma PIO
The CD has not been given since it is claimed that no CD exists with the Public authority.
The send enquiry Committee report headed by Dr. Silima Nanda and Prof. J. M. Parekh in
2007 has recorded, ” As was true of the previous Committee, this committee has been unable
to ascertain who made CD copies of the TV clip and then showed it in EMPC.”
This appears to show that such CD existed about which the Committee knew. The Committee
heads by Dr. Silima Nanda and Prof. J. M. Parekh are directed to give a statement whether
such a CD existed and whether not. They will also certify whether they have seen the said
CD.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO will give the statement mentioned above to the appellant and the
Commission before 30 January 2009.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
0 7th January, 2009
(For any further correspondence, please mention the decision number for a quick disposal)