CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi -110 067.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /SG/A/2008/00460/2200
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2008/00460
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Anant Kumar Singh,
E-7, Delhi University Staff Quarters,
Maurice Nagar, Delhi-110007.
Respondent : Mr. Deepak Vats,
Assitt. Registrar & PIO,
University of Delhi,
Main Campus,
Delhi-110007.
RTI application filed on : 21/02/2008
PIO replied : 18/03/2008
First appeal filed on : 28/03/2008
First Appellate Authority order : 11/04/2008
Second Appeal filed on : 01/11/2008
The appellant had asked in RTI application regarding reasons for not occupying the
Vice -Chancellor’s Residence, Expenses uncured on Car/Driver of the present Vice-
Chancellor, amount spent till date for maintenance fo the VC Residence, and spend of
conveyance for PIO and Appellate Authority for attending date of hearing at CIC, Nos.
of working persons, total amount paid till date to the Standing Counsel/Coordinating
Junior and legal fee paid to the Advocates for legal advise.
Detail of information required:-
S. No. Information Sought. The PIO replied.
1. Reasons for not occupying This is not a request for information as defined under
the Vice -Chancellor’s section 2 (f) of the act.
Residence by the present
Vice-Chancellor.
2. Expenses incurred on The driver posted in the Vice Chancellor’s office is
Car/Driver of the present in the pay scale of Rs. 3050-4590/-. The amount
Vice-Chancellor every spent on fuel/maintenance / insurance and accessories
month form the date of of vehicles from 01/09/2005 to 31/12/2007. is as
taking over the charge as under:
Vice Chancellor. 1.9.2005 to 31.3.2006 Rs. 133,873.19
1.4.2006 to 31.3.2007 Rs. 211, 982.70
1.4.2007 to 31.12.2007 Rs. 199,604.80
3. The amount spent till date The following are the details of the amount spent on
for maintenance of the VC maintenance of 32, Chhatra Marg:
Residence presently (a). Cost of civil work Rs. 5,73,903.11
occupied by the present (b). Cost of electrical works Rs. 4,85,575.87
Vice Chancellor.
4. Amount spent on No such details are maintained / recorded.
conveyance for PIO and
Appellate Authority for
attending date/s of hearing
at CIC since the date of
implementation of RTI
Act, 2005
5. No. of persons working in The details of the personnel working in the
the information section for information section are given below:
attending the work of RTI S.No. Name Post Emoluments
and amount paid to them 1. Sh. J.B.Mathur Assistant Rs. 11,000/-
2. Sh. Jagdish Consultant Rs. 6450/- Excl.A.
on account of 3. Sh. Krishnandu Kamila Jr. Asstt. Rs. 7,500/-
wages/conveyance etc. 4. Ms. Seema Jr. Asstt. Rs. 7,500/-
every month. 5. Sh. Mahipal office Atndt, Rs. 4170/- Excl. A.
6. Total amount paid till date The PIO was given information to the appellant of
to the Standing the said matter (2 pages).
Counsel/Coordinating
Junior and legal fee paid to
the Advocates for legal
advise /court cases till date
w.e.f. year 2000.
The First Appellate Authority ordered.
“The OA was disposed off by providing the relevant information. the appellant has
preferred appeal on four issues and out of which point 2 needs consideration. The Executive
Engineer, South Campus is directed to provide the information about the amount spent on the
maintenance of house being used by the Vice Chancellor. The information may be made
available to the information section by 30th April 2008 for supplying it to the appellant.”
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Anant Kumar Singh,
Respondent: Mr. Deepak Vats PIO
The appellant had filed a second appeal earlier on the same RTI application which has been
dismissed by the Commission by order no. CIC/OK/A/2008/00722. The appellant has not
disclose this and filed an appeal again in the same matter. This is not right.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
March 05, 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)