CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2009/001616/11213
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2009/001616
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Complaint.
Complainant : Mr. Anil Pathak,
A-104, Asha Apartment.
Opposite to Clock tower
Ghaziabad-201009
Respondent : Mr. M. S. Ghuge
Public Information Officer & Assistant Director,
All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)
7th Floor, Chandra Lok Building Janpath,
New Delhi- 110001
RTI application filed on : 19/08/2009
PIO replied : Not Replied.
First appeal filed on : 10/10/2009 Complaint received on : 25/11/2009 Complaint notice sent on : 30/11/2009 Information Sought:
Details regarding the students of M.B.A ( 2 years), M.C.A (3 years), and BTek (4 years) in the years of
2006,2007 and 2008 on the following :
1) List of details of all the students who passed.
2) List of details of all the students who failed.
3) List of details of all the students who scored more than 60 %.
4) List of details of all the students who scored less than 60 %.
5) List of details of all the students who scored less than 50 %.
Reply of Public Information Officer (PIO):
Not replied.
Ground for First Complaint:
No information received from the PIO or FAA.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The information received from the PIO was unsatisfactory and inappropriate and no information was
provided from the First Appellate Authority (FAA).
Submission received from the PIO :
Asst. Director and CPIO replied dated on 17/03/2009 : “The information sought for by the complainant is
not held by AICTE nor is this office expected to have this information as per rules. This information is
with various colleges across the country and the colleges are not the public authority and hence the RTI
application cannot be transferred to the colleges. However, he was advised to obtain this information from
the concerned Universities/ Deemed Universities, as they are also Public Authorities, vide his office letter
of even number dated 24/12/2009. A copy of the same is enclosed herewith. He also gave explanation for
not supplying information within the mandated time stating that his application was received in RTI Cell
on 25/11/2009 and the information was supplied to him on 24/12/2009, thus there was no delay in
supplying the information.” He further stated dated 30/12/2009 explaining further the reason for not
providing the information within the mandated time : The application dated 19/08/2009 was transferred by
Ministry of Human Resource Development dated 07/09/2009 to AICTE but the same was not received as
per office records. The application was received in RTI Cell on 25/11/2009, and therefore, the information
was to be supplied by 21/12/2009. The information was supplied to him on 24/12/2009, thus no delay in
supplying the information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Complainant: Mr. Anil Pathak;
Respondent: Mr. M. S. Ghuge, Public Information Officer & Assistant Director;
The Complainant claims that the data sought by him is obtained each year by the AICTE and
hence should be provided. The Respondents who have come are completely ignorant about the matter and
claim that they do not know anything. The Commission directs the PIO to provide the information to the
Complainant before 20 February 2011.
Decision:
The Complain is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information to the Complainant before
20 February 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the then
PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information
within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the
requirement of the RTI Act. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1).
A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show
cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
The then PIO will give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him
as mandated under Section 20 (1) before 20 February, 2011. He will also send the information sent to
the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the
information to the appellant.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
01 February 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(Su)
CC:
To,
The then PIO through Mr. M. S. Ghuge, Public Information Officer & Assistant Director;