Central Information Commission Judgements

Dr. Himmat Singh Ratnoo vs Jawaharlal Nehru University on 12 March, 2010

Central Information Commission
Dr. Himmat Singh Ratnoo vs Jawaharlal Nehru University on 12 March, 2010
                        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                         Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
                           Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
                                   Tel: +91-11-26161796
                                                                   Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000244/7134
                                                                         Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000244

Appellant                                      :       Dr. Himmat Singh Ratnoo
                                                       26-E, Mahanandi Extension,
                                                       Jawaharlal Nehru University
                                                       New Delhi-110067.

Respondent                                     :       Mr. Jit Singh
                                                       Public Information Officer & Dy. Registrar
                                                       O/o the Public Information Officer,
                                                       DR (SC/ST Cell) Room No.133,
                                                       SC/ST Cell (Admin. Blcok),
                                                       Jawaharlal Nehru University,
                                                       New Delhi-110067.

RTI application filed on                       :       29/09/2009
PIO replied                                    :       22/10/2009 & 01/11/2009
First Appeal filed on                          :       04/12/2009
First Appellate Authority order                :       Not mentioned.
Second Appeal Received on                      :       25/01/2010
Notice of Hearing Sent on                      :       09/02/2010
Hearing Held on                                :       12/03/2010

Information sought:
Appellant sought following information regarding name of the body/entity whose meetings taken place on
29/07/2009 and 09/09/2009, hen, where, how and by whom was this body/entity created, list of constituent
members of the body/entity & their addresses:
1. What is the exact name of the body/entity whose meetings are said to have taken place on
   29/07/2009 and 09/09/2009?,
2. When, where, how and by whom was this body/entity created?
3. Is it a lawful, legal and constitutional body/entity? If yes, furnish copies of the provision of
   the acts, Statutes Rules, Regulations, Laws, Bye-laws, etc on the basis of which the said body/entity has
   been created along with the date of enforcement of such Acts, Statutes, Rules, Regulations, Laws, Bye-laws,
   etc with appropriate resolutions of appropriate bodies.,
4. Constitution, memorandum, statutes, rules, regulations, laws, byelaws, procedures, etc
   governing the constitution, functioning, conduct of the meetings, etc of this entity/body.,
5. If this body was created on or before 01/07/2008, provided the following information
   separately with respect to each and every meeting of this body/entity from 01/07/2008 up to
   date(if created after 01/07/2008, then from its inception up to date):
     a) List of constituent members of the body/entity
     b) List of office-beares, officials , officials, etc of this entity/body
     c) Name, father's name, present postal address, permanent address as well as official telephone number(s)
          and E-mail address(es) with respect to each constituent member as well as the office-beares and
          officials, etc of this body/entity.
     d) How many days prior to the meeting of the entity/body are the notice, agenda and agenda papers for the
          meeting required to be dispatched to its constituent members.
     e) Copy of the notice, the agenda and the agenda papers for the meeting,
     f) List of constituent members to whom the notice, agenda and agenda papers for the notice, agenda and
          agenda papers w.r.t. each constituent member as per the official and authenticated record of the
          entity/body.
     g) List of the persons who were present in the meeting,
     h) Name, father's name, present postal address, permanent address as well as official telephone number(s)
          and E-mail address(es) of the office-bearer/official who convened the meeting;
       i) who chaired the meeting
      j) who responsible for keeping minutes for the meeting
      k) Copy of the detailed minutes of the proceedings of the meeting, opinion of the each constituent member
         on each item on the agenda of the meeting along with resolutions and the lists of member present i) who
         were in favour, ii) who were against and iii) who abstained w.r.t each resolution on each item of the
         agenda of the meeting
      l) What is the prescribed procedure for confirmation of minutes of meeting? Proof & certificate that the
         procedure was followed with respect to the minutes of the meeting
      m) Certificate that the minutes are a true record of the proceedings of the meeting
      n) Action taken report with respect to each resolution of the meeting.,

PIO's Reply:
The Appellant was provided point-wise reply by the PIO vide letter dated 22/10/2009 & 01/11/2009.

Grounds for First Appeal:
Authentic information was not provided.(point no. 2, 3), Information denied(5(e)(f)(h)).

Order of the First Appellate Authority:
Not enclosed.

Grounds for Second Appeal:
Incomplete & false information.

Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Absent;

Respondent: Mr. Jit Singh, Public Information Officer & Dy. Registrar; Prof. V. K. Jain, FAA & Registrar;

The Appellant has sent a letter to the Commission stating that his petition should be treated as a
complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act. He has filed a first appeal and is claiming that very high fee was
charged from him and that he has been given incomplete, misleading and false information. Since the appellant
has filed a first appeal on 04/12/2009 which he has included the Commission is treating this as a second appeal.
According to the Appellant the FAA has not passed any order. The Appellant has been unwilling to appear
before the FAA Prof. V. K. Jain.

A perusal of the informant provided by the Appellant which is 423 pages indicates that the information has been
provided to the Appellant. The Appellant has given no specific reasons to claim that the information is
misleading, incomplete and false. As far as allegation that he has been charged an unreasonable fee the PIO
states that the fee charge was Rs.2/- per page as per the rules and this fee had also been refunded to the
Appellant.

Decision:

The appeal is dismissed.

The information appears to have been provided.

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
12 March 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj