CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000483/10837
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000483
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Abhay Kumar Dwivedi
AO-75, Kala Kunj,
Shalimar Bagh, Delhi - 110088.
Respondent : Mr. Jay Chanda
Public Information Officer & Dy. Registrar
University of Delhi
Main Campus, Delhi - 110007.
RTI application filed on : 18/08/2009
PIO replied : 09/09/2009
First appeal filed on : 07/10/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 12/11/2009
Notice of Hearing sent on : 22/12/2010
Hearing held on : 08/01/2011
Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Number of candidates applied for M. Phil a. The total applicants were forty.
Course in 2009-10 and number of candidates b. Thirty three candidates appeared for the written
appeared in the exam (with SC and ST examination.
details). Details of marks obtained by the c. Out of Thirty three, 15 candidates belong to
candidates in written examination. General, 10 to SC, 01 to ST, 07 to OBC and none for
physically challenged.
Table-1 mentions the marks obtained in the written
examination (Annexure-1) (enclosed).
2. Details of standard on the basis of which the The copy of minutes, dated 10th August 2009,
candidates were called for the interview and attached that explains the parameter for the selection
details of the meeting in which the standards (Annexure-2)(enclosed).
were set for the same along with copy of the
minutes of the meeting.
3. Details of marks of written exam and Table-2 explains the marks obtained in the written
interview exam obtained by the candidates and interview of candidates (Annexure-3)(enclosed).
who appeared in the interview exam.
4. Whether the M. Phil Program was inter- The Department was interdisciplinary in nature and
disciplinary. If yes, then whether the did not require particular subject expert for the
specialists of the all concerned subjects of the interviews.
said program was called during the interview.
5. Whether any History specialist was present The history subject expert was not present because
for those candidates who had history subject. the post in History is laying vacant in the
Department. Despite that, the department invited
applications of history candidates because it is inter-
disciplinary in nature.
Page 1 of 3
6. Number of candidates who applied for the The information regarding M.Phil admissions was
admission in African Studies in the session available from 2004-05 to 2009-10. The whole
2004-05 to 2009-10 and number of candidates information was bulky and consisted of 3346 pages.
appeared in written exam and number of Therefore, pertaining to the same the applicant was
candidates included in the last seniority list
requested to deposit a sum of Rs 66924- as
including the details of General, SC & ST. photocopying charges (Rs 2 per page) as per section
7(3)(a) of the RTI Act, 2005.
7. Whether any provision was included for the The reservation for OBC has been determined as per
OBCs in M. Phil Program. If yes then details university guidelines.
of the same.
First Appeal:
Incomplete information received from the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
1. After considering the appeal, it is directed that the Head, Department of African Studies should
provide specific information about the rules followed regarding OBC reservation in M.Phil
admissions as requested at Sl.No. 7 of the Original Application, directly to the appellant under
intimation to the Information Section on or before 15.12.09.
2. Further, Sl.No. 1 of the Appeal is a statement of the appellant. Information on record has been
provided by the PlO.
3. Sl.No. 3 of the Appeal is regarding fees for the information provided by the Head of the Department
of African Studies. It appears that the information is not maintained in the department in the manner
prescribed by the appellant In this regard, it is informed that as ppr CM No. 11/2/2008-IR dated
10.07.08 of Department of Personnel & Training, Govt. of India, the PlO is not required to do
research on behalf of the citizen to deduce anything from the material and then supply it to him.
Therefore, the decision of the Head, who is deemed PlO is upheld.”
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Incomplete information received from the PIO after FAA’s order.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Abhay Kumar Dwivedi;
Respondent : Mr. Jay Chanda, Public Information Officer & Dy. Registrar; Dr. Suresh Kumar, Head of the
Department (African Studies) Delhi University;
The PIO has given considerable information but the Appellant claims that some of the information has not
been given to him. It is difficult for the Commission to determine whether all the appropriate information
was provided to the Appellant or not. In view of this the Commission asked the Appellant if he would like
to inspect the relevant records. The Appellant states he would like to inspect the relevant records on
11 January 2011 from 10.00AM onwards. In particular he will be shown the complete application for
admission with all its documents for Mr. Susant Kumar Kanungo for the 2006-2007 session and the same
papers for the six students who are selected for 2009-2010. The PIO will also show the answer sheets of the
written exam for 2009-2010 of all the candidates. In the event the answersheets have been weeded out the
Appellant will be given a copy of the destruction of the records. The Appellant wants to also see the
attendance records for the 2009-2010.
The Appellant claims that the copy of the “guidelines for M.Phil. entrance exam for 2009-2010” which the
Head of the Department claims are the minutes provided to him has signatures of Dr. A. S. Yaruingan. Dr.
Tribuhvan Prasad and Dr. Suresh Kumar dated 10/08/2009. The Appellant is alleging that two of the
signatures are forged. This is a very serious allegation but no evidence has been produced. The Commission
therefore directs Dean Faculty of Social Sciences to inquire into this by asking all three teachers and arrive
Page 2 of 3
at a conclusion whether any of the three signatures are forged. Copy of this report will be sent to the
Commission and the Appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The Dr. Suresh Kumar, Head of the Department (African Studies) is directed to
facilitate an inspection of the records as directed above by the Appellant on 11 January
2011 from 10.00AM. He will give photocopies of the records which the Appellant wants
free of cost upto 500 pages.
The Dean Faculty of Social Sciences is directed to conduct an inquiry as directed above and
send a report to the Appellant and the Commission before 30 January 2011.
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
08 January 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(GJ)
CC:
To,
The Dean
Faculty of Social Sciences
University of Delhi
Main Campus, Delhi – 110007.
Page 3 of 3