CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2009/002556/5693
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002556
Appellant : Mr. Amit Kumar Tanwar,
WZ-44H, Possangipur,
Janakpuri,
New Delhi-110058
Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Agarwal
Public Information Officer
Addl. Dy. Registrar (Plg.)
Guru Gobind Singh Indrapastha University,
Kashmere Gate, Delhi-110403
RTI application filed on : 17/04/2009
PIO replied : 18/05/2009
First Appeal filed on : 30/05/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 14/07/2009
Second Appeal Received on : 08/10/2009
Notice of Hearing Sent on : 16/10/2009
Hearing Held on : 25/11/2009
The Appellant sought information regarding admission of four students in first year of M.Tech/ B
Tech(Dual Degree) (Computer Science course in USIT). Appellant sought following five matter in
respect of four students:
S. Information Sought PIO's Reply
1. What is the rank and category (D-Gent or Od-Gen The CET Rank of Mr. Tarun Aggarwal
etc.) of the following students in CET 2008 who and Category is 360 and DGEN
were admitted to the first year of B.Tech/M. Tech respectively and the information
Dual Degree (Computer Science) course in regarding rest of 3 students is incomplete.
university school of Information Technology Therefore Appellant is requested to seek
(USIT)? the correct data so that reply may be sent
Information sought in respect of following students : accordingly. Further it may be noted that
S.No. Name Roll NO.(USIT) Mr. Tarun Aggarwal was admitted for the
1. Tarun Aggarwal 0411643207 session 2007-08.
2. Parveen Aggarwal 1001646208
3. Sahil Sharma 1011643208
4. Tushar Mehta 1021643208
2. In which counseling they were admitted to the first As per records Mr. Tarun Aggrawal was
year of B.Tech/ M.Tech Dual Degree (Computer admitted on 13/07/2009 at the time of first
Science) Course in University School of counseling.
Information Technology (USIT)?
3. What was the basis of giving Admission to all the Mr. Tarun Aggarwal was admitted as per
above students in B.Tech/ B.Tech Dual Degree CET Rank at the time of Counseling/
(Computer Science) Course in USIT Admission.
4. Whether the above students were Mr. Tarun Aggarwal CET Rank-360, was
admitted/transferred to the first year of B.Tech/ admitted in B.Tech. (CSE) programme at
M.Tech Dual Degree (Computer Science) Course in USIT during the first Counseling/
USIT in violation of the guidelines of the University Admission and he maintained his
which Does not permit filling up of the vacancies admission.
arising after final counseling throughout the year?
5. Were the above students given preference in Mr. Tarun Aggarwal was admitted as per
granting admission/transferred to USIT without his preference filled up by him during
offering the vacant seats after final counseling to first Counseling/ Admission.
other rank holders above their ranks and thus
denying all such higher rank holders the opportunity
of getting admission in B. Tech/ M.Tech Dual
Degree (Computer Science) Course in USIT of
Respondent University in the year 2008 based on
CET rank 2008?
Grounds for First Appeal:
Incomplete information provided.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
FAA stated that PIO supplied the information vide reply date 18/05/2009. The PIO also intimated the
Appellant that the information regarding rest of three students is incomplete and requested him to give
correct data so that reply may be sent accordingly. In response to Appeal the Academic Division has
reiterated that information regarding remaining three students can not be provided due to lack of details of
the students.
PIO was directed to provide the details of the requisite information within 15 days.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Desired information not provided.
Appellant wanted to get the information in respect of the rest three out of four students.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Amit Kumar Tanwar;
Respondent: Absent;
After the order of the FAA the PIO has sent the information about the admission of three students
i.e. Mr. Pravin Agarwal (Nepal), Mr. Tushar Mehta(USA) and Mr. Sahil Sharma (Canada). The Appellant
points out that the letters of admission to these three candidates mention no addresses but just mention
three countries. He also points out that these letters carry a date which is after the closer of admission date
of the University. He therefore alleges that this is false and manipulated information being provided to
him. To verify these three students’ admissions genuineness he wants the following information regarding
this:
1- On what quota were these three students admitted.
2- Full postal addresses of these three students alongwith proof of postal dispatch.
3- The mode of payment of the admission fees of these students.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to give the information mentioned above to the Appellant before
15 December 2009.
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
25 November 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)