Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. Baijnath Singh vs Banaras Hindu University on 9 January, 2009

Central Information Commission
Mr. Baijnath Singh vs Banaras Hindu University on 9 January, 2009
                  CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                           Room no. 415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
                         Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110066
                                Tel: +91 11 26161796

                                              Decision No. CIC/OK/A/2008/01282/SG/0942
                                                        Appeal No. CIC/OK/A/2008/01282

Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                             :      Mr. Baijnath Singh
                                             Zonal Incharge,U.P.C.C. RTI Task Force,
                                             S-21/85 Englishia Line,
                                             Varanasi

Respondent 1.                         :      Public Information Officer

Indian Institute of Medical Science
Banaras Hindu University
Varanasi, U.P.

RTI filed on                          :      18/07/2008
CPIO's Reply                          :      30/07/2008
First Appeal filed on                 :      04/08/2008
First Appellate Authority order       :      25/08/2008
Second Appeal filed on                :      12/09/2008

Information Sought: The appellant had sought information from Kashi Hindu University about
giving University Campus and Auditorium for political gatherings.
1- Does University Campus and Auditorium was given for political gathering?
2- If yes then by which rules/regulations?

3- Will University again in future give Campus and Auditorium for political gathering?

PIO’s Reply: The PIO in his reply on dated 30/07/2008 informed to the appellant that “an
application was received to convey one day Zonal conference on 14.07.2008 under the
chairmanship of Shri Subhash Pandey, Hon’ble Cabinet Minister, Sankriti Vibhag, Govt. Of
U.P.

Had it been known that the auditorium would be utilized for political activities, the permission
would have not been granted, as there is no provision for such activities. Thus, in future also the
use of auditorium for such purpose does not arise.”

First Appellate Authority Ordered:

The first appellate authority on 25/08/2008 gave revised categorical answer to the appellant.

Relevant facts emerging during hearing:

The following were present.

Appellant: Absent
Respondent: Mr. Ajay Kumar PIO
The respondent admits that the auditorium was given for a Zonal conference of Brahman Samaj
and Bahujan Samaj Party. He has given the letter from Mr.Sunil Kumar Shukla of the BSP. The
letterhead clearly shows it was from the BSP and the director has permitted this use.
The PIO is directed to send a copy of this letter to the appellant.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO will send a copy of the letter from Mr.Sunil Shukla asking for use of the auditotrium to
the appellant before 20 January 2009.

This decision is announced in open chamber.

Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
9 January, 2009

(In any case correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)