Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. Dinesh Kumar vs University Of Delhi on 1 June, 2009

Central Information Commission
Mr. Dinesh Kumar vs University Of Delhi on 1 June, 2009
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                        Club Building (Near Post Office),
                      Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
                             Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000780/3504
                                                       Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000780

Relevant Facts

emerging from the Appeal

Appellant : Mr. Dinesh Kumar
278, Ashram,
New Delhi-110014.

Respondent                        :      Mr. Deepak Vats
                                         Dy. Register & PIO
                                         University of Delhi
                                         Main Campus,
                                         New Delhi-110007.

RTI application filed on          :      10/11/2008
PIO replied                       :      10/12/2008
First appeal filed on             :      09/01/2009
First Appellate Authority order   :      10/02/2009
Second Appeal filed on            :      17/04/2009

Information sought:

The appellant had sought following information regarding Academic Council
(AC)/Executive Council (EC) minutes under his RTI application:-

Sl. Information sought PIO’s reply

1. Give one copy of each EC minutes of last two Minutes of the last two
meetings held? meetings of the Executive
Council had been provided.

The applicant is required to
deposit Rs.126/- towards the
cost of information being
provided to him.

2. Please refer manual 6 section 4(1) (b) (vi), RTI The minutes are printed
information as available on website of the twice in a year.
University of Delhi, the first line: “Minutes of
University Court, Executive Council…”, How
much time is taken for these minutes to be
available in print form or to get published?

3. Please refer manual 6 section 4(1) b) (vi), RTI The points raised by the
information as available on website of the applicant are to seek
University of Delhi, the last line: “NB: interpretation of the
Confidential matters…minutes of University Act/rules and which can be
Court/EC/AG until these are printed, will remain undertaken under the Act
confidential and not available in the public while providing
domain”, please specify under which section of information.
RTI Act 2005, the minutes of EC/AC are
confidential.

4. Give a list of all matters, excluding examination -As above-

related information, which are regarded as
confidential under sections 8/10 of RTI Act, 2005.

5. Are all the minutes of AC meetings or some part of -same as para 3-

minutes of AC meetings regarded as confidential
under sections 8/10 of RTI Act 2005?

6. Are all the minutes of EC meetings or some parts -same as para 3-

of minutes of EC meetings regarded as confidential
under sections 8/10 of RTI Act 2005?

7. Can the minutes of University Court/EC/AC be -same as para 3-

denied to the Parliament of India?

8. Will the minutes of University Court/EC/AC -same as para 3-

remain not available to the Parliament of India until
these are printed?

9. When did the minutes of EC/AG print/publish for The last minutes of the
the last time? Executive Council were
printed in the month of
January, 2008.

10. What are the reasons for delay, if any, for the No such information is
printing/publishing of EC/AC minutes since the available on records which
date answered in item 9) above? can be provided to the
applicant.

First Appellate Authority ordered.

First Appellate Authority ordered that “The information sought by the appellant has
already been provided and there is no further information, which can be provided to the
appellant.”

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Dinesh Kumar
Respondent : Mr. Deepak Vats, PIO
The PIO has provided the information sought. On some of the points the appellant has sought
clarifications and explanations which do not qualify as information as defined under Section 2(f)
of the RTI Act.

Decision:

The Appeal is dismissed.

The information had been provided to the appellant.

This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
1st June 2009

(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(AK)