CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000442/7324
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000442
Appellant : Mr. T. K. Roy
3/3A, Street No. 5,
K-Block, Gangotri Vihar,
Delhi-110031.
Respondent : Public Information Officer
University of Delhi
Main Campus, Delhi-110007.
RTI application filed on : 29/09/2009 PIO replied : 16/10/2009 First Appeal filed on : Not enclosed First Appellate Authority order : 21/12/2009 Second Appeal Received on : 17/02/2010 Notice of Hearing Sent on : ............... Hearing Held on : ............... Information sought:
1. With respect to the Delhi University document ” Guidelines for Sponsored
Research Projects” vide Executive Council Resolution No. 134 dated 14/11/1997
as applicable to the two projects:
-Yamuna Biodiversity Park, and
-Aravalli Biodiversity Park.
under the Biodiversity Parks Programme sponsored and funded by the DDA, the exact
objective details along with photocopies duly attested by the PIO corresponding to each
of the paragraphs and sub-paragraphs (points and sub-points) of the said Guidelines.
2. A copy of the Guidelines for sponsored/funded projects other than the research
projects.
3. Reference and copy of the Executive Council resolution, if any, authorizing the
applicability of the “Delhi University Guidelines for Sponsored Research
Projects” to the sponsored/funded projects other than the research projects.
4. Role and authority of the Heard of Department (HoD) of the concerned
Departments or Head of the Centre/Cell/ School as the case may be with respect
to the sponsored research projects as well as sponsored projects (other than the
research projects) within the area/ discipline of the
Department/Centre/Cell/School.
5. Role and administrative authority of the Director, CEMDE; Director, School of
Environmental Studies and Head of the Department of Environmental Biology
with respect to each of the projects, namely, Yamuna Biodiversity Park and
Aravalli Biodiversity Park both…….. The Biodiversity Parks Programme
sponsored and funded b the DDA.
6. (a) Name of the custodian, along with reference of statutory provision thereof, of
the records and also of the property of the projects under, Biodiversity Parks
Programme sponsored and funded by the DDA during the period of on-going of
the projects and
(b) Name of the authority who is under obligation to audit the accounts and also
of functioning of the above mentioned projects sponsored and funded by the
DDA.
(c) The provision against embezzlement like taking out assets duly entered in the
relevant stock registers by the project officials for personal custody and reported
as stolen/theft in general and in case of a Laptop in particular.
Reply of PIO:
“The information sought by the applicant was referred to the Director, CEMDE, HOD,
Environmental Biology, Director School of Environmental studies, Dy. Registrar
(Council), Deputy Finance Officer and Internal Audit Officer of the University. No input
received from the Director, CEMDE.
However, input received from Prof. C.R. Babu, Project Incharge, Biodiversity Parks
Programme is enclosed. Further, input received from the Head, Deptt. of Environmental
Biology (Sl. No. 5), Director, School of Environmental Studies (Sl. No. 5), Internal Audit
Officer (Sl. No. 6) and Deputy Finance Officer is enclosed.
Further, input received from the Deputy Registrar (Council) with respect to Sl. No. 1, 3, 4
& 5 of the Original Application is also enclosed.
No relevant input has been received on any other points by the Office of the PIO as on
the date of the reply. The applicant is required to pay Rs. 44/- for 22 pages towards
photocopy charges for information being provided to him.
However, the applicant has already inspected all the documents made available by the
Project Incharge, Biodiversity Parks Programme on 08/10/2009 & 09/10/2009 in the CIC
regarding Biodiversity Parks Programme. The Hon’ble Information Commission vide
decision no. CIC/SG/A/2009/001841/4861 Adjunct dated 09/10/2009 has closed all the
application sand appeals which are pending with this order.”
Grounds for First Appeal:
Not enclosed.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
“After considering the Appeal, it is notices that the PIO has provided available
information on record to the Appellant. The PIO also requested the Appellant to deposit
Rs. 44/- towards 22 pages of information, which the Appellant did not deposit. Instead of
that the Appellant is requesting for indexing for information provided. As per DOPT
Office Memorandum No. 11/02/2008-IR dated 10/07/2008, the PIO is not required to
deduce conclusion from any material or do any research work on behalf of the citizen, the
request of the Appellant is not maintainable under the Act.”
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Appellant claims that the Appellate Authority also provided his incorrect decision blindly
based on the incomplete, irrelevant & misguiding information of the PIO.
The Commission had decided as follows on 9 October 2009 vide its decision no.
CIC/SG/A/2009/001841/4861Adjunct :
“The Appellant has in the last two years sought information regarding the Biodiversity
park through over 50 RTI Applications and has repeatedly been asking for fairly
voluminous information. Hence, the inspection was ordered on the two days at the
Commission’s office where all relevant records were brought by the public authority. The
Appellant wanted to use a pen during the inspection and he was allowed to use only a
pencil by the order of the Commission. The Commission has realized that the modus
operandi of the Appellant of filing multiple RTI Applications has the effect of nearly
paralyzing a project of significant scientific importance. The Commission is now sure
that any legitimate information need of the Appellant has been adequately taken care of.”
Thus all possible information on this matter has been provided to the appellant.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed.
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
31 March 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AK)