ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:

 “…. RTI on the documents submitted by the Registrar of C V Raman College of Engineering/ C V Raman Global University to the Chairman of AICTE having letter no: Ref No. CVRCE/REG/422/19, dated: 07-05-2019, (Copy attached for your reference) in connections with allegations made in the said letter:

(i) Kindly provide the authenticated supporting documents in connection with harassment done to lady faculty members by Dr. Mahapatra, HoD of MBA department of CVRCE, mentioning the name of the TWO faculty members, who did complaint as mentioned by the registrar of C.V.Raman (AUTONOMOUS)College Of Engineering / C.V. Raman Global University having letter number, letter no:Ref No. CVRCE/REG/422/19,dated: 07- 05-

2019,(Copy attached for your reference). (ii) Kindly provide the date and time on which complaint was given by the said TWO lady faculty members along with content of the complaint as it was written by these TWO faculty members, with the signature of each individual person on separate paper as per Evidence Act,1872 / The Bharatiya Sakshya Bill,2023. (iii) Kindly provide the complete authenticated official documents in connection with the said complaint, and the necessary steps were been taken up as per Indian Evidence Act,1872 / The Bharatiya Sakshya Bill,2023, and followed as per Standing Operating Procedure (SOP). (iv) Kindly provide the necessary steps that were, taken up in the process of Administration to resolve the issue in connection with such complaint as per Indian Evidence Act,1872 / The Bharatiya Sakshya Bill,2023.”

2. The CPIO, AICTE replied vide letter dated 10.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“As per records available with PGR Cell, AICTE, HQ, no such information available.”

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.10.2023. The FAA vide order dated 16.10.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 15.12.2023.

5. The Appellant was present during the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the Respondent(s), Ambarish Kumar Sharma, US & CPIO along with Vijay Kumar Koli, US & CPIO, Ministry of Education; Lt. Cdr Akhil Sharma along with Bhupendra Kumar UDC & CPIO, AICTE appeared in person.

6. The Appellant was being heard in continuation of multiple appeal(s) filed by him against DARPG, UGC & AICTE in a related manner with the instant case vide CIC/DARPG/A/2023/611907 + 9 cases. Since, the submissions of the Appellant remained consistent for almost all such cases, in the instant matter, the argument that was reiterated was that of having been provided with an unsatisfactory reply and requesting for imposition of penalty.

7. The Respondent from AICTE reiterated the reply that was already available on record. 8. The Commission at the outset observes that the instant appeal was specifically filed against AICTE, therefore the role of the CPIO, Dept. of Higher Education is being dispensed with. Further, the reply provided by the CPIO, AICTE is as per the provisions of the RTI Act leaving no scope of intervention in the matter.

9. The Appeal is dismissed accordingly. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

(Anandi Ramalingam) ( आनंदी रामᳲलंगम ) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुᲦ) ᳰदनांक/Date: 18.04.2024 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) (कनᭅल एस एस िछकारा (ᳯरटायडᭅ)) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)