O R D E R

Information sought:

The Appellant filed online RTI Application dated 31.08.2020 seeking information on the following three points:

“1. WHETHER IN THE YEAR 2018, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CREATIVE RESEARCH THOUGHTS (IJCRT) WAS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE UGC-CARE LIST FOR PUBLISHING JOURNALS OF THE PhD THESIS PAPER......?

2. KINDLY PROVIDE ME THE EXACT YEAR, MONTH AND DATE DURING WHICH INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CREATIVE RESEARCH THOUGHTS (IJCRT) WAS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE UGC-CARE LIST FOR PUBLISHING JOURNALS OF THE PhD THESIS PAPER......?

3. IF A PhD RESEARCH SCHOLAR PUBLISHED HER/HIS THESIS PAPER FROM INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CREATIVE RESEARCH THOUGHTS (IJCRT) IN MARCH 2018, IN THAT CASE WHETHER THE PhD RESEARCH SCHOLAR IS ENTITLED TO OBTAIN MARKS IN ALL HER/HIS PRESENT AND FUTURE INTERVIEWS......?”

The CPIO vide online reply dated 15.09.2020, informed to the Appellant as under:

“For the information kindly see the UGC website following links : -

https://www.ugc.ac.in/pdfnews/4952604_UGC-(M.PHIL.-PH.D-DEGREES)-

REGULATIONS,-2016.pdf https://ugccare.unipune.ac.in/apps1/home/index”

Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.10.2020. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 04.11.2020, informed as under:

“For required information see the following links https://ugccare.unipune.ac.in/apps1/home/indexh https://www.ugc.ac.in/pdfnews/4952604_UGC-(M.PHIL.-PH.D-DEGREES)-

REGULATIONS,-2016.pdf https://www.ugc.ac.in/pdfnews/1928583_UGC-Regulation_MPhil-

PhD2ndAmendment.pdf https://www.ugc.ac.in/pdfnews/6315352_UGC-Public-Notice-CARE.pdf ”

Grounds for Second Appeal:

The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. Appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The Appellant did not participate in the hearing despite being served the hearing notice.

The Respondent submitted that sufficient reply has been provided to the Appellant vide letter dated 15.09.2020 as the requisite information was available in public domain. He further added that an elaborated reply has also been given to the Appellant vide letter dated 29.03.2022.

A written submission has been received by the Commission from Shri Jintendra, Deputy Secretary & CPIO, University Grants Commission, New Delhi vide letter dated 29.03.2022, and the same has been marked to the Appellant, wherein the Commission has been apprised as under:

Decision:

Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that though the contents of the instant RTI Application is clarificatory in nature, adequate reply has been provided by the Respondent. Moreover, the Appellant did not participate in the hearing to buttress her case, the Commission finds no further scope of intervention in the instant matter.

With the above observations, the instant Second Appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

The Appeal, hereby, stands disposed of.

Amita Pandove (अिमता पांडव)

Information Commissioner (सचू ना आय(cid:7334)ु )

(cid:7408)दनांक / Date: 31.03.2022 Authenticated true copy (अिभ(cid:7079)मािणत स(cid:7004)यािपत (cid:7079)ित)

B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना)

Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)

011-26105027 Addresses of the parties:

1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA)

University Grants Commission Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110 002

2. The Central Public Information Officer University Grants Commission Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110 002

3. Ms. Rosy Chakraborty