के (cid:574)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग१,मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067 ि(cid:554)तीय अपील संূा / Second Appeal No. CIC/UGCOM/A/2024/608066 Saravanan N. … अपीलकता१/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO:

University Grants Commission, New Delhi …ঋितवादीगण/Respondent Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

Hon’ble Commissioner _ANANDI RAMALINGAM O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 06.01.2024 seeking information on the following points:

1) “For what basis, UGC grant permission for allotting undergraduate in Hons degree to private university.

2) How many private university in Tamil Nadu got this permission to grant Hons degree to their UG student.

3) How many government colleges got this permission to grant Hons degree to their UG student.

4) Perhaps, government colleges and private college not got this permission to grant Hons degree to their UG student, need explanation for this.

5) Perhaps, government colleges and private colleges got this permission to grant Hons degree to their UG student, need explanation for this.”

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 19.01.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“Permission for courses is granted by the affiliating university and not UGC to Colleges.”

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.01.2024. The FAA vide order dated 08.02.2024 stated that:

“1: The State (Public/Private) Universities established as per Section 2 (f) are empowered to award general degree programmes without the specific approval of UGC. However, the approval for running professional, technical and medical programmes are given by the respective Regulatory/ Statutory bodies. Such programmes are governed by the norms of respective Regulatory/ Statutory bodies.

2-3: No specific information is held/ available on the subject matter. However, It is informed that the list of all recognized Institutions is uploaded on the UGC website https://www.ugc.gov.in/ and can be accessed under the tab ‘HEIs”. Also, the list of approved nomenclature of degrees including minimum eligibility and duration of programme can be accessed at https://www.ugc.gov.in/ UGC Regulations.aspx.

4-5: The Public Information Officer is not supposed to create information or to interpret information or to solve the problems raised by the applicant or to furnish information to the hypothetical questions. Under RTI Act, only such information can be provided which already exist with or held by the Public Authority. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.

Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter.”

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 23.02.2024.

5. The Appellant was present during the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the Respondent, Lokesh Kumar Jangra, US & CPIO attended the hearing in person.

6. The Appellant initially challenged the merits of the reply provided by the CPIO, however, upon being advised by the Commission that his RTI Application does not seek for any information as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, yet, he has been adequately facilitated with clarifications by the CPIO & FAA, the Appellant conceded and did not put forth any further arguments.

7. The Respondent reiterated the reply provided to the Appellant.

8. The Commission in furtherance of the hearing proceedings observes that the reply provided by the CPIO or the order of the FAA do not warrant any intervention at this stage and the second appeal is found to be bereft of merit. For better understanding of the mandate of the RTI Act, the Appellant shall note that outstretching the interpretation of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act to include