Dated 17-07-2007
Name of the Complainant:
Ms. Shibani Devi
Head of Deptt of Mathematics Karimganj College, Karimganj
Name of the Public Authority:
Director, Higher Education
The following were present:
1. Dr. H.K. Sahoo Director, Higher Education.
2. Shri Delwar Hussain Inspector of Colleges & SPIO of Director, Higher
Education.
3. Dr. Radhikaranjan Chakraborty Principal, Karimganj College.
4. Dr, Santanu Dutta Vice Principal & I.O. of Karimganj College. - Public
Authorities
5. Dr. Dibakar Chakraborty - Appeared for the Complainant
The Complainant absent but the brother of the complainant, Dr. Dibakar Chakroborty,
present duly authorized by the complainant. The Director of Higher Education,
the Inspector of Colleges & SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education,
the
Principal Karimganj College, Karimganj along with the Vice Principal & I.O.
of Karimganj College, Karimganj present.
Brief of the case
The complainant submitted a petition to the Principal, Karimganj College
on 23.3.07 under the RTI Act, 2005 seeking the following information:
1. Certified copies of academic routines (for Science stream) for sessions 20022003,
2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07.
2. Duly filled, in format clearly indicating there in classes (Theory/practical/tutorial)
assigned to individual teachers (regular / temporary/part time/ad hoc etc) of
the departments of Chemistry and Statistics along with the number of students
registered against these subjects at various levels (HS/Degree pass/ Hons) for
the last three academic sessions (i.e. from 2004-05 to 2006-07) as well as the
copies of rules /guidelines (UGC/DHE/ AHSEC/University/ any other) followed
in assigning the number of classes to the teachers.
3. Certified copies of all documents / rules considered and the resolutions
etc, taken by the concerned authority prior to placing before GB the proposed
withdrawal of a sanctioned post of lecturer from the department of Mathematics.
4. Certified copies of all resolutions / guidelines considered by the concerned
authority connecting regularization of service of Sri Saritanu Choudhury currently
working in the department of Statistics in a non sanctioned post with a drawal
of a sanctioned post of lecturer only from the department of Mathematics and
from no other department of the college
5. Certified copies of rules, guidelines, circulars etc. considered by the concerned
authority in arriving at the conclusion that one sanctioned post of lecturer
in the department of Mathematics has become redundant and no longer required.
6. Certified copy of the report submitted by the Committee (formed by GB vide
resolution no 1 dated 06.07.2006)
7. Copies of all GB resolutions taken (since 21.3.2006 ) in connection with
the proposed withdrawal of a sanctioned post of lecturer from the department
of Mathematics.
As the information was not furnished, she submitted a complaint before the Commission
on 22.5.07. Hence this case
Submission of the parties
Dr. D. Chakraborty, the representative of the complainant stated that the complainant
submitted her application under the RTI Act on 23.3.07. The Principal sent the
application to the Director of Higher Education, Assam on 3.4.2007 seeking advice
as
to whether a Head of the Department can in her official capacity claim certified
copies of the documents under the Act even when she was allowed to consult the
relevant documents from the College office.
Vide letter dated 12.4.07 the Inspector of Colleges, Assam & SPIO of the
Directorate of Higher Education, Assam requested the Principal to furnish the
documents to her. This letter was received by him on 24.4.07.
The Principal vide his letter dated 25.4.07 requested the Director of Higher
Education, Assam to provide him with the relevant rules and guidelines prescribed
indicating the number of classes (theory / practical) to be assigned to the
Department of
Chemistry & Statistics in degree (pass & Hons) and H.S level in an undergraduate
College. The Principal wrote to the Registrar, Assam University, Silchar to
provide him with the relevant rules and guidelines prescribed .by the University
relating to the number of classes (both theory and practical separately) to
the assigned to the Departments of Chemistry & Statistics in Degree and
pass courses in undergraduate level.
Again, he wrote to the Secretary, U.G.C. New Delhi on the same subject seeking
copies thereof. He also wrote to the Secretary, Assam Higher Secondary Education
Council, Assam on the same subject seeking copies of the documents.
The petitioner wrote to the Principal, Karimganj College, Karimganj in reply
to his notice dated 24.4.07 seeking departmental routines etc in connection
with her application dated 23.3.07 on 1.5.07 stating that she could not make
out reasons for asking departmental routines etc from her when these were supposedly
available with his office already.. She reminded the Principal to furnish certified
copies of the documents asked for by her vide her application dated 23.3.07.
The Principal wrote to her on 3.5.07 informing her that the said letter was
a part of the regular office orders of the College and requires to be complied
with and any failure to do so might be treated as dereliction of duties. Regarding
information sought for by her he stated that he had written to the concerned
public authorities as per section 6 (3) of the RTI Act requesting to supply
information which are held by them in intimation to her. He also informed the
petitioner that her petition was sent to the government pleader for his advice
on the matter as to whether an employee of a public authority in her official
capacity can seek information under this act.
On 8.5.07 the petitioner wrote one petition to the Inspector of Colleges and
the SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education stating that the reason for
seeking advice of government pleader on the issue was not clear to her and appeared
to be unwarranted in view of the instructions given by him to the Principal,
Karimganj College. She stated that the Principal had virtually refused her request
and requested him to take action.
The Principal on 16.5.07 informed the petitioner that the petitioner was not
entitled to seek information under the provisions of the RTI Act 2005 as the
Act provides for Right to Information for citizens to secure access to information
under the
control of the public authority where they have no access to information. But
she being a lecturer participating in different academic bodies of the college
and university enjoys free and perpetual access to all information of the college
procedures and practices. Hence he rejected her application seeking for information.
On 22.5.07 the petitioner submitted a petition to the State Chief Information
Commissioner in which it was mentioned that the Principal, Karimganj College
vide his letter dated 16.5.07 (which was received by her on 17.5.07) rejected
her application and hence she wanted to submit an appeal against the order of
rejection by the Principal.
The Principal submitted that most of the rules and guidelines sought for by
the petitioner were not available in his office and as such he wrote to the
various authorities like the Director Higher Education, the Registrar, Assam
University, Silchar, the Secretary UGC and the Secretary, Assam Higher Education
Council, Guwahati for providing him the aforesaid documents in order to supply
the same to the petitioner.
The Principal admitted that he sought the information of the government pleader
who opined in writing that section 8 (e) of the Act is applicable in the instant
case and hence on the basis of the advice of the government pleader he did not
furnish the information to the petitioner.
He stated that he received instruction of the Inspector of Colleges asking him
to furnish information to the petitioner on 24.5.07. But as the rules and guidelines
as sought for by the petitioner were not available in his office he wrote to
these authorities as mentioned above for furnishing the same. He submitted that
this was the first case under the RTI Act in his college and they were not very
much aware of the Act and had to refer the case to the government pleader for
advice.
He also submitted that he did not understand the consequence of refusing information.
He clarified that the academic routines are prepared by the heads of the department
in consultation of the Teachers' Council and all the records are not readily
available in his college. However he would be able to furnish copies of the
G.B. resolutions in connection with the proposed withdrawal of sanctioned post
of lecturer from the department of Mathematics. He stated that he would furnish
copies of the college guidelines, instruction and other documents as available
in the College including the available academic routines. He apologized before
.the Commission for the mistakes he had made in interpreting the RTI Act.
Observation of the Commission
The Commission on perusal of the records found that the Principal, Karimganj
College deliberately avoided furnishing information available with him to the
petitioner and appeared to have the malafide intention of withholding information
to her. He disobeyed the instruction of the Inspector of Colleges who is also
the SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education and with malafide intention
decided to reject the application.
The Commission found that the Principal had wasted enormous time and resources
in making unnecessary correspondences with various public authorities. If he
had devoted that time and resource in gleaning the information from the records
of his office, he could have furnished it to the petitioner and avoided this
hearing in the Commission office.
Decision of the Commission
The Commission on careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the
case decided to treat the Principal as the deemed SPIO under section 5 (5) of
the RTI Act, 2005 on the basis of the letter of the SPIO of the Director of
Higher Education dated 12.4.07 and received by the Principal on 24.4.07. The
Commission accordingly took the decision to impose penalty @ Rs. 250/- per day
with effect from 25.5.07, one month after the date on which he received the
advice of the SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education up to the date by
which the information sought for by the complainant is furnished to her up to
a maximum of Rs. 25000/-. The Commission further directed the Principal to furnish
information within 7 days i.e. 24.7.07 positively to the petitioner failing
which the Commission would be constrained to direct the Higher Authorities to
take disciplinary action against him besides enhancing the amount of penalty.
The Commission would not however execute these decisions till the submission
of Affidavit by the Principal explaining his points of view for further consideration
by the Commission. Accordingly the Principal should submit a sworn affidavit
showing cause as to why the proposed penalty should not be executed and why
disciplinary action should not be recommended.
The Commission further directed the Director Higher Education to designate all
the Principals of the Colleges as the SPIOs of the respective colleges and himself
as the First Appellate Authority for all the Colleges. .
Sd/- (R.S. Mooshahary)
Chief Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.
Sd/-(Dr. B.K. Gohain)
State Information Commissioner, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.
Authenticated true copy
(Jiauddin Ahmed)
Secretary, State Information Commission, Assam
Janata Bhawan, Dispur.
CC:
1. The Director, Higher Education, Guwahati.
2. The Inspector of Colleges & SPIO of the Directorate of Higher Education,
Guwahati
3. The Principal, Karimganj College, Karimganj.
4. Ms. Shibani Devi, HOD of Mathematics, Karimganj College, Karimganj.
5. MD, AMTRON, Bamunimaidan
6. The Director, Information & Public Relation, Dispur
7. Office file.
Secretary
State Information Commission, Assam