Reasons for increase in revaluation and supplementary exam fee by Delhi University
The appellant sought the reasons for increase in the re-evaluation fee and supplementary exam fee by Delhi University. He also wanted to know as to why does it takes three months for re-evaluation and related issues. The Public Information Officer (PIO) informed the appellant that the queries raised by him were not information as per section 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) observed that available information on record had already been provided to the appellant and upheld the decision of the PIO stating that the appellant has requested for interpretation/ clarification/explanation about hypothetical events which was not permissible under the Act.
View of CIC
The appellant submitted that the students were facing a genuine problem and the University authorities were not able to take remedial measures. The respondent explained that the nature of the appellant’s queries were in the form of seeking explanation/opinion, which cannot be provided under the RTI Act. The Central Information Commission (CIC) agreed with the PIO and the FAA and rejected the appeal.
While it is still a long way, a day would come when the public authorities would disclose the reasons for the decisions taken by them pro-actively and involve the stake holders in the decision making process.
Citation: Mr. Divesh Kumar Bhagwat v. University of Delhi in File No.CIC/DS/A/2011/001782/RM
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/584
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission