Rules for refund of money for admission in B. Tech - PIO should provide documents rather than giving elaborate explanations – reply within time limit without any delay to avoid penalty
1. Vide RTI dt 30.5.12, appellant had sought information on two points relating to the rules for refund of money for admission in B.Tech.
2. PIO AICTE Kolkata vide letter dt 22.7.12, asked appellant to resubmit the demand draft. Appellant vide letter dt 7.8.12, resubmitted the Draft.
3. PIO vide letter dt 29.8.12 provided a response to the appellant by enclosing copy of a public notice issued by AICTE.
4. Appellant submitted that he has received a letter from AICTE dt 4.7.13 wherein he has been informed that as per AICTE rules, only Rs 1000 should be deducted if a candidate withdraws his admission before commencement of the session. In respect of query no.2, appellant was informed that was no such rule in the AICTE to compel a College which does not refund the admission fee. He further submitted that the AICTE has provided a response to him with considerable delay and even now, copy of the rule relating to query no.1 has not been provided. In the absence of the public authority, their views could not be ascertained.
5. The Commission finds that initial response provided by PIO AICTE dt 22.7.12 was incomplete and even the information conveyed vide their letter dt 4.7.13, a copy of the rule has not been provided to the appellant. The Commission directs PIO RO Eastern Regional Office, AICTE, Kolkata, to provide a response to the appellant within one week from date of receipt of the order.
6. A show cause notice be issued to the PIO AICTE RO Kolkata as to why action under section 20(1) Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees: Provided that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on him: Provided further that the burden of proving that he acted reasonably and diligently shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be. of the RTI Act be not initiated against him for the unwarranted delay in providing the information. His written submission should reach the Commission within three weeks from date of receipt of the order.
7. If there are other persons responsible for delay in providing information to the appellant, the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause notice and direct them to provide a response to the Commission. The appeal is disposed of.
Central Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Ratan Sen v. AICTE in File No. CIC/RM/A/2013/000089