Central Information Commission Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi website-cic.gov.

Transcription

1 Central Information Commission Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi website-cic.gov.in Case No. CIC/CC/C/2014/900253/MP Complainant Public Authority : Shri Shine, Trivandrum. : M/O Human Resource Development, University Grants Commission, IASE. Date of Hearing : 21 st June, 2017 Date of Decision : 18 th July, 2017 Present Complainant Respondent : Ms. Sumangala represented the complainant through VC. : Shri Rahul Kumar, ASO, MHRD, Shri Shyam Singh, SO, Ms. Kundla Mahajan, US, Shri Rajesh Kumar, Assistant from UGC at CIC & Shri Jitendra Parikh, Registrar, IASE through VC. RTI application : CPIO s reply : , , First Appeal : Nil FAA s order : Nil Complaint : Information Commissioner : Manjula Prasher ORDER The instant matter was earlier heard by the Commission on and the Commission rescheduled hearing in the matter on

2 Background of the case: 2. Shri Shine, the appellant stated that he had completed B. Tech in Mechanical Engineering Degree ( academic year) from The Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (IASE), Deemed University, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan which was not in the list of Deemed University, the Supreme council of Education Qatar where he was working had kept his request for equivalency certificate pending, he sought equivalency certificate as the Qatar Government was accepting degrees from selected universities from India and the engineers who completed their course from other universities which were not in the approved list of Qatar Government had to obtain equivalency certificate from the Supreme Council of Education Qatar. He, therefore, requested for issue of a letter of confirmation about the university s government approval about the validity of B. Tech Degree certificate issued by IASE and its being at par with other universities to enable him to submit the same to the Supreme Council of Education, Qatar. 3. During the hearing held on the appellant mentioned notification of MHRD dated stating that the notification allowed the deemed university to issue degree for 130 courses which included B. Tech. He also referred to the Distance Education Council approval given to IASE to hold such a course. He stated that he needed the information very urgently as it was a question of his career. The respondents stated that the appellant had not mentioned about the notifications in his RTI application and therefore it was not possible for them to comment on the same. 4. The Commission vide Interim Order dated held that The Commission,, therefore, treating the complaint as a second appeal, directs the appellant to send his request along with the notifications/approvals, referred to by him to the CPIOs concerned within three days positively to enable the CPIOs concerned to understand his perspective and they in turn, will respond to his request within one week of the receipt of such request from the appellant under intimation to the Commission. 5. In compliance with the directions of the Commission, the appellant vide his letter dated submitted the copies of a bunch of documents consisting of 2

3 Notifications dated , copies of the replies of the Parliament Questions made by MHRD etc. numbering around 70 pages to the CPIO, UGC and copy to the Commission, without referring to how these documents establish the appellant s contention as to how B. Tech in Mechanical Engineering Degree obtained by him from the IASE was equivalent to the degrees issued by the universities recognized by the UGC. 6. The respondents stated that the Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (IASE), Sardarshahr, Rajasthan is a Deemed University. The UGC had not granted its approval to the university to offer technical courses under ODL mode. The erstwhile Distance Education Council (DEC) had granted ex-post facto Institutional recognition to it for the programmers offered by it through distance mode up to the academic year The provisional institutional recognition was also granted to IASE for the academic year No further recognition had been granted to it either by DEC or UGC to offer any programme through distance mode. The information had been already displayed on the UGC website. They added that a Deemed University can operate within its own Headquarters only. UGC had not granted its approval to the university to open any study centre in any other State or even within its State in this regard Public Notice dated and were already available on the UGC s website. The programmes like BE/B. Tech were not allowed through distance mode and MHRD s directions prohibiting BE/B. Tech through distance mode dated were available on the UGC s website. They stated that the joint committee of UGC, AICTE and DEC had not given its recognition to B.E. and B. Tech programmes of any university through distance mode, in this regard a copy of letter dated issued by the erstwhile DEC along with a copy of Public Notice No. UB/04(04)2010 issued by All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) was provided to the appellant. They further added that MHRD vide Gazette Notification No. 6-1/2013 dated had notified that all the degrees/diplomas/certificates including technical education degrees/diploma awarded through Open and Distance Learning mode of education by the Universities established by an Act of Parliament or State Legislature, Institutions Deemed to be Universities under Section 3 of the UGC Act, 1956 and 3

4 Institutions of National Importance declared under an Act of Parliament stand automatically recognized for the purpose of employment to posts and services under the Central Government, provided they have been approved by the UGC. Prior to this, the Gazette Notification No. 44 dated was effective. As per this, the approval of Distance Education Council (DEC), wherever required by AICTE, was necessary for the recognition of qualifications acquired through ODL mode of education. 7. In view of above submissions of the respondent authority, the Commission observes that the respondent authority had intimated to the appellant vide letter dated that the respondent authority UGC had not granted its approval to the IASE, Sardarshahar to offer technical courses under ODL mode but the UGC has not categorically stated that the approval provided by the Distance Education Council was not applicable. The Commission, therefore, directs the CPIO, UGC to submit an affidavit that the Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (IASE), Sardarshahar did not have the requisite approval to conduct the B. Tech in Mechanical Engineering under ODL mode, the course in question in the academic year within three weeks of the receipt of the order of the Commission. The appeal is disposed of. Authenticated true copy: (Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner Deputy Registrar 4

5 Address of the parties: Shri Shine, KS Land, Palayamkunnu (PO), Varkala, Trivandrum (Kerala) University Grants Commission, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi M/O Human Resource Development, Department of Higher Education, (U.-3A Section), Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi IASE (Deemed University), Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr (Rajasthan). 5