CIC raps DU's Venkateswara College over 'baseless' RTI reply on favouritism allegations

New Delhi, Mar 3 (PTI) The Central Information Commission has hauled up Delhi University's Sri Venkateswara College over what it termed a "baseless" denial of information under the RTI Act in a case pertaining to allegations of recruitment favouritism and corruption.

The college, however, has asserted that there was "no corruption angle" and that appointments were made strictly as per the Delhi University rules.

Information Commissioner Sudha Rani Relangi, in a recent order, observed that the reply of the public information officer (PIO) of the college on certain key queries was "not as per the spirit of the RTI Act, 2005".

The appellant, Jawahar Singh, had alleged "corrupt practices" in the recruitment process, claiming that ineligible candidates were appointed to posts such as upper division clerk (UDC) and others, and that some staff were removed under a "pick and choose policy".

He further alleged that the college favoured candidates from a particular state, which he claimed was against the Delhi University norms.

During the hearing, the PIO denied the allegations, stating that "all recruitments of staff are conducted as per the norms and regulations prescribed by the university" and that "there is no corruption angle involved as alleged by the appellant".

The PIO also tendered an apology for the delayed RTI reply, saying it was unintentional.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) noted that the denial of certain queries in a one-line response stating "Question not defined under Section 2(f)" without citing any exemption clause was "found to be baseless".

On the query seeking a complete list of newly recruited staff, the CIC observed that such information "should ideally be available in public domain in terms of Section 4(1) of the RTI Act, 2005", adding that the figures provided "do not adequately answer the query of the appellant".

Section 4(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, mandates proactive disclosure of information by public authorities to minimise requests.

CIC also said that regarding recruitment rules, the PIO was "supposed to have invited attention of the appellant towards the specific hyperlink from where the rules/regulation of recruitment be accessed, which is missing in the PIO's reply".

Allowing the second appeal, the Commission directed the PIO to "revisit the contents" of the relevant queries and provide a "revised updated reply along with copy of relevant information and specific URL path" within one week. PTI MHS PRK