Rama Bala v. Cpio And Faa/Registrar Sed Indira Gandhi National Open Univeristy

$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8847/2019, CM No. 36531/2019 RAMA BALA ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person.

versus CPIO AND FAA/REGISTRAR SED INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERISTY ..... Respondent Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

O R D E R

% 14.08.2019 CM No. 36531/2019 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application sands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 8847/2019 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the orders of the CPIO dated June 27, 2018 and the First Appellate Authority dated July 13, 2018. The petitioner vide her application dated April 24, 2018 / May 26, 2018 sought for the following information: "1. Answer sheet of my entrance examination.

2. 5 answer sheets of last qualifying students.

3. The scheme of marking in the questions.

4. On what basis I am given less marks in each question.

5. Is there any proposal is submitted with you on Hindu Succession Act 1956 for translation or lack of translation in Hindi in legal books. If any please give me the information of

the proposal and the person who has submitted. A copy of the proposal as my proposal on it has been stolen from my house."

The CPIO has stated the following:

Sl No.

Query No.

Answer Enclosure(s) 1.

1.

Please find attached herewith photocopy of answer script for Ph.D Entrance Test of your PHDTT programme bearing enrolment number 681050932.

Copy of answer script.

2.

2.

The information is confidential in nature and related to a third party, and therefore, cannot be furnished to you.

3.

3.

There is no key / marking scheme for PHDTT entrance test.

4.

4.

Marks are awarded by the evaluators as per the performance of the students.

5.

5.

As your query pertains to PIO, School of Translation Studies and Training (SOTST) IGNOU. The RTI Application has been forwarded to PIO, (SOTST). For any further information in this regard you are advised to contact PIO, (SOTST) IGNOU Maidan Garhi New Delhi-68.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority which was disposed of by the First Appellate Authority on the following terms:

Sl.

No.

Query No.

Answer Enclosure(s) 1 to 5 This is to inform you that the information sought by you regarding letter dated 24.04.2018 and 26.05.2018 had already been furnished to you by PIO (SED) vide reply letter dated 29.05.2018 through online portal

and 27.06.2018 by Speed Post No.ED886372706IN.

From the above, it is clear that the petitioner has not sought the remedy of second appeal before the CIC. On a specific query to the petitioner, she states no purpose would be achieved if second appeal is filed before the CIC. I am unable to agree with the said submission. The writ petition is dismissed. The remedy is with the petitioner to approach the CIC in second appeal challenging the order of the First Appellate Authority in accordance with law.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J AUGUST 14, 2019/aky