1. The appellant, Shri Prashant Kumar Baheti submitted RTI application before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi stating that vide letter No. DEC/JRN/06/5448 dated 29.08.2007 issued by IGNOU all courses run under distance education mode by JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth (Deemed) University were provided one time ex-post facto recognition and sought the details of various courses which were recognized at that time; decision regarding ex-post facto recognition by Distance Education Council (DEC) or by Joint Committee of DEC, AICTE/UGC etc. through two points.
2. The CPIO informed the appellant that during the period of institutional recognition, the University was required to offer programmes approved by the statutory bodies of the University after seeking approval of the regulatory bodies concerned, wherever required. Further, in case of technical/professional programmes offered by the university, the approval from the AICTE was required to be obtained by the university in accordance with the Gazette Notification No. 44 dated 1.3.1995 issued by MHRD. Seeking approval from the respective apex bodies was the responsibility of the university. However, no university was authorized to offer technical and professional programmes including M. Phil and Ph. D through distance mode. 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 and provided copy of letter dated 13.08.2009 issued by the DEC to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the decision of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA concurred with the decision of the CPIO.
3. The appellant thereafter filed the instant appeal before the Commission on the grounds of unsatisfactory information having been provided by the respondent authority as the list of approved course names was not provided to him.
4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant was not present in spite of a notice of hearing having been sent to him. The respondent CPIO stated that the appellant's identical appeal has been adjudicated by the Commission in case No. CIC/SA/A/2016/901824/MP on 03 August, 2017.
5. As the appellant's identical appeal had been adjudicated by the Commission in case No. CIC/SA/A/2016/901824/MP on 03 August, 2017, no action is called for on the part of the Commission in the instant appeal. The appeal is disposed of.