www.PunjabColleges.com
Largest database of Universities and Colleges in India situated in more than 9000 towns.
Home   Contact Us
Enter College / University Name or City:
Punjab Colleges
Pvt Institutes in Punjab


Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda, Punjab



Contact


Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda, Punjab
Address:Dabwali Road
GZS PTU Campus Bathinda
Bathinda (District Bathinda)
Punjab, India
Pin Code : 151010


Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab is a recognised institute / college. Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab was established on / in 1989.


Principal of Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab is Dr Jasbir Singh Hundal.

Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab is situated in Bathinda of Punjab state (Province) in India. This data has been provided by www.punjabcolleges.com. Bathinda comes under Bathinda (Bhatinda) Tehsil, Bathinda District.

Fax # of Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab is +91-164-2280164.

Contact Person(s) of the Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab is (are): Mr Randhawa 0164-2210158, 98146-80687.

Mobile No(s) of concerned persons at Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab are +91-94173-38239, +91-8872500281, 81466-51520, 9781100051.

email ID(s) is Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET Bathinda Punjab

Website of Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab is www.gzscetbti.gov.in, www.gzscet.org.

Registrar : Prof GS Baath.


Contact Details of Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab are : Telephone: +91-164-2280985, 2282491, 2280542, 2283025, 2280985, 2280546
earlier Principals Dr SC Sharma, Dr Harpal Singh 94172-80687,98884-68687, R-2280794, Dr PK Bansal, Dr TS Sidhu
Principal of Polytechnic Wing Prof Darshan Singh Sidhu
NSS Co-ordinator Prof Gagandeep Kaur, NSS Program Officer Tejinder Singh

Associated NCC Officer Lieutenant Prof Rajiv Kumar (ANO)

GZCET is Regional Campus of Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar.

08.08.2012
The fees of students admitted under SC BC quota is reimbursed by Social Welfare Dept. That Dept has not paid an amount to the tune of about Rs 2.25 crore to GZCET, Bathina so far.
Deputy Registrar: Gurdeep Singh
Sports Incharge: Prof Bhupinderpal Singh Daut
Himanshu Podar: Lecturer in Computer Science
RK Bansal (ECE Inquiry Officer)


Courses

M.Tech (Geo-Informatics) started from 2012

B.Tech, B.E in Agricultural Engg./ Planning Engg.), Architecture, Civil, Mechanical, Electronics, Electrical, Textile

GZCET School of Architecture runs B Arch course since 1989. 5 years B. Arch. course

ITI Courses
Information & Communication Technology
ICT 101 Computer Fundamental, MS Office & Internet

Production and Manufacturing
MAN-101 Turning


Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab runs course(s) in Engineering, Architecture stream(s).

Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET is affiliated with Directorate of Technical Education and Industrial Training Punjab, Chandigarh (Chandigarh)


Profile of Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET

Bathinda Education Photois the first institute in Punjab established with the full funding of state government in the year 1989 when the honble Governor of Punjab Sh.S.S.Ray laid the foundation stone on 23rd October, 1989. Initially set up as Government Engineering College, it was converted in to an autonomous institute in the year 1992 and a Board of Governors (BOG) was constituted to manage the affairs of the College. The Chairman of the Board of Governors is the Chief Executive for technical education in the state i.e. Honble Minister of Technical Education and the other members of Board of Governors includes eminent Industrialists academicians and senior representatives of the state Government. The College is affiliated to Punjab Technical University Jalandhar and provides an excellent academic environment under the able guidance of well-qualified and highly dedicated faculty.

Location
BATHINDA is historical Corporate city having the Guru Gobind Singh fort built in 1000 A.D and once a fort of Rajia Sultana. The city being important city of past is also one of the most modern cities of Punjab. It is also known City of Lakes and textile city. It is the power hub of the state as it has two big thermal power stations. Bathinda has many Public undertakings in its manifold as National Fertilizer Limited, Kandla – Bathinda oil Pipeline, coming up HPCL Guru Gobind Singh Oil Refinery, Dry Port and many more. The city has a honour of having the biggest Military Cantonment of Asia and Worlds second biggest Railway junction connecting it with all the major cities of the country. The city is situated on the National Highway Number 64.

The College is located on the out skirts of Bathinda on Dabwali road. It is
* 7 Km from the Railway Station.
* 5 Km from the Bus stand.
* 210 Km from Chandigarh.
* 300 Km from Delhi by rail and 345 Km by Bus.
* 155 Km from Patiala.

Mechanical Engineering
The Department of Mechanical Engineering, GZSCET, established in 1989 has grown up by leaps and bonds since its inception and has overtaken similar institutions in the region by producing competent professionals in the field of mechanical engineering This has been possible by upgrading the upgrading the course curricula keeping a pace with emerging technologies and also by providing industrial training at three levels in the degree course training at three levels in the degree course i.e. two training at the end of first and second year for the duration of six weeks each and third one at the end of third year for the duration of one complete semester of six months at any reputed industry of the region. In the final year the students in group of three students each are to select a project work to apply and verify their innovative skills and technological knowledge acquired in degree course. The highly qualified and dedicated faculty of the department together with laboratories equipped with all modern facilities is striving hard to produce engineers capable of meeting the challenges of highly competitive world around us and fusing it with practical understanding by arranging extensive laboratory work.
Faculty of Department
Er. Charanjit Singh * *Coordinator *M.E.
Er. Anupam Saxena * *Assistant Professor*M.E.
Er. Surinder Singh * *Assistant Professor *M.E., MIE
Dr. Buta Singh * *Assistant Professor*Ph.D.
Er. Naveen Singla* *Assistant Professor*M.E.
Dr. Balwinder Singh* *Assistant Professor*Ph.D.
Er. S.P.S.Johal * *Lecturer Sr Scale*B.E.
Er. Rajesh Gupta * *Lecturer Sr Scale*M.Tech.
Er. Vivek * *Lecturer Sr Scale*B.E.
Er. J.S.Tiwana * *Lecturer Sr Scale*ME
Er. Harish Garg* *Lecturer Sr Scale*B.E.
Prof Rajesh Gupta:Public Relation Officer
Civil Engineering
The Department of Civil Engineering offers undergraduate programme in Civil Engineering. The Department offers various training programmes in the area of Concrete Technology and Structural Engineering. Environmental, Geo-technical, Transportation, Hydraulics, The all the labs in these areas are well equipped to facilitate the undertaking of sponsored research projects and consultancy assignments. Several such projects have been successfully completed in the recent past. Through departmental elective subjects the students can avail the possibility of specialisation in different areas of Civil Engineering. The major equipments used for research and Universal Testing Machine (UTM) Soil Penetration Test apparatus, Compression Testing Machine, Loading Frame, Spectrophotometer, Weather Station and BOD Incubator. The Department earns nearly Rupees 20 lacs per annum through consultancy services in different areas of Civil Engineering.

ECE
The Department offers a 4 year B.Tech program in Electronics and Communication Engineering The Department has expertise available in the area of Neural Networks, Fuzzy Logic Systems, Genetic Algorithms, Fault tolerant Interconnection Networks, Parallel and Distributed Computing and Multiprocessor Scheduling. It has well equipped laboratories of Digital Electronics and Microprocessors, Communication Engineering, Instrumentation and Power Electronics, Analog Electronics Devices and Circuits and Neural Networks. Special equipment and testing facilities are available in various labs of the Department. The Department also has in house computer facilities for the faculty and students. Apart from teaching the faculty is also actively involved in Research and Development activities in the respective fields, with many publications at the International Level.

Computer Science and Engineering
The Department offers undergraduate B.Tech programme in Computer Science and Engineering. The Department supports a large number of Scientific Computing efforts, Designing, Graphics Environment and documentationpreparation packages. The program offers instruction in fundamental principles, Design and application of computer systems, Computer Technologies and S/W development. The Department has air conditioned and fully equipped Labswithlatest software and Hardware, which caters to the Computation needs of the students and faculty of all Department s. The Department is providing 24 hour Internet facility through VSAT. The Department has a local academy of CISCO to run the CISCO Network Academy program for the students of this college. The successful students are awarded the CNAP Certificate from CISCO equipment.

Textile Engineering
Textile Engineering Course was introduced in 1995 in this College. The Department is having well qualified faculty from all over the country with a vast experience in Textile Industry. The Department has all the labs required for undergraduate teaching. Also there is a regular interaction with the adjoining Industries for teaching the students on the shop floor. The various equipment includes Universal Tensile Tester, Projection Microscope, Stiffness Tester, Plain Circular Knitting Machine, Rib Circular Knitting Machine, Warping Machine, Power loom, along with the routine equipments of the laboratories. The Department offers specialised courses i.e. Advance Theory of Textile Structure, Clothing crence and Garment Technology, Knitting Technology, Non-Conventional yarn Manufacture, Non-woven Technology and Management of Textile manufacture.

Applied Science
Department of Applied Science is always the first Department to be established in an institute. It covers the core subjects of Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Communication Skills, Management and Material Science. It is basically supporting Department. The department provides excellent academic environment under the guidance of well qualified faculty. The Department is involved in research and development activities and contributing regularly to International Journals of repute. The Department has well developed labs of Material Science and applied Chemistry which are developed under MODROBS Scheme of Government of India.

Electrical Engineering
The Department offers B.Tech. programme in Electrical Engineering. The programme of study is planned to provide a proper mix of courses with necessary theoretical base and practical oriented work in the up to date laboratories. The major equipments in the laboratories of the department includes Microprocessor and Control Systems training kits, synchronous/Induction motors and generators, DC machines and transformers, Relay testing/ demonstration sets and star delta tests etc. One of the faculty members of the department has developed a Device Night Time High Way System (NTHS), which has been patented with Government of India. He is also developing Direct Current Transformer (DCT) with innovative scheme for power system utilities. The department is actively involved in research work.

Architecture
This department offers five year B.Arch. programmed spread over ten semesters. This programmed prepares the students for professional practice in the field of Architecture. It has a bright scope and provides exposure to students in various fields for assessing and discovering their own talent for future development. The department is fully equipped with well furnished drawing studios, building material museum, Audio visual lab Model making workshop and resource centre. Being a part of an Engineering institute the Department has an added advantages of access to various faculties available in Engineering Departments. Education tours are integrated part of B.Arch programmed. The students are taken to various places of architectural interest all over the country to develop their visual sensitivity to make them aware of rich architectural heritage of our country. The department offers several elective subjects i.e. Landscape Design, Rural Architecture, Interior Design, Town Planning etc.

LIBRARY
The LIBRARY of the college has established itself remarkably and has a very good collection of large number of books on different topics and subscribes to a number of journals both National and International. In order to encourage the use of various teaching aids an informatics centre has been working in the College which is being looked after by a senior faculty member and a technician. The College has well equipped workshop where students undergo practical training. The various shops are housed in a separate spacious building, are being looked after by trained supervisors. All the shops have imported as well as indigenous machines / equipment. Apart from regular workshop training during the semester, every student is required to undergo a four weeks training in the workshop after the second semester where the students are encouraged to make utility jobs.
FACULTY OF CENTRAL WORKSHOP
Er. J. S. Tiwana, Incharge Workshop, M.E.
Er. Sikander Singh Sidhu, Lecturer w/p, M. Tech.
Sh. Amarjit Singh, Lecturer w/p, Diploma

Facilities
Bank Stationary and Photostat Shop Post Office P.C.O. and FAX Fast Food Joints, Verka Milk Booth, Cafe Internet@24hrs Bus Facility

HOSTEL
Excellent residential facilities are available for students who come here to study from various of the country.
No. of hostels available are five
* FOUR BOYS HOSTELS
* ONE GIRLS HOSTELS

Every hostel has its individual mess , common room and vehicle parking space. There are canteens in front of hostels which are open 24hrs. Rooms are spacious and airy. There is 24hr water and power supply to the hostels. The common rooms are equipped with complete audio visual entertainment systems, table tennis table and carom boards etc. Daily newspapers and magazines are available within the common room

Stuff



Images / newspaper cuttings related to Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET

Alumni meet 2014 (Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET)
Alumni Meet: 12th April, 2014
Alumni meet 2014
Supply of Electro Chemical Machining (Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET)
Tender: 20th March, 2014
Supply of Electro Chemical Machining
Campus wide networking (Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET)
Tender: 5th February, 2014
Campus wide networking

Supply of dekstop computers (Tender)
Design of Studio Items (Tender)
Supply of Electrical Discharge Machine (Tender)
Asstt Professor posts (Corrigendum)
Asstt Professor for Electrical Engg (Job Vacancy)
Controversy on naming of new technical university (News)
Sukhbir Singh Badal invited in GZSCET (Advertisement)
Teaching and non teaching posts (Job Vacancy)
2 students held for Rs 14 lakh theft (News)
MIS Officer (Job Vacancy)
Asstt Professor for computer science (Job Vacancy)
Asstt Professor (Job Vacancy)
Asstt Professor for computer science (Job Vacancy)
Supply of Dekstop computer (Tender)
Annual Function held (News)
Industrial training program held (Profile)
Dr Naresh presents Research paper in Russia (News)
Professor Rajiv elected as ANO of PTU Campus (News)
Plans afoot to make GZS College a govt univ (News)
B Arch and MBA courses (Admission Notice)
Campus ko milega University ka darja (News)
B Tech and B Arch (Admission Notice)
Sarpanchi hath na ayi, naukri daah te layi (News)
MTech and B Arch courses (Admission Notice)
GZS, a learning curve (Profile)
Students to train at Korean Varsity (News)
Teaching post on contract basis (Job Vacancy)
NSS Camp (News)
Technical Fest (News)
Technical Sanskrit Program (News)
Starting of NSS Camp (News)
Medical camp me 300 mahilao ki jaach li (News)
Blood donation camp lagaya (News)
End of Annual Athletic meet (News)
End of Conference (News)
AIDS jagrukta camp ka ayojan (News)
Jagrukta hi AIDS se bachav hai (News)
Chowkhats, Doors and Windows for D type Hostel etc (Tender)
Exam ke naye prarup par jatai khushi (News)
Sadak hadse me Engg ke Student ki maut (News)
Innovation wins at Tech Fest (News)
Compkriti me students ne dikhaye jalve (News)
BTech, MTech and MBA Courses etc (Admission Notice)
Quality Improvement Program (Admission Notice)
Sonu first in Solo Dance (News)
Tarannum fest ends on high note (News)
PTUs Tarannum festival, Day one seats the tone (News)
Preference to JET Students (Admission Notice)
College di baajri, DC di haajri (News)
Colour Washing, Distemper and Paint etc (Tender)
BTech through LEET (Admission Notice)
BTech, MSc, MBA and B Arch Courses etc (Admission Notice)
BTech, Mtech and MBA Courses etc (Admission Notice)
BTech,BArch and MTech Courses (Admission Notice)
Paper checking me likhvaye answer (News)
BTech,MTech and Diploma Courses (Admission Notice)
Sweeping and Civil works etc (Tender)
Vatavaran Science te takniki khetra wich adhunik jhuka vishe te conference (News)
Inter College Athletic Tournament wich Giani Jail Singh College ne jitte 3 medal (News)
Bina Degrees aur Notification ke bharti (News)
Giani Jail Singh Campus ke Students ne jeeta Gold (News)
Giani Zail Singh Engg college wich Cultural Programme (News)
Students ne dikhai pratibha (News)
GZS College holds session on adoloscence problems (News)
Camp me 120 logo ne kiya Blood donate (News)
Giani Jail Singh College wich Athletic meet (News)
Naukri ke bahane Rs 2 lakh ki thagi (News)
PTU introduces MTech in geo informatics (News)
Notice to Lecturer Sh Sanjeev Kumar (Advertisement)
Assistant Professor for BTech Course (Job Vacancy)
Lecturer for Physics Chemistry and Math etc (Job Vacancy)
Notice (Advertisement)
Sweeping and Cleaner (Job Vacancy)
Sweeping Cleaning and Civil Works Maintenance etc (Tender)
Geani Jail Singh College wich Sbhiacharak Programs (News)
B Tech B Architecture and M Tech etc (Admission Notice)
BTech BArch and Mtech through LEET also (Admission Notice)
Geani Jail Singh me Rakatdan camp Ayojit (News)
College wich hoi Gadbadi di padtal shuru (News)
No revision in fare of Govt Buses (News)
Engineering College me aniymitaon Janch padtal shuru (News)
Probe holds GZSCET principal exam coordinator guilty (News)
Academic audit will wipe out non performers (News)
B Tech B Architecture and Diploma (Admission Notice)
B Tech and Architecture (Admission Notice)
Sacking of Secuirity staff at GZSCET triggers protest (News)
PTU to run Bathinda College (News)
Was JEE paper leaked in Bathinda (News)
Three IIT faculty members debarred from JEE test (News)
GZSCET staff quizzed in mass copying case (News)
B Tech B Arch M Tech and Diploma Courses (Job Vacancy)
Message of Principal Dr S C Sharma (Profile)
5 year ban on IIT Roorkee observers (News)
Under Graduate and Post Graduate Programmes (Admission Notice)
Students under cloud fail (News)
Zail Singh College struggles to find a Principal (News)
Govt reinstates tainted prof as Principal (News)
Bhatinda Engineering College ki Aniymatao ki janch (News)
Engineering College me animitao ki janch ka adesh (News)
Its more trouble for engineering college (News)
Inquiry order into copying at Bhatinda college (News)
Result of one exam not Announced (News)
Centre Supervisor had Daughter Studying in same college (News)
Heads to roll at Bathinda exam centre (News)
Mass Copying at JEE Venue (News)
Bathinda college teacher supdt set to be suspended (News)
IIT K may declare witheld results on 8 June (News)
Govt seeks fact finding report from IIT Kanpur (News)
Fatherly love faith in brand IIT prove undoing of college aiding copying in JEE (News)
In dock not the first time (News)
Fate of 20 Students uncertain (News)
IITs blacklist Bathinda engg college (News)
Bathinda ke College me nakal ki pushti (News)
IIT K holds back results Bathinda College in dock (News)
Bathinda centre in the eye of storm (News)
Copying alleged in IIT exam (News)
Now sports school to come up at Ghudda (News)
Engg Student Attempt Suicide (News)
PTU holds workshop on human values (News)
professors nu riswat cash ch fason di sajish bepard (News)
Engineering Wing (Job Vacancy)
Engineering College ch 4 vidyarthi muatal (News)
Clash in College hostel (News)
College wich Salana Samaroh karvaya (News)
B Tech and M Tech (Admission Notice)
Proffesor nu fasaoun de mamle di adalti janch shuru (News)
Tension In Bathinda College as Vigilance Team (News)
Vigilance Raid in College (News)
Professor nu phadan geyi vigilance team khaali haath parti (News)
BTech MTech And Diploma Courses in Giani Zail Singh College (Admission Notice)
BTech MTech and Diploma etc (Admission Notice)
Direct Admission in B Tech and M Tech (Admission Notice)
Diploma Course in CSE ECE and Mechanical Engg (Admission Notice)
B Architecture (Admission Notice)
B Tech and B Architecture Programme (Admission Notice)
Engineering College Ch Hovegi Jama Ek di Padai (News)
Geani Jail Singh College banega University (News)
BTeh in all trades (Admission Notice)
Giani Zail Singh Engg College (Profile)
Techies protest against PTU (News)
POSTGRDUATE (Admission Notice)
Hospital in Admit (News)
Course Offered (Profile)
Best Future (Admission Notice)
Opening Of Shops (News)
Tender Notice ()
Teach Gurus (Profile)
Admission Notice for Diploma Courses (Admission Notice)
Paise wapis na milan te Students da jaam (News)
Appoinment of Lecturer (Job Vacancy)
Library and Workshop (Profile)
B Tech and B Architecture Programme (Admission Notice)
Kalam asks Chief secy to act in job scam (News)
College Management ke khilaf rosh jataya (News)
Punjab tech Education dept seeks report on IIT JEE Cheating case (News)
Board Director ne darj kiye Geani Jail Singh Engg College ke byan (News)
Copying scam trips colleges technical upgrade (News)
Message of Director Jasbir Singh Hundal (Profile)
Profile of Giani Zail Singh College of Engg and Tech, Bathinda (Profile)
Lecturer Sanjeev Kumar adressee (Public Notice)

Media coverage of Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology GZCET, Bathinda Punjab, Punjab

From prisoner to president

Giani Zail Singh, president from 1982 to 1987, was prisoner at the district jail here from 1938 to 1943 for backing the Parja Mandal movement in Punjab under the British rule. India has attained freedom, the old district jail has moved, and its land has gone to the Baba Farid University of Heath Sciences (BFUHS). Fear is rife that the university, dismantling the prison part by part, will also demolish Gianiji s cell.

Surinder Gupta, district Congress president; Inderjeet Singh Khalsa, chairman of Baba Farid Institutes; and Amar Singh Sukheeja have written to the President for preserving the historical cell as a memorial to Gianiji, who contributed a lot to the region. PS Gill, vice-chancellor of the medical university, has agreed to keep the cell intact. The news of its imminent demolition, he said, are plain rumours. Gianiji the magnanimous

Kotkapura: When in power, politicians accumulate wealth, bully people, and become proud. Gianiji was different. The former president whose birth anniversary falls on Saturday was a good human being, in the opinion of his grandson, Kultar Singh Sandhwan. Giani Zail Singh had the respect of even his rivals, said Sandhwan. Prakash Singh Badal, one of his opponents, even voted him for president.

During the country s freedom struggle, Harider Singh, ruler of Faridkot estate, put Gianiji in prison. Years later, Harider Singh, now erstwhile king, visited Gianiji, who had become chief minister. Gianiji greeted him with affection.

Maninder Singh versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Maninder Singh s/o Shri Gurmeet Singh,
H.No.5157, Sector 38 (West), Chandigarh.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.
The Public Information Officer
o/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dhabwali Road, Bhatinda.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 1082 of 2011

Present:-
Shri G.S. Randhawa on behalf of the complainant.
Shri Gurinder Singh, PIO alongwith Shri T.S.Nagi, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER:
The alleged deficiencies in the information have been discussed at length with the parties. It transpires that the only information which is yet to be supplied pertains to Government instructions regarding maintenance of Roaster Register on the basis of which reserved vacancies were filled in the respondent-college.

2. The plea of the respondent is that this information has already been furnished to the complainant, who, however, states that copies of the instructions given to him are not the same as issued by the Department of Social Welfare, Punjab, Chandigarh.

3. The stand of the respondent is that they have supplied all the information held by them and in their custody, according to which they have maintained the Roaster Register and filled the vacancies. The copy of these instructions have already been furnished to the complainant. The plea of the respondent is that they do not have any record of other instructions said to have been issued by the Government.

4. I have heard the parties. The information held by the respondent has been furnished to him. If however, the complainant wants copies of any other instructions said to have been issued by the Director Social Welfare, Punjab, Chandigarh, he should approach the concerned department to obtain the copies of the same. The present complaint case is closed.

(R.I. Singh)
September 22, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Maninder Singh versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Maninder Singh s/o Shri Gurmeet Singh,
H.No.5157, Sector 38 (West), Chandigarh.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dhabwali Road, Bhatinda.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 1082 of 2011

Present:-
Shri G.S. Randhawa on behalf of the complainant.
Shri T.S. Nagi, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER:

The respondent submits letter No.2723 dated 24.8.2011 enclosing point-wise reply given to the complainant, who, however is not satisfied with the same. The plea of the complainant is that he had specifically asked for breakup of Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes category of Mazhabi Sikh/Balmiki and other castes. However, the information furnished by the respondent does not give the details pertaining to these categories.

2. The stand of the respondent on the other hand is that they have given a copy of the relevant Government instructions and also furnished the details of roaster-points pertaining to their college.

3. The issue pertains to Government instructions issued by the Department of Personal Policy-1 Branch (PP-1 Branch).

4. I have heard the parties and gone through their respective pleas. To resolve the issue, it is considered appropriate to summon the Dealing Assistant of PP-1 Branch of Personal and Administrative Reforms so that the issue may be settled..

5. The case is adjourned to 22.9.2011 at 10.30 A.M. The respondent shall also depute the concerned official who is fully/well conversant with the subject matter.

(R.I. Singh)
August 25, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab
CC
The Principal Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Personal and Administrative Reforms, Punjab Civil Secretariat, Chandiarh for deputing the Dealing Assistant on 29.9.2011 at 10.30 A.M..

Maninder Singh versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Maninder Singh s/o Shri Gurmeet Singh,
H.No.5157, Sector 38 (West), Chandigarh. -------------Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dhabwali Road, Bhatinda. -------------Respondent.

CC No. 1082 of 2011

Present:-
Shri Maninder Singh complainant in person.
None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER


On the last date of hearing, the complainant had pointed out certain deficiencies in the information furnished to him and the respondent was directed to remove the same. Today, however, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent even though he was present on the last date of hearing.

2. Failure of the respondent to remove the deficiencies amounts to non-furnishing of the information. Issue fresh notice to the respondent calling upon to show cause why proceedings under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 should not be drawn and penalty should not be imposed for non-furnishing of the information. The respondent shall also explain why suitable compensation should not be awarded to the complainant, who had moved the State Information Commission, Punjab and he has still not received the information. Reply of the respondent may be received in the Commission on each point and he may also make his personal submissions on the next date of hearing if any.

3. To come up on 25.8.2011 at 10.30 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
July 29, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Maninder Singh versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Maninder Singh s/o Shri Gurmeet Singh,
H.No.5157, Sector 38 (West), Chandigarh.
-------------Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Dhabwali Road,
Bhatinda. -------------Respondent.

CC No. 1082 of 2011

Present:-
Shri G.S. Randhawa on behalf of the complainant.
Shri T.S. Nagi, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Partial information has been furnished. The respondent is directed to remove the deficiencies.

2. To come up on 29.7.2011 at 10.30 A.M.


(R.I. Singh)
June 2, 2011. Chief Information Commissioner Punjab

Maninder Singh versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Maninder Singh s/o Shri Gurmeet Singh,
H.No.5157, Sector 38 (West), Chandigarh.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Dhabwali Road,

Bhatinda.
-------------Respondent.
CC No. 1082 of 2011

Present:-
Shri Mahinder Singh complainant in person.
Shri T.S. Nagi, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The respondent submits a letter bearing No.717 dated 10.5.2011, a copy of which has been furnished to the complainant. The respondent, however, is directed to place on record the reply given by him on all the thirteen issues raised by the information-seeker in his application dated 26.2.2011.

2. To come up on 2.6.2011 at 10.30 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
May 11, 2011. Chief Information Commissioner Punjab

Raja Singh Khela versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Dr. Raja Singh Khela,
Director-Principal,
GTB Khalsa Institute of Engg. & Tech.
Chhapianwali, Malout,
District- Mukatsar. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Principal,
GZS College of Engg. & Tech.,
Bathinda. __________ Respondent

CC No. 3546 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Gurpreet Singh, on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sri Gurinderpal Singh, Registrar-cum-PIO.

ORDER

Heard.
The information required by the complainant has been supplied to him by the respondent.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
30th December, 2009 Punjab

VIVEK Vs THE STATE OF PUNJAB and OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No.12395 of 2008

Date of Decision: July 16, 2009

Vivek .....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
The State of Punjab and Others .....RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

PRESENT: -
Mr. R.K. Chopra, Senior Advocate, with
Ms. Maninder, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. S.S. Bhinder, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
Petitioner, Vivek, Lecturer in Mechanical Engineering, Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Dabwali Road, Bathinda, has filed this civil writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying issuance of a writ quashing Order dated 6.6.2008 (Annexure P-10) vide which the claim of the petitioner for grant of Lecturer (Senior Scale) under the Career Advancement Scheme (for short, `the Scheme) has been rejected. Prayer further made in the petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release to the petitioner the scale of Lecturer (Senior Scale) with effect from 17.7.2006 i.e. the date on which the petitioner completed six years of service and became eligible for grant of Lecturer (Senior Scale) under the Scheme.

The petitioner was selected against a regular post on 19.5.2000. The petitioner joined duties as a Lecturer on 17.7.2000. The period of probation was completed satisfactorily on 17.7.2002. No adverse remarks were ever conveyed to the petitioner and therefore, it has been asserted that the service record of the petitioner is clean and good. It has also beenbrought out that a large number of papers have been published by the petitioner and a number of conferences have been attended.

In addition to the normal duties of Lecturer, the petitioner had been assigned additional duties, such as Hostel Warden, Incharge of Lawn Tennis, Coordinator FETE, Adviser to students and Incharge of Energy Park (project of Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources, Government of India), Member College Editorial Board, Member Cultural Council of the College which the petitioner performed satisfactorily.

All India Council of Technical Education, New Delhi published guidelines dated 31.7.2001 (Annexure P-4) for grant of higher pay scale under the Scheme in respect of teachers for the degree level institutions. Relevant portion of Annexure P-4 reads as under:-

1.2.0 Lecturer (Senior Scale) A lecturer will be eligible for placement in a senior scale through a procedure of selection, if she/he has:

(i) Completed 6 years of service after regular appointment with relaxation of one year and two years, respectively, for those with M.Phil. M.E./ M.Tech. and Ph.D.

(ii) Participated in summer/winter schools of total duration of 4 weeks, or engaged in other appropriate continuing education programme of comparable quality as may be specified or approved by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE).

(iii) Consistently satisfactory performance appraisal reports.

The Government has issued Notification (Annexure P-5), the relevant portion whereof reads as under:-

The length of service required to qualify for senior scale and selection grade in respect of lecturers and from Asstt.

Professor to Professor grade, shall be granted only with reference to the continuous service of the teacher in that particular college and no benefit of previous service shall be given without prior approval of the Government, whether or not the previous college was promoted by the Punjab Government.

The Notification further provides that “requirement of consistency, satisfactory performance appraisal shall be the mandatory requirement for the Career Advancement Scheme from Lecturer to Lecturer (senior scale) and from Lecturer (Senior Scale) to Lecturer (Selection Grade) Assistant Professor.

Learned counsel contends that earlier the Scheme was followed in its spirit. Of late, a committee has been formulated. The committee has not laid down any criteria and is rather working whimsically. In the case of the petitioner, respondent No.3, who is Principal of the College where petitioner has been serving, is one of the members of the Committee. Respondent No.3 is inimical and therefore, the petitioner has not been given his due under the guidelines and notification issued by the Government, to which reference has been made.

Learned counsel has pointed out that there being nothing adverse against the petitioner, considering the spirit of the guidelines, on the completion of required period of six years, the petitioner became entitled to the post of Lecturer (Senior Scale).

Learned counsel for the respondentState has contended that in such cases, selection is made by a committee. The petitioner could not pass the selection procedure.

I have considered the issue.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State has not been able to detail the criteria adopted by the so-called selection committee. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has not earned any adverse report, and there is nothing adverse in the service record of the petitioner so as to show that the petitioner would not fall within the four corners of the Scheme and notification extracted above.

The extracted portion of the guidelines and the scheme do not, anywhere, provide any process of selection. Guidelines and the notification seem to be, `length of service required to qualify for senior scale and selection grade and appraisal reports. There is no report that indicates that performance of the petitioner had been bad at any given time.

Nothing has been indicated to say that the petitioner has not been working consistently or satisfactorily. In such circumstances, the criteria adopted by the committee is not clear to the Court.

This petition is decided with directions to respondent No.1 i.e. Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, to consider the case of the petitioner in the context of the guidelines and the instructions, without reference to the proceedings of the so-called selection committee and take a decision in regard to the claim of the
petitioner.

While considering the issue, the Secretary shall also consider as to whether the procedure adopted by the respondent-State is in conformity and whether it serves the purpose for which Career Advancement Scheme had been introduced.

The Secretary shall take the decision within six weeks of receipt of certified copy of the order.

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE

Sarita Chopra versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Sarita Chopra,
# 1066-A, Sector 41-B,
Chandigarh.
__________Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Gaini Zail Singh College of
Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda, Punjab.

__________ Respondent

CC No. 991 of 2009

Present:
i) Dr. Sarita Chopra, complainant in person.
ii) Sri Raja Singh Khela,Asstt. Professor-cum-PIO.

ORDER
Heard.
The complainant has acknowledged that she has received the information for which she had applied to her satisfaction.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
29th June, 2009 Punjab

Lalit Mohan versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No.32-33-34, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Lalit Mohan,
S.R. House, Opposite Personal Point,
100 feet Road, Near Ghore Wala Chowk,
Bathinda. ......Complainant

Vs.

PIO, Registrar,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bhatinda .....Respondent

CC No.203 of 2007:

ORDER:
Sh. Lalit Mohan, vide his letter dated 27.01.2007 made to the State Information Commission, stated that his application under RTI dated 21.11.2006 in which fee of Rs. 500/- was sent when no reply regarding fee was received from the PIO, had not been attended to within the stipulated period. Instead, after 61 days, on 22.01.2007, the PIO/Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda (referred to as GZSCET hereinafter) vide letter dated 22.01.2007 declined to give the information to him, without stating reasons for such rejection, without informing him of the period within which an Appeal could be filed against such rejection and without giving him information of the Appellate Authority. He, therefore, requested that the PIO GZSCET, Bathinda be directed to supply the complete information, free of cost under the provisions of Section 7(6), and penal action be initiated under Section 20(1) and Section 20(2) for intentional delay in providing the information “as the information required is related to APIO, GZSCET, Bathinda.”

2. A set of papers was set to the PIO/GZSCET, Bathinda on 31st January, 2007 and he was asked to send his response to the applicant within 15 days. The PIO in his letter dated 12.02.2007 stated that Sh. Lalit Mohan had paid fee vide cheque. He clarified that the Complainant had earlier also asked for information under the RTI Act and had been depositing the money in the bank as he knew full well that the money was required to be deposited in the bank account (of the College) or to be paid for through demand draft. This time, he had intentionally paid through cheque inspite of correct knowledge. He also stated that Sh. Lalit Mohan was working as Lecturer in the Engineering Department, and was at present on five years self-employment leave since 16.07.2002. He also stated that Sh. Gurdeep Singh (regarding whose service matters the information was sought) was also working in the same college as Superintendent and had been promoted on 13.01.2006 as Deputy Registrar. Sh. Gurdeep Singh, Deputy Registrar had written to the College prior to the receipt of the application that Sh. Lalit Mohan was not pleased with the decisions taken by the said College and bore a grudge against him since he was serving on the Admin seat. Sh. Lalit Mohan had now and even earlier held out threats that he had money and power and he can do anything against him “Oh us virudh kuch bi kar sakda hae.” On the basis of the written complaint dated 03.10.06 given by Sh. Gurdeep Singh, Legal advice had been sought on whether or not to give the information. Copy of advice received dated 01.12.2006 (both copies attached). The written complaint dated 03.10.06 reads “Sh. Lalit Mohan Lecturer on leave presently running his institute Carrier Launcher is keeping personal grudges against me due to my Admn. seat as certain decision taken by the college Admn. might not have been liked by him. In the past too he has threatened me various times and now he even says that I will get you eliminated as I have money and power. He is bent upon disturbing my personal life and professional career due to his professional differences with me and is unnecessarily harassing me. If anything happens to me or my family he may be held accountable for all that. This is submitted for your kind information and further action please”. Inspite of clear advice that the information need not be given, still, the PIO thought it fit to make a reference to the State Information Commission by way of ‘rehnumai’. The advice given by the Deputy Registrar was dated 15.01.2007 was as under :-

“It is to inform you that this Commission is adjudicatory body to decide the disputes under the RTI Act, 2005. The Public Information Officer/Competent Authority may decide this matter at his own level.”

3. Thereafter, the PIO stated that the clear cut facts which emerged were that Sh. Lalit Mohan had made complaints against the College Management and Sh. Gurdeep Singh, and bore personal grudge against the latter. In so far as Sh. Gurdeep Singh was concerned, Sh. Lalit Mohan had made a complaint against him, at the time of Sh. Gurdeep Singh’s promotion as Deputy Registrar, which was available on record. Not only that, Sh. Lalit Mohan visited the office on 10.01.2007, and on that day also, made threats before leaving. From the record of the college, it is clear that Sh. Lalit Mohan does not care for orders passed by the college, and the latest example is that during his leave for self-employment he has not only not vacated his quarter but also deposits the rent sporadically as and when he feels like it. A notice dated 11.01.2007 for the due amount of Rs. 55644/- had been issued to him, which he did not deposit, rather he issued threat to the official that he would see them in the court. In this manner, Sh. Lalit Mohan is not in accord with the decisions taken by the college and holds Sh. Gurdeep Singh responsible for them.

4. In view of the above, the PIO states that he put up the case to the Competent Authority who took a decision not to supply the information under Section 8(1)(g). This decision was taken in accordance with the advice of the State Information Commission for the PIO/College to take a decision at its own level. In addition, he mentioned that Sh. Gurdeep Singh had also not paid fee in the approved mode and legal advice obtained on the letter of Sh. Gurdeep Singh also advised against giving the information. He, therefore, stated that no delay has been caused in giving the response of the college to Sh. Lalit Mohan, since the reference was made to the State Information Commission on 19.12.2006 and immediately upon receiving the advice on 22.01.2007, the decision was taken and the information was declined to be given to Sh. Lalit Mohan vide letter dated 22.01.2007 itself. Therefore, there had been no delay. He stated that Sh. Lalit Mohan had misrepresented that the reply was in violation of Section 8 whereas Section 8 which deals with exemption from disclosure, and which had been correctly used on this occasion. He, therefore, requested that the complaint be dismissed.

5. Vide his letter dated 01.03.2007, Sh. Lalit Mohan filed objections to the reply of the PIO, (a copy of which had been supplied to him by the PIO on 14.02.2007). He stated that no information on any of the five points asked for by him had been given to him, the PIO had clubbed two separate RTI applications (dates not given) with two separate cheques dated 01.12.2006 in each, and had given one reply for both in one letter, although the information required was different in two separate applications. Regarding the statement of the PIO in his letter that Sh. Lalit Mohan had deposited the money by cheque intentionally, he pointed out that the same PIO had accepted RTI fee by cheque for other applications and they had not cited this as a ground of rejection in their reply to him. Further Sh. Lalit Mohan challenged the legal opinion as lacking “legal awareness” and he states as under:-
“(a) Legal opinion lacks legal awareness as it says
“It has not been disclosed for what purpose information is required” by Mr. Lalit Mohan”
Section 6(2) of RTI Act, 2005 says
“An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information ……….”
So, the ground for rejection is violative of RTI Act 2005.
(b) Legal opinion says
“Information sought to be given has no relationship to any public activity”
Deputy Registrar is a Public Servant for which an advertisement is given in the news papers & all eligible persons from public can apply. Promotion from the post of Superintendent to Deputy Registrar is also a public activity.
(c) Legal opinion says
“Rather disclosure of alleged information would harm the competitive position of third party”.
Promotion file of a public servant does not fall in the category of Third Party information because promotion file of a public servant is not supplied by the public servant rather it is a public document prepared by the Public Authority.

Secondly, was there any condition imposed by the public servant (superintendent) at the time of promotion that the file be treated as confidential and not to be disclosed to Parliament or State Legislature.
(Section 8, sub section (1) of RTI Act, 2005)
(d) Legal opinion says
“It would endanger the life or safety of the person”
No part of promotion file of a public servant is such that disclosure of which would harm the safety of a public servant. The Hon’ble State Information Commission can examine the contents of the promotion file and can check which part of the file can endanger the life or safety of the person”
6. Thereafter, the hearing of this case was fixed for 24th April, 2007 in the premises of the Commissioner’s court at Patiala. In the order passed by the Double Bench of the undersigned, sitting with Mrs. Ravi Singh, Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, the legal advice obtained by the college from Sh. Har Raj Singh, Advocate had been dealt with and it had been ruled “the legal opinion has been seen and cannot be justified in any manner or be made applicable to the present application dated 01.03.07, presently under consideration. Exemptions which cannot be claimed u/s 8 of the Act and are therefore, not applicable*.”

7. At this stage, PIO put in a new plea stating that the said college was an autonomous institution, which was not getting any aid whatsoever nor any grant from the Government sources. Therefore, the RTI Act does not apply to it as per the definition of Public Authority as defined under Section 2(h). The case was adjourned to 22.05.2007 with the observations as under :-
“As such it is necessary to sort out this matter as there is no jurisdiction of the Commission, in case the matter pertains to an institution which does not fall within the jurisdiction of this Act. Both the parties may produce proof on this account. The matter may be taken up on the next date of hearing”.

8. On 12.06.2007, during the hearing, Shri Lalit Mohan submitted vide his letter dated 21.5.07 vide a bound booklet containing his covering letter and annexures running into 50 pages to prove his contention that Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is Autonomous Institution 100% funded
* This should have been “admissible”.

by the State. The PIO on his part vide letter dated 11.06.06 pointed out that the statement made by him on the previous date of hearing was that the College was an Autonomous Institution not receiving any fund from the State and pointed out a mistake in the order of the Commission where double negative had been used denoting the opposite. This was corrected in the next order of the Commission dated 12.6.07. The College also filed a letter of even date with annexures running from ’urha’ to ‘haha’ in the Court. As both replies were found to be quite extensive, the case was adjourned to 18.7.07 for consideration. On 18.7.07, Sh. Lalit Mohan filed another letter dated 12.07.2007 giving further facts, the main being that although the PIO was contesting for the previous 3 months that the RTI Act was not applicable to it, as it was an autonomous college, the said college had itself, through a public notice in November, 2005 in the Tribune informed the general public that the RTI Act 2005 was applicable to them. He stated that the PIO/APIO was making false statement before the Commission and was harassing the applicant simply because the information asked for by the applicant related to APIO Sh. Gurdeep Singh. He attached a photocopy of the said notice which appeared in the Tribune dated 9.11.2005. He also stated that this notice was published in pursuance of the directions given by the Director, Technical Education and Industrial Training vide its letter No. 4379-4402 dated 7.10.2005 to implement the RTI Act, 2005 in Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda and attached a copy of the said letter dated 7.10.2005 also, in compliance of which direction the matter had been published in the Tribune.

9. On the next date of hearing on 19.9.07, the following orders were passed:-
“Present: Complainant in person.
Shri Surinder Garg, Advocate, on behalf of complainant.
Dr. Daler Singh, PIO of the College and
Sh. Gaurav Sharma, advocate, on behalf of the PIO.
Order:
Arguments heard from both sides. Sh. Surinder Garg, Advocate represented the complainant and Shri Gaurav Sharma, Advocate represented the PIO. Documents rendered by them have been taken on record. Both of them have been asked to give copies of the documents given to the Commission to each other in the Court. However, the PIO stated that they would like to give written arguments for which they wanted some time, which was agreed to. Written arguments may be given at least one week before the next date of hearing.
Adjourned to 21.11.2007.”

10. In pursuance thereof, Shri Lalit Mohan gave another letter dated 5.12.07 duly indexed (with annexures 1-23 pages). The PIO also gave his letter dated 3.12.07 with annexures (1-12 pages). The case was adjourned to 5.3.08 since new documents had been presented. On 5.3.08, Dr. Daler Singh, PIO, who was just recovering from a severe attack of Jaundice was taken ill at the time of hearing and therefore arguments could not take place. The case was adjourned to 30.4.08 for arguments. On 30.4.2008, the following orders were passed:-

Present: Sh. Lalit Mohan complainant in person.
Dr. Daler Singh, PIO-cum-Principal
Sh. Jasdeep Singh, Advocate
Order:
Sh. Lalit Mohan presented his oral arguments as well as a letter dated 30.04.2008 containing some further documents and concluded his arguments on behalf of the respondent college. The PIO Dr. Daler Singh presented a letter addressed by the Dr. Harpal Singh, Principal to the Technical Education Minister, Punjab-cum-Chairman, Board of Governors, Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda along with annexures on behalf of the college. Sh. Jasdeep Singh, Advocate also presented his arguments based on the same communication addressed to the Technical Education Minister and concluded his arguments.

2. After hearing arguments of both parties the judgment was reserved. Both parties will be informed of the date of announcement of the order in advance.

3. It was pointed out by the complainant that in annexure 5 of the letter sent by the Principal of College to the Technical Education Minister the following words occur:-
“A case is under consideration with Hon’ble State Information Commissioner Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj, I.A.S. u/s definition (h) vide CC 203/2007.

She is also fully agreed that status of College is an autonomous body and not a public authority. Hence, College is not required to supply or provide such information under Right to Information Act 2005.

At present the case is adjourned to 30.04.2008 for arguments (copy enclosed).”
Further it is also stated that :-

“Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Punjab, Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj, I.A.S. has also verbally advised to the undersigned to take the permission of withdrawal of the implementation RTI Act 2005 from our Board of Governors at the earliest
Sd/-
Public Information Officer”

These words occur in the letter addressed by the PIO to the Principal Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology.

4. It is further observed that in annexure 6 Sh. Gaurav Sharma advocate for S.S Bhinder Advocate has written the following communication to the Principal GZSCET, Bathinda,
“Sub:- Clarification regarding Implementation of R.T.I. Act-2005. CC No. 203 of 2007.

I am appearing in the above noted case on behalf of the college. During the proceeding before Hon’ble State Information Commission, Punjab an observation was made by the Ho’ble bench that in case the college society is independent and self financing i.e not getting any aid or grant from State Govt. than why the college is implementing the Act?

Now, in view of the above observation you may do the needful to further strengthen our stand before the bench.”

In view of the above it is necessary for the undersigned to clarify that observations of the Bench have not been correctly understood. The observations of the Bench were in the context of the active as well as the passive acquiescence of the College authorities to all orders received from the Govt. in respect of application of the Right to Information Act to the said College including appointment of PIO, Appellate Authority etc. and wide publicity in the press etc. It had been observed that in case the said college wished to adopt a stance that it was autonomous, having freed itself from its moorings to the State Govt. and having become completely financially independent and as such could choose its own course of action, the resolution of the Board of Directors of the said autonomous College was required to be produced in support thereof. To this extent, the remarks subscribed to the undersigned have been misconcluded, since the matter regarding whether the said college is a Public

Authority under the Right to Information Act or not is the matter which is before the Commission for decision at present. The PIO should correct* his record and the reference to the State Technical Education authority accordingly.
Judgment reserved.”

*letter dated 5.6.08 was later received setting the record straight.

11. I have gone through the entire record on file, the documents produced by both sides and have also given careful consideration to the point of views and arguments put forth by Counsel of both the parties.

12. In the first place the present complaint is only in respect of application dated 21.11.06 in which information had been asked for by Sh. Lalit Mohan regarding complete promotion case from the rank of Superintendent to the rank of Deputy Registrar in respect of Sh. Gurdeep Singh. This clarification is necessary because the reply of the PIO dated 22.1.07 vide which the information was denied to Shri Lalit Mohan stated “the information asked by him in respect of Sh. Gurdeep Singh, Dy. Registrar and Shri Jagdeep Singh Sidhu, SDE cannot be provided as per legal advice obtained from the Advocate”. Two cheques bearing Nos. 858253 and 858254, /addressed to the Principal, Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda, both dated 1.12.06 for Rs. 500/- each were also returned along with the above advice rejecting his application. There was no complaint filed by Shri Lalit Mohan in respect of information sought regarding Shri Jagdeep Singh Sidhu, SDE, pending before the Commission in the present case, nor is there any reference to any such official named Shri Jagdeep Singh in the legal advice dated 1.12.06, tendered by Shri Harraj Singh Advocate. Neither is it in order to dispose of two separate RTI applications by a single order unless the information asked for in both cases is identical.

13. The present case is with respect to complaint dated 27.1.07 made by Shri Lalit Mohan purely in respect of his application under RTI Act dated 21.11.06 (which concerns papers regarding promotion of Sh. Gurdeep Singh only).

14. The point regarding the legal advice not being considered appropriate or acceptable by the Bench in the present case had already been made in the order of the very first hearing dated 24.4.2007. It was after the rejection of the legal opinion, as the basis for rejection of the RTI application, that the new point had been raised for the first time by the PIO, that the said institution was a Autonomous Institution, not in receipt of any fund from the Punjab Government.

15. From the various papers placed on record by the Management, there is no doubt that the college is an Autonomous Institution in every manner, being completely self-financing, recruiting its own staff, and competent to take its own decisions. The controlling body is the Board of Governors in which, no doubt, the government is strategically represented through Ex-officio Directors, but has its’ say only through its Directors on the Board. The Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology as well as 4-5 other similarly placed Institutions had been originally set up and established with State finances by the government and were run by it and had later been encouraged to become self sufficient by gradual withdrawal of funds/grants till nil level was achieved. Later they were also made autonomous and registered as Independent Societies. However, none of them appear to have severed completely the umbilical chord with the government, possibly because of the perceived advantages.

16. When letter no. 4379-4402 dated 7.10.05 regarding adoption of the RTI Act, 2005 was addressed to them for compliance report by the Director Technical Education and Industrial Training Department (Technical Wing) Punjab, Chandigarh all appeared to have acted upon the directions and sent their compliance report along with copies of the advertisement published, to the Director Technical Education and Industrial Training in compliance of the same. The aforesaid instructions dated 7.10.05 were conveyed to all autonomous colleges making the RTI Act, 2005 uniformally applicable to all and was addressed to the Principal Shaheed Bhagat Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Ferozepur, Principal, Beant Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Post Box No. 13, Gurdaspur, Principal,Giani Zail Ssingh College of Engg. & Tech., Bathinda, Principal, Malout Institute of Management and Information Technology, Green Field Enclave,Malout, Principal, Hira Singh Bhathal Institute of Engg. & Tech., Lehra Gagga.

17 On its part, the, Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda fell in line/ complied with the directions. Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda itself vide advertisement placed in the Tribune in Chandigarh, New Delhi, Jalandhar Edition of Wednesday, November 9, 2005, stated as under:-
“GIANI ZAIL SINGH COLLEGE OF ENGG. & TECH.
(AN AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTE ESTABLISHED BY GOVT. OF PUNJAB”)
DABWALI ROAD, BATHINDA- 151001
INFORMATION FOR PUBLIC UNDER RIGHT TO INFORAMTION
ACT, 2005
In terms of Section 4(1) (b) and 4(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, the general public is informed that Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Tech. Bathinda has been established by the Government of Punjab and is controlled by a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The College provides Technical Education in emerging area of Engineering and Technology and manages its affairs by the Board of Governors under the Chairmanship of Hon’ble Technical Education Minister, Punjab.
The programmes in the college provide both lateral entry and vertical mobility at Degree level and PG level of education and at present the college offer programmes in Engineering & Technolgoy viz. degree and post graduate (ME/M.Tech). Seven disciplines graduate courses namely (1) Mechanical Engineering (2) Electric Engineering (3) Civil Engineering (4) Electronic and Communication Engineering (5) Agriculture (6) Computer Science and Engineering (7) Textile Engineering and three disciplines Post Graduate Courses namely 1) Mechanical Engineering (2) Civil Engineering (3) Electronic and Communication Engineering. The college has also department of Applied Sciences (applied mathematics, applied physics, applied chemistry, humanities and English) and department of Training and Placement besides Central Workshop and Computer Centre.

The academic work of college is carried out by the faculty which is supported by technical, administrative and other staff.

The Administrative Department consists of several sections which are headed by the incharge of particular section.

The college is following its own rules as per college bye-laws as well as the Punjab Government, Civil Services Rules in all service matters. The college is affiliated to the Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar.

At present, Smt. Rajinder Kaur Bhattal, Hon’ble Deputy Chief Minister and Technical Education Minister, Government of Punjab is the Chairperson of the Board of Governors and Dr. Harpal Singh is holding the charge of Principal. Dr. R.K.Bansal, Prof. and head, Department of Electrical Engineering is the Public Information Officer and Sh. T.S.Nagi Sr. Assistant, Assistant Public Information Officer.

The college has developed its own website principalgzscet@yahoo.co.in. and information has been provided on the same website.

The important contact numbers of the college are as under :-
Sr. No. Name & Designation Office Residence
1. Dr. Harpal Singh, Principal 01642-280985 01642-280164(Fax), 01642-280794
2. Dr. R.K.Bansal, Professor 01642-281745 01642-218322

Sd-
Dr. Harpal Singh, Principal

18. It is quite clear from the evidence provided by Shri Lalit Mohan, that in response to his RTI applications made to the Principal, Malout Institute of Management and Information Technology, Green Field Enclave, Malout, and to the Principal, Hira Singh Bhattal Institute of Engg. & Tech., Lehra Gaga, they both confirmed that the provisions of the Act were being complied with by them.

19 In so far as Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Tech., Bathinda is concerned, it has not only published its stance in the newspaper that the RTI Act, 2005 is applicable to it and informed all persons of the fact and of the identity of the Public Information Officer and Assistant Public Information Oficer appointed by the college there under, but has also been complying with the provisions thereof by giving information to all information seekers not only earlier to the present application, but also after the matter of it being an autonomous institution was raised before the Bench. That is only correct as neither has a stay been applied for, nor obtained by the PIO from any authority against the implementation of the provisions of the Act.

19-A At one stage the PIO had stated that the institution was not subject to the RTI Act, since it did not qualify as ‘Public Authority’ under definition of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. However, information was being supplied “voluntarily” to the public. At another place, the PIO had mentioned that the college had “inadvertently” issued the said advertisement without appreciating the implications thereof. The PIO stated that the normal working of the office had been disrupted due to the flood of RTI applications, a large majority filed by the same Complainant. Therefore Dr. Harpal Singh, Principal of the College had made a reference to the Technical Education Minister, Punjab-cum-Chairman of the Board of Governors of Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Tech. Bathinda vide letter dated 28.4.2008 seeking exemption under the Act. This letter was written by the Principal to the Chairman on a reference by the PIO based upon the present case under consideration. (The impression created in the said reference that a suggestion had been given that exemption be sought in respect of application of the Right to Information Act, 2005 to said College, at the behest of the undersigned, was dispelled thoroughly in the order of the Commission dated 30.4.08, earlier reproduced in extenso in para 10 (pages 7 to 8).
The relevant extract reads :-

“it is necessary for the undersigned to clarify that observations of the Bench have not been correctly understood. The observations of the Bench were in the context of the active as well as the passive acquiescence of the College authorities to all orders received from the Govt. in respect of application of the Right to Information Act to the said College including appointment of PIO, Appellate Authority etc. and wide publicity in the press etc. It had been observed that in case the said college wished to adopt a stance that it was autonomous, having freed itself from its moorings to the State Govt. and having become completely financially independent and as such could choose its own course of action, the resolution of the Board of Directors of the said autonomous College was required to be produced in support thereof. To this extent, the remarks subscribed to the undersigned have been misconcluded, since the matter regarding whether the said college is a Public Authority under the Right to Information Act or not is the matter which is before the Commission for decision at present. The PIO should correct* his record and the reference to the State Technical Education authority accordingly.
Judgment reserved.”
*letter dated 5.6.08 was later received setting the record straight.

20 It is observed that whether it was a conscious or thoughtless decision of the College to adopt/accept the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 as applicable to itself, the fact remains that as things go, at present, the said Act is clearly and squarely applicable to the said College and whether adopted ‘inadvertently’ or ‘voluntarily’, the applicability is required to be uniform and cannot be on a “pick and choose” basis. The exemptions for the information required to be supplied as available in Section 8 & Section 7(9) of the RTI Act are nonetheless available to the college authorities. In the letter dated 5.6.08, the PIO has once again informed that a self speaking proposal has been sent to the Chairman of the Board of Governors which is under consideration to withdraw the implementation of the RTI Act, 2005 by this college.

21 It is observed that whether the GZSCET is or is not subject to the jurisdiction of the RTI Act, 2005 cannot be decided at the behest of the PIO, who has moved a proposal in this behalf, or achieved by this Institution through an interpretation by this Bench. It needs a decision by the institution itself. The Institution is Autonomous and has itself proclaimed that it is implementing the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, it is for the Board of Governors in its collective wisdom, to decide whether it wants to avail itself of the advantages of being an Autonomous Institution in every way, by breaking free or it wants to keep itself moored to the government and fall in line/adopt the policies of the government, including that of accepting the RTI Act, 2005. The Right to Information Act, 2005, is one of the most progressive pieces of Legislation of the day. As the matter stands today, I am of the view that the RTI Act remains applicable to the said Institution until an unequivocal decision is taken by the Competent Authority i.e. the Board of Governors to reverse the earlier acceptance of the Act.

22 Coming to the present matter, I am not convinced that giving of the information asked for by Sh. Lalit Mohan under items 1-4 of his application dated 21.11.06 will by itself, in any way endanger the life of Sh. Gurdeep Singh, although no doubt, Sh. Gurdeep Singh can have occasion to feel upset and the fact that the file regarding his promotion matters should be opened up before hostile eyes would be galling for anyone in his position, but under the RTI Act there is no scope for “prestige” issues. The papers are required to be made transparent and available. Even if it is presumed or there is any apprehension that because of the information being made available, adverse consequences will follow for Sh. Gurdeep Singh, it is still the prerogative only of the Competent Authority in the Executive, to take action in respect of any complaint made by Sh. Lalit Mohan in consequence thereof, or redressal of any perceived grievance which Sh. Lalit Mohan may be nursing.

23. Coming to the plea of the Complainant for imposition of penalty under Section 20(1) of the
Act for delay in supply of information, the RTI application of the Complainant was admittedly received on 21.11.06 by the PIO and the reply (rejecting his request) was provided to him on 22.01.07 i.e. after 61 days, which is 30 days over and above the stipulated period in Section 7(1) of the Act. From the RTI application, it is clear that no proof of initial fee of Rs. 10/- required to be deposited with the application had been attached by the Complainant. As per letter dated 01.12.06 written by Sh. Lalit Mohan he admits that he sent his cheque was dated 01.12.2006. He states “I handed over application with the above said reference to APIO Mr. Gurdeep Singh on 21.11.06 in the presence of Principal, GZSCET, Bathinda in the office of the Principal, GZSCET, Bathinda with a request to let me know the fee there and then only. I was assured that I will get the information regarding the fee within a week but approx ten days have passed but no information regarding the fee has been given to me, now I am depositing the fee with the following detail cheque no. 858253 dated 01.12.2006 Bank Central Bank GZSCET, Bti. amount Rs. 500/- only.” The cheque for Rs. 500/- is presumably to cover the initial application fee, as well as amount to be paid for documents applied for as per his own estimation of the cost. The college has taken a plea in its letter dated 12.02.07 that Sh. Lalit Mohan had intentionally deposited the fee through cheque, although he had earlier also been applying for information and had been paying the fee through the approved mode by depositing the amount in the bank account of the college or through Bank draft. This reason had not been quoted by the College in the letter of rejection dated 22.01.07.

24. Notwithstanding the fact that the cheque was not encashed, or fee credited through the approved mode, it can be taken that the cheque for potential payment of the initial fee of Rs. 10/- was available with the college on 01.12.06 (although it was later returned uncashed). The RTI application becomes complete only when initial application fee of Rs. 10/- accompanies to the application, so taking a liberal view regarding the technical infirmity in the mode of payment of fee, the application can be said to be dated 01.12.06 in place of 26.11.06. Taking the RTI application to be dated 01.12.06 and date of the rejection as 22.01.06, the period amounts to 51 days. After discounting the 30 days stipulated period there is a delay of 21 days.

25. The PIO is required to give a reply within the stipulated period, one way or the other. In the present case he has given a reply rejecting the application. While doing so, no doubt that he has not done it as per the provisions of Section 7(8) of the Act, by providing the reasons for the rejection, the period within which an Appeal against the rejection could be made or the particulars of the Appellate Authority. Neither has Section 8 or any clause thereof been cited for rejecting the application. However, the letter of Sh. Gurdeep Singh dated 03.10.06, given well before the RTI application dated 21.11.06. citing danger to his or his family’s life due to threats made by Sh. Lalit Mohan, was considered serious enough by the PIO to seek legal advice from an advocate, who advised against supplying the information. By way of abundant caution the PIO also thought fit to make a reference for guidance to the State Information Commission on 19.12.2006 which was received as per his statement on 22.01.2007. It cannot be said that the said PIO/College was needlessly, intentionally not moving in the case at all, or was just sitting on the application without taking any action on it. It is quite another matter that the decision of the said college has been overruled by the Bench, but the PIO was well within his rights to take the decision in his best judgment which he took in view of the administrative exigencies and his interpretation of the Act. It cannot be said that there was any malafide in so doing and the delay in the decision has been adequately explained. It does not call for penalty as he has been able to establish reasonable cause for the delay. Even otherwise, this point was not urged by the Complainant or his Counsel and therefore, no show cause notice under Section 20(1) had even been issued to the PIO.

26 However, since the delay has occurred, the PIO is hereby directed to supply the full information sought by Sh. Lalit Mohan free of cost as per the provision of Section 7(6) of the Act within 10 days of the receipt of this order. In case the Complainant does not receive the information within this period, the Complainant is free to get the matter re-opened through a simple letter addressed to this Bench.

27. Complainant, Sh. Lalit Mohan and the PIO were informed vide written notice dated 01.06.2009 and telephonic calls made through the Private Secretary to Sh. Lalit Mohan and to the Registrar of the College that the judgment would be pronounced on Friday, the 5th June, 2009 at 11.30 AM in chamber.

28. Today, the case has been called twice. On behalf of the PIO/Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda Prof. Raja Singh Khela, PIO-cum-Assistant Professor (Electrical) appeared. He presented his appointment order as PIO w.e.f 09.04.2009. Complainant, Sh. Lalit Mohan has not appeared himself or through any representative.

29. Operative part of the judgment was read out and the judgment was announced. A copy was provided to the PIO. A copy of the judgment should be sent to the Complainant Sh. Lalit Mohan through registered post.

Sd-
(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj)
State Information Commissioner

Rupinder Garg Advocate versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor (Court No-2), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Rupinder Garg, Advocate,
VPO – Phul Town,
District Bathinda – 151104.
--Complainant
Vs.
Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Tech.,
Dabwali Road, Bathinda – 151001.
-- Respondent

CC No. 372 of 2009

Present: i) None on behalf of the complainant .
ii) Sri Raja Singh Khela, PIO-cum-Principal.
ORDER
Heard.
The respondent states that the information required by the complainant has been provided to him vide his letter No. 2277 dated 29-4-2009.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
30th April, 2009 Punjab

Sh Vivek Lecturer versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek, Lecturer,
Deptt. of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Respondent

CC No. 20 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Vivek complainant in person.
ii) Prof. Raja Singh Khela, Asstt. Professor (Electrical) on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent states that their petition filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging the finding of the Commission that Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is a public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, has been withdrawn and the required information has been given to the complainant. The complainant has confirmed that the information has been received by him.

The respondent further states that action to withdraw his other two civil writ petitions No. 832 & 859 of 2009 has also been initiated by the College authorities.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
23rd April, 2009 Punjab

Sh Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur.
__________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Respondent

CC No. 266 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Prof. Raja Singh Khela, Asstt. Professor (Electrical) on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent states that the information required by the complainant has been given to him vide his letter dated 21.04.2009. The complainant is not present. Apparently, he is satisfied with the information supplied to him.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
23rd April, 2009 Punjab

RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,Ludhiana-141001.
________ Complainant.
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Respondent

CC No. 372 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii)Prof. Raja Singh Khela, Asstt. Professor (Electrical) on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent states that the information required by the complainant has been given to him vide his letter dated 21.04.2009. The complainant is not present. Apparently, he is satisfied with the information supplied to him.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
23rd April, 2009 Punjab

Sh Suraj Parkash Bansal versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor (Court No-2), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Suraj Parkash Bansal,
# 424, Kamla Nehru Nagar,
Bathinda ' 151001.
___________Complainant

Vs.
Public Information Officer,
O/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Tech.
Dabwali Road, Bathinda ' 151001.
__________ Respondent

CC No. 481 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of complainant.
ii) Sh. Simranjit Singh, Steno-Typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has informed the Commission that the Hon’ble High court of Punjab and Haryana has stayed the findings of the Commission that Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Tech., Bathinda is a public authority within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act.
In view of the above, this case is adjourned sine die. Fresh notices will be issued to the parties after the Hon’ble High Court has taken a decision in the matter.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
16th April, 2009 Punjab

Sh Vivek Lecturer versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek, Lecturer,
Deptt. of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Complainant
Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Respondent

CC No.20 of 2008

Present:
i)Sh. Vivek and Sri Lalit Mohan, on behalf of the complainant.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has informed the Court vide his letter dated 21.01.2009 that following the Courts orders dated 04.12.2008, in which it has been found that the respondent is a public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005 and directing the respondent to give the information required by the complainant within a period of 30 days, the required information has been sent by the PIO to the complainant vide his letter No. 71 dated 02.01.2009. The complainant however submits that no such letter has been received by him and despite their having approached the respondent in a written communication, informing that the letter has not been received by them, no copy thereof has been provided to him, with the result that the complainant still has not received the information for which he had applied.

In the meanwhile it has come to the notice of the Court vide a communication from the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, that the orders of this Court dated 04.12.2008 have been challenged by the respondent in a writ petition filed in the Hon’ble High Court, which has stayed the orders till the next date of hearing, on 18.04.2009.
In view of the above, no further action, at present, can be taken in this case. Adjourned to 10.00 AM on 23.04.2009 for further consideration.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
12th February, 2009 Punjab

Sh RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. __________ Respondent

CC No.372 of 2008

Present:
i Sh. R.S. Arora, complainant in person.
ii None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
Despite the finding of the court contained in its orders dated 04.12.2008 that the respondent is a public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005 and the directions issued in the Court’s orders that information required by the complaint must be given to him within a period of 30 days, the complainant states that no information has still been received by him.
In the meanwhile it has come to the notice of the Court vide a communication from the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, that the orders of the Court dated 04.12.2008 have been challenged by the respondent in a writ petition filed in the Hon’ble High Court, which has stayed the orders till the next date of hearing, on 18.04.2009.

In view of the above, no further action, at present, can be taken in this case. Adjourned to 10.00 AM on 23.04.2009 for further consideration.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
12th February, 2009 Punjab

Sh Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur.
__________ Complainant
Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
__________ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER

It has come to the notice of the Court vide a communication from the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, that the orders of the Court dated 04.12.2008 have been challenged by the respondent in a writ petition filed in the Hon’ble High Court, which has stayed the orders till the next date of hearing, on 18.04.2009.

In view of the above, no further action, at present, can be taken in this case. Adjourned to 10.00 AM on 23.04.2009 for further consideration.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
12th February, 2009 Punjab

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Complainant
Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Respondent

CC No.20 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Vivek and Sri Lalit Mohan, on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Dr. Daler Singh, Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,

ORDER

Heard.
Making his submissions on the issue of whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is a public authority or not, the respondent submits that the College was set up by the Government as a Government College of Engg. but was later made autonomous with the registration of a society under the Societies Registration Act, to which the College was transferred. He also submits that the College does not get any grant from the Government and two of the members of the Board of Governors are private persons. For these reasons, he submits that the College is not a public authority as defined under the RTI Act.
The Complainant on the other hand has submitted a copy of a notification issued by the Principal of the College on 09.11.2005, which was published in the daily ‘The Tribune’ on that date, disclosing information suo motto in terms of Section 4(1)(b) and 4(2) of the RTI Act, 2005. It is also conceded by the respondent that the College is bound by the directions and guidelines issued to the Engg. Colleges in the State by the Department of Technical Education of the Govt. of Punjab. The control and supervision exercised by the Government over the College is further emphasised by the fact that the Minister for Technical Education is the Chairman of the Board of Governors and the Secretary Technical Education, Director, Technical Education and Finance Secretary of the Punjab Government are members of the Board of Governors. In view of the self proclamation of the respondent that it is a public authority under the RTI Act, and the control and supervision exercised by the State Government over the College, I rule that Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is a public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
The respondent is accordingly directed to give a point-wise response to the complainant to his application for information dated 16.11.2007 within a period of 30 days from today. It is made clear that since the supply of the required information in this case has been inordinately delayed, the information will be supplied by the respondent free of cost.
Adjourned to 10.00 AM on 12.02.2009 for confirmation of compliance.


(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
December 4, 2008 Punjab

Sh RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001.
________ Complainant.
Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
__________ Respondent

CC No.372 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Dr. Daler Singh, Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,

ORDER

Heard.
Making his submissions on the issue of whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is a public authority or not, the respondent submits that the College was set up by the Government as a Government College of Engg. but was later made autonomous with the registration of a society under the Societies Registration Act, to which the College was transferred. He also submits that the College does not get any grant from the Government and two of the members of the Board of Governors are private persons. For these reasons, he submits that the College is not a public authority as defined under the RTI Act.
The Complainant on the other hand has submitted a copy of a notification issued by the Principal of the College on 09.11.2005, which was published in the daily ‘The Tribune’ on that date, disclosing information suo motto in terms of Section 4(1)(b) and 4(2) of the RTI Act, 2005. It is also conceded by the respondent that the College is bound by the directions and guidelines issued to the Engg. Colleges in the State by the Department of Technical Education of the Govt. of Punjab. The control and supervision exercised by the Government over the College is further emphasised by the fact that the Minister for Technical Education is the Chairman of the Board of Governors and the Secretary Technical Education, Director, Technical Education and Finance Secretary of the Punjab Government are members of the Board of Governors. In view of the self proclamation of the respondent that it is a public authority under the RTI Act, and the control and supervision exercised by the State Government over the College, I rule that Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is a public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
The respondent is accordingly directed to give a point-wise response to the complainant to his application for information dated 10.01.2008 within a period of 30 days from today. It is made clear that since the supply of the required information in this case has been inordinately delayed, the information will be supplied by the respondent free of cost.
Adjourned to 10.00 AM on 12.02.2009 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
December 4, 2008 Punjab

Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur.
__________ Complainant
Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
__________ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Dr. Daler Singh, Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,

ORDER

Heard.
Making his submissions on the issue of whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is a public authority or not, the respondent submits that the College was set up by the Government as a Government College of Engg. but was later made autonomous with the registration of a society under the Societies Registration Act, to which the College was transferred. He also submits that the College does not get any grant from the Government and two of the members of the Board of Governors are private persons. For these reasons, he submits that the College is not a public authority as defined under the RTI Act.
The Complainant on the other hand has submitted a copy of a notification issued by the Principal of the College on 09.11.2005, which was published in the daily ‘The Tribune’ on that date, disclosing information suo motto in terms of Section 4(1)(b) and 4(2) of the RTI Act, 2005. It is also conceded by the respondent that the College is bound by the directions and guidelines issued to the Engg. Colleges in the State by the Department of Technical Education of the Govt. of Punjab. The control and supervision exercised by the Government over the College is further emphasised by the fact that the Minister for Technical Education is the Chairman of the Board of Governors and the Secretary Technical Education, Director, Technical Education and Finance Secretary of the Punjab Government are members of the Board of Governors. In view of the self proclamation of the respondent that it is a public authority under the RTI Act, and the control and supervision exercised by the State Government over the College, I rule that Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda is a public authority as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
The respondent is accordingly directed to give a point-wise response to the complainant to his application for information dated 28.09.2007 within a period of 30 days from today. It is made clear that since the supply of the required information in this case has been inordinately delayed, the information will be supplied by the respondent free of cost.

Adjourned to 10.00 AM on 12.02.2009 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
December 4, 2008 Punjab

Sh Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. ____ Complainant

Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001 __________ Respondent
CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii)Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno-typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Despite the issue of orders of the Court dated 16-10-2008 that arguments will be heard on 20-11-2008 on the issue whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda, is a public authority or not, the respondent has not appeared in the Court and has sent a steno-typist, Sri Balvinder Ram as his representative, who obviously has no idea of the issue involved. There is no option but to adjourn the case for this purpose and this case is accordingly adjourned to 10 AM on 4-12-2008 for arguments on the point whether the respondent is a public authority as defined in the RTI Act. It is made clear that if the respondent is not present with his arguments on the next date of hearing, there would be no alternative before the Court but to take a decision exparte.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
November 20, 2008 Punjab

Sh RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001 __________ Respondent

CC No.372 of 2008

Present:
i)None on behalf of the complainant.
ii)Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno-typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Despite the issue of orders of the Court dated 16-10-2008 that arguments will be heard on 20-11-2008 on the issue whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda, is a public authority or not, the respondent has not appeared in the Court and has sent a steno-typist, Sri Balvinder Ram as his representative, who obviously has no idea of the issue involved. There is no option but to adjourn the case for this purpose and this case is accordingly adjourned to 10 AM on 4-12-2008 for arguments on the point whether the respondent is a public authority as defined in the RTI Act. It is made clear that if the respondent is not present with his arguments on the next date of hearing, there would be no alternative before the Court but to take a decision exparte.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
November 20, 2008 Punjab

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001.
____________ Complainant
Vs.

Dr. Daler Singh.
Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent
CC No.20 of 2008

Present:
i) Sri Lalit Mohan, on behalf of the complainant.
ii)Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno-typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Despite the issue of orders of the Court dated 16-10-2008 that arguments will be heard on 20-11-2009 on the issue whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda, is a public authority or not, the respondent has not appeared in the Court and has sent a steno-typist, Sri Balvinder Ram as his representative, who obviously has no idea of the issue involved. There is no option but to adjourn the case for this purpose and this case is accordingly adjourned to 10 AM on 4-12-2008 for arguments on the point whether the respondent is a public authority as defined in the RTI Act. It is made clear that if the respondent is not present with his arguments on the next date of hearing, there would be no alternative before the Court but to take a decision exparte.
The complainant has come prepared with written arguments, a copy of which has been handed over to the representative of the respondent for his information.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
November 20, 2008 Punjab

Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. ____ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. _____ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER

The judgment in CC-203/07 has not yet been delivered.
This case is being adjourned since 29-2-2008 for the reason that the question whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda, which is the respondent in this case, is a public authority or not, is under the consideration of another Bench of this Commission in CC-203/2007. It has now been almost eight months but the above mentioned issue has still not been decided in CC-203/07.
In the above circumstances, this court will take up the issue involved on its own and the parties are therefore directed to appear in the Court on the next date of hearing and to come prepared for arguments on the point whether the respondent is a public authority as defined in the RTI Act, or not.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 20-11-2008 for further orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
October 16, 2008 Punjab

RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dabwali Road,Bathind __________ Respondent


CC No.372 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER

The judgment in CC-203/07 has not yet been delivered.
This case is being adjourned since 29-2-2008 for the reason that the question whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda, which is the respondent in this case, is a public authority or not, is under the consideration of another Bench of this Commission in CC-203/2007. It has now been almost eight months but the above mentioned issue has still not been decided in CC-203/07.
In the above circumstances, this court will take up the issue involved on its own and the parties are therefore directed to appear in the Court on the next date of hearing and to come prepared for arguments on the point whether the respondent is a public authority as defined in the RTI Act, or not.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 20-11-2008 for further orders.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
October 16, 2008 Punjab

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent

CC No.20 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER

The judgment in CC-203/07 has not yet been delivered.
This case is being adjourned since 29-2-2008 for the reason that the question whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda, which is the respondent in this case, is a public authority or not, is under the consideration of another Bench of this Commission in CC-203/2007. It has now been almost eight months but the above mentioned issue has still not been decided in CC-203/07.
In the above circumstances, this court will take up the issue involved on its own and the parties are therefore directed to appear in the Court on the next date of hearing and to come prepared for arguments on the point whether the respondent is a public authority as defined in the RTI Act, or not.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 20-11-2008 for further orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
October 16, 2008 Punjab

Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. ____ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. _____ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The judgment in CC-203 of 2007 has not yet been delivered.
In the above circumstances, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 16-10-2008 for further consideration and orders, by which date it is expected that the judgment in CC-203/2007 will have been given.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
September 11, 2008 Punjab

RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dabwali Road,Bathind __________ Respondent

CC No.372 of 2008

Present:
Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The judgment in CC-203 of 2007 has not yet been delivered.
In the above circumstances, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 16-10-2008 for further consideration and orders, by which date it is expected that the judgment in CC-203/2007 will have been given.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
September 11, 2008 Punjab

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent


CC No.20 of 2008


Present:
Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The judgment in CC-203 of 2007 has not yet been delivered.
In the above circumstances, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 16-10-2008 for further consideration and orders, by which date it is expected that the judgment in CC-203/2007 will have been given.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
September 11, 2008 Punjab

Direct Admission at College Campus Under Fee Waiver Scheme and Vacant Seats

Direct Admission at College Campus Under Fee Waiver Scheme & Vacant Seats

(A) Direct Admission Under Fee Waiver Scheme For B. TECH/B.ARCH (2008-2009 Session)

The Governor of Punjab is pleased to accord admission to the B. Tech./ B.Arch. Courses under tuition fee waiver scheme for women, economically weaker and physically handicapped (PH) meritorious students, as per the Punjab Govt. Notification no. 13/60/08-ITE2/3797, dated 27.08.08. The counseling for admission shall be held as per the following schedule.

Civil Engineering - Woman Seats: 2 PH: 1 Economically Weaker: 3
Mechanical Engineering- Woman Seats: 2 PH: 1 Economically Weaker: 3
Electrical Engineering- Woman Seats: 2 PH: 1 Economically Weaker: 3
Electronics & Communication- Woman Seats: 1 PH: 1 Economically Weaker: 2
Textile Engineering- Woman Seats: 1 PH: 1 Economically Weaker: 1
Computer Science & Engineering - Woman Seats: 2 PH: 1 Economically Weaker: 3
Architecture- Woman Seats: 1 PH: 1 Economically Weaker: 1

• Only Residents of Punjab (in terms of Punjab Government Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (PP II Branch) letter no. 1/3/95-3PPII/9619, dated 6th June 1996) will be eligible for admission under this scheme.

• Under Economically Backward category, family income of parents of applicant should not be more than 2.5 Lacs per annum. Applicant should submit Income Certificate issued only by the concerned Tehsildar/ Executive Magistrate with office number and seal. No other certificate/affidavit etc. shall be accepted.

• The applicant should submit Certificate of Physically Handicapped as per the Punjab Govt, guidelines.

• The applicants, other than the Economically Weaker category shall have to deposit other College dues of Rs. 20,000/- approximately at the time of admission.

(B) ADMISSION FOR VACANT SEATS (RESERVED CATEGORIES)

Admission to the following vacant seats in the reserved categories in the various branches of B.Tech. and B.Arch. shall also be held on September 11, 2008 after the Admission under category `A` above.

Branch

Civil Engineering – Total Seats - 07
Mechanical Engineering– Total Seats - 04
Electrical Engineering– Total Seats - 20
Elect & Comm. Engineering– Total Seats - 03
Textile Engineering– Total Seats - 09
Computer Science & Engineering– Total Seats – 05

(C) ADMISSION FOR VACANT SEATS (GENERAL CATEGORY)

Counselling for admission to some vacant seats in the general category in the various branches of B.Tech. and B.Arch. shall be held as per the following schedule:

The seats falling vacant in `B` category above shall be de-reserved and offered to the general category candidates. The actual number of seats available in each branch shall be notified before the beginning of the Counselling.

General Note:

-> Last Date of Receipt of Applications for categories A and B is September 10, 2008 by 5:00 P.M and the Date of Counselling is September 11, 2008 at 10:00 A.M.

Last Date of Receipt of Applications for category C is September 11, 2008 by 5:00 P.M and the Date of Counselling is September 12, 2008 at 10:00 A.M.

The order of preference for admission shall be as follows: i) CET ii) AIEEE iii) 10+2 pass with Non Medical subjects

• Eligibility for admission to B.Arch. : 10+2 (with Math and English) with 50% marks for general category and 45% marks for reserve category or 3 year diploma recognized by Centre/ State Govt, with 50% marks, and NATA score. Merit will be prepared in a ratio of 50:50 of qualifying exam and NATA.

The application form may be obtained from the Reception Counter of the College free of cost.

The candidate must present himself in person at the time of counseling and deposit fee of Rs. 42,000/- approx. at the time of admission under category B&C.

The candidate will have to submit original documents at the time of counseling.

Sd/-(Principal)

Giani Zail Singh College Of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda

Contact Nos.: 0164-2283025, 2282491 Ext. 211, 0164-2280985
Fax: 0164-2280164

Sh Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. ____ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. _____ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Only the respondent is present.
It is learnt that the hearings in CC-203 of 2007 have been completed and the judgment has been reserved by the Hon’ble SIC, Smt. Rupan Deol Bajaj.
In the above circumstances, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 11-9-2008 for further consideration and orders, by which date it is expected that the judgment in CC-203/2007 will have been given.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
August 7, 2008.

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent

CC No.20 of 2008

Present:
Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Only the respondent is present.
It is learnt that the hearings in CC-203 of 2007 have been completed and the judgment has been reserved by the Hon’ble SIC, Smt. Rupan Deol Bajaj.
In the above circumstances, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 11-9-2008 for further consideration and orders by which date it is expected that the judgment in CC-203/2007 will have been given.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
August 7, 2008. Punjab.

RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dabwali Road,Bathind __________ Respondent


CC No.372 of 2008

Present:
Sri Balvinder Ram, Steno typist, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Only the respondent is present.
It is learnt that the hearings in CC-203 of 2007 have been completed and the judgment has been reserved by the Hon’ble SIC, Smt. Rupan Deol Bajaj.
In the above circumstances, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 11-9-2008 for further consideration and orders by which date it is expected that the judgment in CC-203/2007 will have been given.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
August 7, 2008. Punjab.

Sh RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dabwali Road,Bathind __________ Respondent

CC No.372 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER
Neither the complainant nor the respondent are present.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 7-8-2008 for further consideration and orders. The respondent is directed to be present on the next date of hearing in case a decision has been given by the Commission in CC No. 203 of 2007 before that date.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated 26th June, 2008

Sh Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. ____ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. _____ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Kheta Ram,complainant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Neither the complainant nor the respondent are present.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 7-8-2008 for further consideration and orders. The respondent is directed to be present on the next date of hearing in case a decision has been given by the Commission in CC No. 203 of 2007 before that date.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated 26th June, 2008

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent

CC No.20 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER

Neither the complainant nor the respondent are present. The complainant has requested for an adjournment.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 7-8-2008 for further consideration and orders. The respondent is directed to be present on the next date of hearing in case a decision has been given by the Commission in CC No. 203 of 2007 before that date.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated 26th June, 2008

Sh RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Dabwali Road,Bathind __________ Respondent

CC No.372 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER
The issue whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Bathinda, is a public authority under the Government of Punjab or not is still pending in the Court of Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj. This case is accordingly adjourned to 10 AM on 26-6-2008 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
22nd May, 2008

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent


CC No.20 of 2008

Present: None

ORDER

Neither the complainant nor the respondent are present.
The question whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Bhatinda is a public authority as defined under the RTI Act, is under consideration by the Bench of Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj, in CC-203/2007.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 26-6-2008 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 15th May 2008

Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. ____ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. _____ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Kheta Ram,complainant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Heard.
The complainant has informed the Court that the case CC-203/2007 is still pending for a decision in the Court of Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj.
This case accordingly is adjourned to 10 AM on 26-6-2008 for further consideration and orders.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 15th May 2008

Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. ____ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. _____ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Kheta Ram,complainant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Heard.
The complainant has informed the Court that the case CC-203/2007 is still pending for a decision in the Court of Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj.
This case accordingly is adjourned to 10 AM on 26-6-2008 for further consideration and orders.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 15th May 2008

Lalit Mohan versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Lalit Mohan
S.R. House, Opp. Personal Point,
100 Ft. Road, near Ghore Wala Chowk, Bathinda ......Complainant

Vs.

PIO/.O/o Registrar
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology
Bathinda .....Respondent.


CC No-203- 2007:

Present:
Sh. Lalit Mohan complainant in person.
Dr. Daler Singh, PIO-cum-Principal
Sh. Jasdeep Singh, Advocate

Order:

Sh. Lalit Mohan presented his oral arguments as well as a letter dated 30.04.2008 containing some further documents and concluded his arguments on behalf of the respondent college, the PIO Dr. Daler Singh presented a letter addressed by the Dr. Harpal Singh, Principal, Technical Education Minister, Punjab-cum-Chairman, Board of Governors, Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology, Bathinda along with annexures on behalf of the college. Sh. Jasdeep Singh, Advocate also presented his arguments based on the same communication addressed to the Technical Education Minister and concluded his arguments.

2. After hearing arguments of both parties the judgment was reserved. Both parties will be informed of the date of announcement of the order in advance.

3. It was pointed out by the complainant that in annexure 5 of the letter sent by the Principal of College to the Technical Education Minister the following words occur:-
“A case is under consideration with Hon’ble State Information Commissioner Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj, I.A.S. u/s definition (h) vide CC 203/2007.

CC-203/2007

She is also fully agreed that status of College is an autonomous body and not a public authority. Hence, College is not required to supply or provide such information under Right to Information Act 2005.

At present the case is adjourned to 30.04.2008 for arguments (copy enclosed).”

Further it is also stated that
“Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Punjab, Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj, I.A.S. has also verbally advised to the undersigned to take the permission of withdrawal of the implementation RTI Act 2005 from our Board of Governors at the earliest
Sd/-
Public Information Officer”
These words occur in the letter addressed by the PIO to the Principal Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology.

4. It is further observed that in annexure 6 Sh. Gorav Sharma advocate for S.S Bhinder Advocate has written the following communication to the Principal GZSCET, Bathinda,

“Sub:- Clarification regarding Implementation of R.T.I. Act-2005. CC No. 203 of 2007.
I am appearing in the above noted case on behalf of the college. During the proceeding before Hon’ble State Information Commission, Punjab an observation was made by the Ho’ble bench that in case the college society is independent and self financing i.e not getting any aid or grant from State Govt. than why the college is implementing the Act.
Now, in view of the above observation you may do the needful to further strengthen our stand before the bench.”

In view of the above it is necessary for the undersigned to clarify that observations of the Bench have not been correctly understood. The observations of the Bench were in the context of the active as well as the passive acquiesence of the College authorities to all orders received from the Govt. in respect of application of the Right to Information Act to the said College including appointment of PIO Appellate Authority etc. and wide publication in the press etc. It had been observed that in case the said college wished to adopt a stance that it was autonomous, having freed itself from its moorings to the State Govt. and having become completely financially independent and as such could choose its
CC-203/2007

own course of action, the resolution of the Board of Directors of the said autonomous College was required to be produced in support thereof. To this extent, the remarks subscribed to the undersigned have been misconcluded, since the matter regarding whether the said college is a Public Authority under the Right to Information Act or not is the matter which is before the Commission for decision at present. The PIO should correct his record and the reference to the State Technical Education authority accordingly.
Judgment reserved.

Sd/-
(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj) State Information Commissioner
30.04. 2008.
(Uma)

RS Arora versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. R.S. Arora,
B-34/10863, New Patel Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001. ________ Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. __________ Respondent

CC No.372 of 2008

Present:
None on behalf of the complainant
Sh. Balvinder Ram, Clerk, . on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has sent a written intimation to the Commission that the question whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bhatinda, is a public authority as defined in the RTI Act, is under adjudication in the Court of SIC, Hon’ble Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj, and the next date of hearing in that case is
30-4-2008, and the present case may therefore be adjourned to a date after 30-4-2008.
The request of the respondent is reasonable and the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 22-5-2008 for consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 10 th April , 2008

Kheta Ram versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Kheta Ram,
Vill. Chriwala Dhanna,
Tehsil Fazilka, District Ferozepur. _________________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology,
Bathinda. ________________ Respondent

CC No.266 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Kheta Ram,complainant in person.
ii)None on behalf of the respondent

ORDER

Heard.
The respondent has informed the Commission that as has been recorded in the orders of this Court dated 29-2-2008 in CC-20 of 2008, the question whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bhatinda, is a public authority as defined under the RTI Act, is under consideration by the Bench of Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj, in CC-203 of 2007 in which the next date of hearing is 30-04-2008.
This case accordingly is adjourned to 10 AM on 15-5-2008 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 28th March, , 2008

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent

CC No.20 of 2008

In continuation of the Court’s orders dated 29-2-2008, you are hereby informed that this will not be heard on 4-4-2008. Since the next date of hearing in CC-203 of 2007 is 30-4-2008, this case is adjourned to 10 AM on 15-5-2008 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 28th March, , 2008

Lalit Mohan versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No.32-33-34, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Lalit Mohan,
S.R.House, Opp. Personal Point,
100 Ft. Road, near Ghore Wala Chowk, Bathinda. Complainant

Vs.

PIO, O/O,Registrar,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. &
Technology, Bathinda. .....Respondent

CC No-203 - of 2007:

Present:
Sh. Lalit Mohan Complainant in person alongwith
Advocate Sh. Surinder Garg.

Dr. Daler Singh, PIO-cum-Principal, Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. &Technology, Bathind
Sh. Gurdip Singh APIO-cum-Dy. Registrar Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. &Technology, Bathinda a.


Order:

Since Dr. Daler singh, PIO was not well, arguments could not take place.
Adjourned to 30.4.08 for arguments.

Sd/-
(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj)
State Information Commissioner

5.03.2008

Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Vivek,
Lecturer,
Deptt. Of Mech. Engineering,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Principal,
Giani Zail Singh College of Engg. & Technology,
Bathinda-151001. ____________ Respondent

CC No.20 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Vivek, complainant in person.
ii) Sh. Gurdip Singh, Dy. Registrar-cum-APIO..

ORDER

Heard.

The question whether Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Bhatinda is a public authority as defined under the RTI Act, is under consideration by the Bench of Hon’ble State Information Commissioner, Mrs. Rupan Deol .Bajaj, in CC-203/2006. It would be advisable to take up this case for hearing after the decision of the Hon’ble SIC in the afore mentioned case has been delivered.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 4-4-2008 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
29th February, 2008

Shri Lalit Mohan versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Shri Lalit Mohan ......Complainant
Vs.

PIO/O/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engg.&Tech. Bathinda .....Respondent.


CC No-203-of 2007:

Present:
Complainant in person.
Shri Surinder Garg, Advocate, on behalf of complainant.
Dr. Daler Singh, PIO of the College and
Sh. Gaurav Sharma, advocate, on behalf of the PIO.

Order:
Arguments heard from both sides. Sh. Surinder Garg, Advocate represented the complainant and Shri Gaurav Sharma, Advocate represented the PIO. Documents rendered by them have been taken on record. Both of them have been asked to give copies of the documents given to the Commission to each other in the Court. However, the PIO stated that they would like to give written arguments for which they wanted some time, which was agreed to. Written arguments may be given at least one week before the next date of hearing.

Adjourned to 21.11.2007.
SD:
(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj)
State Information Commissioner
September 19, 2007.

RANJIT SINGH Vs GANDA SINGH and ORS RFA 688 of 1994


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 7.09.2009

Ranjit Singh ..Appellant
Vs.
Ganda Singh and Ors. ..Respondents

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod K.Sharma

Present:
Mr., Advocate, for the appellant. Sumeet Mahajan, Sr.Advocate, with Mr.Amandeep Singh
Mr.Rajan Bansal, Advocate, for the respondents.
---
Vinod K.Sharma,J. (Oral)
This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 12.11.1993 passed by the learned Additional District Judge Bathinda on a reference made under section 30 read with section 31 (2) of the Land acquisition Act,
1894 (for short the Act) for proportionment of compensation in respect of the award No.2 of 1987 announced on 26.8.1987.

The land measuring 43 bighas 10 biswas was acquired by the Government for setting up Government Engineering College, Bathinda.

Total compensation awarded including the costs of land building plus statutory claims of solatium interest etc came to Rs.14,87,497.18 P. (Rupees fourteen lacs eighty seven thousand, four hundred ninety seven and Paise eighteen only. Out of this amount a sum of Rs.3,67,145.31P (Rupees three lacs sixty seven thousand one hundred forty five and Paise thirty one only was paid to Ganda Singh; Rs.3,66,014.31 P (Rupees three lacs sixty six
thousand and fourteen and paise thirty one only to Smt. Balbir Kaur and Rs, 2,76,912.72 P (Rupees two lacs seventy six thousand nine hundred twelve and Paise seventy two only) to Ranjit Singh. Remaining amount of Rs..4,77,424.84p (Rupees four lacs seventy seven thousand four hundred twenty four and paise eighty four only) was deposited in the court in view of the dispute regarding title and compensation.

Though the court referred to the inheritance of vendor of the appellant and the respondent, however, there is no need to make any reference to it as it is not in dispute that Sapal, Ram Nath and Amar Nath sold 51 kanals of land through registered sale deeds Ex.D.1 to D.3 to Ganda Singh, Smt. Balbir Kaur and Ranjit Singh equally i.e. 1/3rd share each.

` Ranjit Singh appellant filed reply on 28.1.1989 admitting the partition between him and Ganda Singh and Smt. Balbir Kaur and further admitted that the compensation be paid to them.

However, while filing a reply to the claim of Ganda Singh and Smt. Balbir Kaur, he took a somer-sault claiming that he was also entitled to compensation with Ganda Singh and Smt. Balbir Kaur, and that a fraud was played on him by Ganda Singh and Smt.Balbir Kaur, by taking his signatures on blank papers filed reply to the notice under section 9(2) of the Act, admitting claim of family settlement inter se. It was also the case set up that Ganda Singh and Smt. Balbir Kaur did not give him the land which they agreed to give at the time of family settlement. Reference was also made to the order dated 26.5.1971 wherein the parties were held to be co-owners to the extent of 1/3rd share each. Learned lower court held that Rehabilitation Department got delivered possession of acquired land to Amar Nath, Ram Nath, Sat Pal, Ram Saran Dass and Tilak Raj on 24.9.1969, who further transferred possession to their vendees.

On issue No.2 it was held that order dated 26.5.1971 was passed by the Rehabilitation Authorities correctly, thus, held that Tilak Raj
had no claim. On issue No.3 it was held that Tilak Raj, Ram Saran Dass etc. were given delivery of joint possession.

Learned court also held that at the time of sale in favour of Ganda Singh etc., Amar Nath etc were in exclusive possession as co-sharers and handed over possession to Ganda Singh etc. Other issues were also answered on appreciation of evidence, but for the purpose of this appeal we are concerned only with issues No.6 to 12 which read as under:-

“6. Whether Ranjit Singh admitted in his reply filed to the notice u/s 9 of the Acquisition Act that compensation of 43 Bighas 10 Biswas of Khasra No.4222 be paid to Ganda Singh etc alone before the Collector, if so, its effect? OP Ganda Singh

7. Whether the amount of Rs.2,76,212.72P was not paid to Ranjit Singh and the same has been falsely shown having been paid to him in the award? OP Ganda Singh

8. Whether Munshi Ram was the Karta of the joint family consisting of Munshi Ram, Tilak Raj and Ram Saran Dass if so, what was the effect of sales made by Munshi Ram as Karta on the rights of Amar Nath etc. OP Ganda Singh

9. Whether the land sold by Amar Nath etc. to Ganda Singh etc. and Sobha Singh was much less than their share in the entire allotted land, if so its effect? OP Ganda Singh

10. Whether the claim of Ranjit Singh is barred and this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the same? OP Ganda Singh

11. Whether Ganda Singh etc. had played a fraud on the rights of claimants Ranjit Singh, if so, it s effect? OP Ranjit Singh

12. Whether Ranjit Singh was the owner of 1/3rd share of land 43 Bighas 10 Biswas of comprising Khasra No.4222? OP Ranjit Singh
Issues Nos.6 and 12 were taken up together, and by holding that there was a family partition between the parties were decided in favour of Ganda Singh. Issue No.7 was decided against Ganda Singh, whereas on issue No.8 it was held that the findings on this issue was not to affect the rights of Ganda Singh etc who were held to be co-sharers of the land. Issue No.9 was also decided in favour of Ganda Singh, whereas issue No.10 was decided against Ganda Singh and it was held that Ranjit Singh had the jurisdiction to file a claim.

However, issue No.11 was decided against Ranjit Singh for want of any evidence on alleged fraud.

On issue No.13, on appreciation of evidence and pleadings of the parties it was held, that the acquired land measuring 43 bighas 10
biswas comprised in Khasra No.4222 was the ownership of Ganda Singh and Smt. Balbir Kaur, at the time of acquisition on the basis of valid sale deeds Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.3. It was held that it was Ganda Singh and Smt. Balbir Kaur who were entitled to compensation and Ranjit Singh had no right to claim any share therein.

Mr.Sumeet Mahajan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, vehemently contended that the judgment and
decree passed by the learned court below cannot be sustained as admittedly the land was purchased by Ganda Singh, Smt. Balbir Kaur and Ranjit Singh in equal shares, therefore, appellant had claim to 1/3rd share in the compensation. The contention of the learned senior counsel was that the oral partition and the family settlement was not proved, nor it was depicted in the revenue record, therefore, the finding of learned Additional District Judge, Bathinda on issue No.12 deserved to be set aside.

Mr.Rajan Bansal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, supported the findings recorded by the
learned court below, primarily on the ground that it was not in dispute that Ranjit Singh was given better portion of land near the city in lieu of his share, which he sold of by claiming himself to be exclusive owner under the oral partition. Learned counsel for the respondent further contended that in reply to the notice Ranjit Singh had admitted that there was a family partition and that acquired land was under the ownership of Ganda Singh and Smt. Balbir Kaur.. On consideration of matter, I find no force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant.

Once it was admitted by Ranjit Singh that under a partition he was given portion of the land which was near the city which he sold by
claiming himself to be exclusive owner.

Furthermore, his admission in reply to the notice, left no manner of doubt, that the joint property was partitioned by way of family settlement and parties were put in possession
of their respective shares by determining the value of the land. Merely because the oral partition was not depicted in the revenue record could not lead to a conclusion, that there was no partition specially in view of the
clear admission by Ranjit Singh about oral partition, and also the fact that he sold the land which fell to his share by claiming himself to be exclusive owner.

The findings recorded by the learned lower court are based on appreciation of evidence. There is no illegality, which may call for
interference by this court in this appeal.

Appeal is accordingly ordered to be dismissed but with no order as to costs.

(Vinod K.Sharma)
Judge

Shri Lalit Mohan versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Shri Lalit Mohan ......Complainant
Vs.

PIO/ O/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda
.....Respondent.


CC No-203-of 2007:

Present:
Shri Lalit Mohan, complainant in person.
Shri Gaurav Sharma, Advocate, for College-Respondent

Order:

Counsel for the Respondent-College states that he has been engaged for this case only today. He seeks time to study the case.

Shri Lalit Mohan complainant has stated that he has sent letter No. LMS/CM/Supdt/109 dated July 12, 2007 giving further particulars in respect of his arguments that the College is a ‘Public Authority.’ (Not on file. Reader may correct and place on file.)

Adjourned to September 19, 2007.


SD:
(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj)
State Information Commissioner
July 18, 2007.

Sh Lalit Mohan versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Lalit Mohan ---Complainant.

Vs.

PIO/O/o Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda.
---Respondent.

Complaint Case No-203 -2007:

Present:
Shri Lalit Mohan, complainant in person.
Shri Daler Singh, P.I.O. for the Respdt-College.

Order:

Shri Lalit Mohan filed his reply and sought papers vide his letter dated May 21, 2007 with five annexures (10 pages). The College has, vide its letter dated June 11, 2007 with annexures running from Ura to Hahaa filed in Court today.

As both the replies are quite extensive, the case is adjourned to July 18, 2007.

SD: SD:
(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj) (Mrs. Ravi Singh)
State Information Commissioner State Information Commissioner
June 12, 2007.

SANDEEP KUMAR Versus STATE OF PB CWP 3859 of 2003



Vivek versus Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology Bathinda (Bhatinda)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Vivek

Vs.

GZS College of Engineering & Technology, Bathinda.


Complaint Case No. CC-293-2006:


Present:
None for the complainant.

Shri Daler Singh P.I.O. for the respondent-Deptt.
Shri Gurdip Singh A.P.I.O. with him.

Order:

The Public Information officer has stated in court that the information required by the complainant has since been supplied to him vide Memo No.862 dated October 31, 2006, which has been acknowledged by the complainant his No. SPL/VK/10126 dated November 01, 23006 addressed to the State Chief Information Commissioner with copy to the P.I.O. Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Bathinda. The application for information has, therefore, been replied to the full satisfaction of the complainant. It is heartening to note that as a result of this application, the said College has suo motu reviewed the matter and the seniority list issued vide office letter No.12385 dated March 04, 2006 has been withdrawn and Shri Vivek has been given back his old seniority over Shri Jasbir Singh Tiwana, which had been interfered with under a mistaken interpretation of the rules.

It is observed that under the Right to Information Act, 2005, to bring about transparency in the function of the government/Competent Authority the individual has been given a right to seek information and has a right to get the correct information. For removal, of perceived grievances, the complainant can approach the Competent Authority for the removal thereof. However, seeking

Complaint Case No. CC- 293 '2006
information by itself can bring the matter to the conscious knowledge of the Competent Authority, which may even, without a complaint being made upon realization that a mistake which has been committed, rectify it on its own. This is laudable. This court appreciates the action of the Public Information Officer and the Management.
The matter is thus satisfactorily disposed of in terms of the detailed order of this Commission dated September 27, 2006 as read with order of date.

SD:-
(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj)
State Information Commissioner

Sports is more about steely nerves than brute strength

STRONG willpower is one of the strong points of Mr Nitin Gautam. Recently, this student of the DAV Institute of Engineering and Technology here won the Punjab Technical University Inter-College Cross Country Championship.

The event was held last Saturday at the Shaheed Bhagat Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Ferozepore, where as many as 95 students from various PTU colleges of the state participated. The event was a 12-km race for men held on the main roads of Ferozepore. The race culminated at the college campus.

This second year student of BTech in Electronics and Communication Engineering, has now been selected for the national level championship to be held at Chennai on December 10. He said that he, along with his friend, Balwinder Singh, was now practising for the final round of the championship.

He had participated in the same event last year also and won it. But he failed to make to the national level. "But this time I feel I am more confident and determined to win prizes at Chennai. The DPE of my college, Mr Baljinder Singh Bal, and my coach, Mr Darshan Singh, have been the motivating force. I think I am improving," he says.

"Whenever I am competing, I say it to myself that I can win it and I can do it. This really helps. My coach is very strict. When we make mistakes, he makes sure that we don t repeat them and that we learn from those mistakes," he adds.

It s not just physical strength that is important during races, mental endurance, too, is equally important. "I have seen boys who give up even before crossing the 100-mt mark. They lose confidence," he explains.

"But my worst experience has been at the Cross Country event held at the Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Bathinda, last year. Some participants used unfair means to win the race. Some of them used a motorbike to finish the race fast," he added.

He has also been a part of the basketball team of the college for the past two years, but athletics is his forte. He gives the credit of his success to his principal, Mr C.L. Kochher, who, he said, ensured that all sportspersons got good training and good diet.

Engg college principal charged with duping lakhs

Bathinda, March 13, 2009

Just a few days after the authorities of the Giani Zail Singh College of Engineering and Technology (GZSCET) were booked in a recruitment scam, a lecturer of the college has asked the district police to book the principal and the deputy registrar of the college for blackmailing and duping her of around Rs 4 lakh.

In a written application to the SSP, Bathinda, Suman Kathuria, a lecturer in Humanities and Management, accused principal of the college Harpal Singh and deputy registrar Gurdeep Singh of committing fraud and causing mental harassment.

She stated that she had joined the college as a personal assistant to the principal on September 6, 1990, through direct recruitment and the deputy director in question had joined as senior assistant in 1994. He was junior to her in status and scale. In 2000, both of them had applied for the posts of registrar and deputy registrar but the interview was not held. In 2001, Gurdeep, in connivance of the then principal Narinder Singh, in order to make his way clear for the post influenced her to apply for a lecturer in Humanities and Management.

Later in February 2007, her appointment was set aside by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In the meantime, Gurdeep managed to get promoted as deputy registrar as he had already sidelined her by pushing her into teaching line. In a fix then, she requested the college authorities to adjust her among non-teaching staff.

She alleged that Harpal had, through Gurdeep Singh, forced her to pay Rs 50,000 in July 2007, Rs 1 lakh in February 2008, Rs 1.5 lakh in August 2008 and Rs 70,000 in September 2008 to get adjusted to the post of a lecturer, on which she was working at present. Then, she was given an appointment letter but was not allowed to join.

Suman further alleged that Gurdeep again sought a bribe of Rs 1 lakh, which she refused to pay. Still, she was issued second appointment letter but again was not allowed to join.

Later, Gurdeep took the two letters from her and asked her to join some other department with a condition that appointment was subject to ratification/approval by the board of governors. She added that now, the deputy registrar had been exerting pressure on her to pay Rs 1 lakh for the ratification of appointment letter.

In her complaint to the SSP, she urged to book the deputy registrar in question under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

On the other hand, deputy registrar Gurdeep Singh in his written statement has refuted all allegations. He counter alleged that the complainant was blackmailing him. Principal Harpal Singh, however, could not be contacted for his version despite several attempts.

SSP Ashish Chaudhary, when contacted, said, The police is investigating the matter in detail.



Some other Colleges in Punjab
Muktisar Institute of Higher Education, Muktsar
Plot no. 688, 697, 980, 998
Jalalabad Road
Muktsar (District Muktsar)
Punjab
Punjab Institute of Oriental and Indian Languages, Patiala

Patiala (District Patiala)
Punjab
Baba Dyal Singh Memorial Teacher Training Center, Kotkapura
Faridkot Road
Kotkapura (District )
Punjab
Malwa ITC, Burar
Near Patran
Burar (District Patiala)
Punjab
ITFT-Institute of Tourism and Future Management Trends College, Mohali (SAS Nagar)
vill Hoshiarpur, 10 Km From
Chandigarh on PGI- Mullanpur
Mohali (SAS Nagar) (District Mohali (SAS Nagar))
Punjab



Students voice
Write to us giving good and bad things about your college, we will publish it on this site. email us at punjabcolleges @ gmail.com (without spaces)
© www.punjabcolleges.com : Engineering Colleges and deemed Universities in India      Disclaimer