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


Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana, Punjab



Contact


Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana, Punjab
Address:Ferozepur Road
Ludhiana (District Ludhiana)
Punjab, India
Pin Code : 148001


Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab is a University recognised by UGC. Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab was established on / in 08 July 1963.


Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab is situated in Ludhiana of Punjab state (Province) in India. This data has been provided by www.punjabcolleges.com. Ludhiana comes under Ludhiana Tehsil, Ludhiana District.

Fax # of Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab is 0161-2400955, 2402483, 400945.

Contact Person(s) of the Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab is (are): Dr NK Narda.

Mobile No(s) of concerned persons at Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab are 9996457556, 8054959503.

email ID(s) is Punjab Agricultural University PAU Ludhiana Punjab

Website of Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab is www.pau.edu/, web.pau.edu/.

Chairman : Milkha Singh Aulakh.
Chancellor : earlier General (Retd.) S.F. Rodrigues, now Shivraj Patil.
Vice Chancellor : earlier Dr K.S. Aulakh, now Dr Manjit Singh Kang Res 2401795.

Registrar : Raj Kumar Mahey, Res 0161-2404433, 9815034468.


Contact Details of Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab are : Telephone: +91-161-2400955, 2404433,2403006
Telephone: +91-161-401794, 401795, 404433, EPABX-401960/79,
S. Jaswant Singh Astt. Registrar
S. Nirmal Singh, Superintendent
Telephone: +91-161-400945, 401105 (Prefix 2 if number starting from 4 does not work)
SS Bir, PA to Registrar 9872777348
Director Research: Dr Satibr Singh Gausal
V K Dilawari, Controller of Exams 9872001279
Shyam Murti, PA to Vice Chancellor 9417786867
Noharia Singh, Secretary to VC 9914317255

ITI of PAU in Home Science Dept
College of Home Science Punjab Agricultural University Ludhiana Pin-141004 Phone- 09888668186 Email-vc@pau.edu

Punjab Agricultural University, College Of Agriculture

Business Management dept runs MBA Course. This dept was established in 1971. Head of the department is Dr Yashpal Sachdeva.


Courses

One year certificate course in French, One year Diploma Course in French (Fees for both course Rs 6000 for outsiders, Rs 2000 for PAU students / employees).

PAU-College of Veterinary Science, Ludhiana. Course being run: BVSc, and AH, MVsc, PhD

Garment Making: Hand Embroider
Hospitality: Household Assist.(General)Cook-Baker
Food Processing & Preservation: Basic Food Preservation
Agriculture: Cultivation of Vegetables.


Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab runs course(s) in Agriculture stream(s).

Profile of Punjab Agricultural University PAU

The Punjab Agricultural University was established in 1962 to serve the state of erstwhile Punjab. On trifurcation of Punjab in November 1966, Haryana Agricultural University was carved out of PAU by an Act of Parliament in February 1970. Later, in July 1970, Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidalya was established. In 2006 the College of Veterinary Science was upgraded to become Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Science University (GADVASU) at Ludhiana. The Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) is located on Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana. The city is also world famous for its bi-cycle industry.

Introduction
The Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) in Ludhiana, Punjab is one of the State Agricultural Universities in India. It was established in 1962 and is the oldest agricultural university in India after GBPUA&T, Pantnagar. It has an international reputation for excellence in agriculture. It pioneered the Green Revolution in India in 1960s and is considered as one of the best agricultural universities in Asia. It was bifurcated in 2005 with the formation of Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University. The reputed Vice-Chancellor Dr. K S Aulakh has recently resigned under dramatic situations, and has been replaced by Dr. M S Kang.

The Punjab Agricultural University is a state administered agricultural university in India. It is located in the Ludhiana city of Punjab. The University has carved a niche for itself in the academic cap of the country by winning several awards and honors in its glorious existence. Established in 1962, the University is credited for its pioneering work in ushering in the Green Revolution in India in the 60`s. The University was established on the model of land grant colleges of USA that involves research and extension programme.

Covering an area of 1510 acres the University campus has approximately 4615 acres of land spread over different regional stations, research substations and seed farms situated in six different agro- climatic zones of the state. The University has expanded physical amenities in terms of spacious laboratories, lecture rooms, research farms, advanced instrument farm machinery and also transport and library facilities. It also has playgrounds for the purpose of sports. The University also has one open-air theatre for hosting cultural activities and a student`s home for holding extra curricular activities.

Punjab Agricultural University Distinguished as one of the best agricultural universities in Asia, the faculty members as well as the students of the University have won several national and international awards and honours. It includes prestigious awards like Padma Bhushasn, Padma Shri, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Memorial Prize, Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Award, Hari Om Ashram Trust award, ICAR, Best Teacher Award, Jawahar Lal Nehru Award etc. and several felicitations of scientific academies like Third world academy of sciences, Indian National Science Academy, National academy of Agricultural Sciences and National Academy of Veterinary Sciences for their outstanding contribution in the field.

The University offers five bachelors, fifty-one Masters and forty-two Doctorate programmes in fifty departments of five constituent colleges. The Colleges are College of Agriculture, College of Agricultural Engineering, College of Veterinary Science, College of Home Sciences, and College of Basic Science and Humanities.

This renowned institution is committed to continue the task of providing quality education in the areas of agriculture, veterinary science, agricultural engineering and allied fields and also conduct research that aids in increasing agricultural productivity.

History
Punjab Agricultural University was established in 1962 to serve the state of Punjab. It has also made notable contributions in increasing livestock and poultry production. PAU was awarded the Best Agricultural University award in 1995 on account of its outstanding performance in agricultural research, education and extension. It has also made notable contributions in increasing livestock and poultry production.

Punjab Agricultural University, located in the outskirts of Ludhiana in Punjab, is a key contributor in increasing food grain production in the Punjab State. It is regarded as the initiator of Green Revolution in India. PAU has been modeled on the pattern of land grant colleges in USA, performing the integrated functions of teaching, research and extension in agriculture, agricultural engineering, home science and allied disciplines.

The Punjab Agricultural University was established in 1962 to serve the state of erstwhile Punjab. On trifurcation of Punjab in November 1966, Haryana Agricultural University was carved out of PAU by an Act of Parliament in February 1970. Later, in July 1970, Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidalya was established. In 2006 the College of Veterinary Science was upgraded to become Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Science University (GADVASU) at Ludhiana. The Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) is located in Ludhiana city (Punjab State) in north-west India at a distance of 316 km from New Delhi. It is well connected by road and rail with the national capital. Situated on the Ludhiana - Ferozepur Road, the University covers an area of 1510 acres on its main campus and 4615 acres at the regional research stations. Modeled on the pattern of land grant colleges in U.S.A., the PAU performs the integrated functions of teaching, research and extension in agriculture, agricultural engineering, home science and allied disciplines. The University has well equipped laboratories, library and lecture rooms and elaborate farm facilities. Hostel accommodation is available in the university hostels for single students. Married students, if accompanied by their family members, will have to find accommodation outside the campus.

The PAU has played a key role in increasing food grain production in the Punjab State several folds share its reputation and ushering in an era of Green Revolution in India. It has also made notable contributions in increasing livestock and poultry production. In recognition of its outstanding achievements in agricultural research, education and extension, it was adjudged the Best Agricultural University in India in 1995.

The Punjab Agricultural University now has four constituent colleges, viz. College of Agriculture, College of Agricultural Engineering, College of Home science and College of Basic Sciences & Humanities.

At present the University, through 28 departments in the four constituent colleges, offers 31 Master's and 30 Ph.D. programmes. The course curricula are constantly revised and restructured to keep pace with the latest developments in agriculture and allied fields.

Goals
The Punjab Agricultural University was established in 1962 at Ludhiana on the pattern of land grant colleges of USA with integrated teaching research and extension programme. It is committed to continue improvement in the productivity and profitability of agriculture and allied sectors through the achievement of the following goals.:

* To provide quality education in the areas of agriculture, veterinary science, agricultural engineering and allied fields.

* To undertake basic applied and adaptive research to seek appropriate solutions to emerging problems in agriculture and develop relevant technologies to improve socio-economic conditions of the faring community.

* To develop and effective mechanism for the transfer of technology to the farmers and agricultural organisations through different extension programmes with a view to improve agricultural productivity and economic conditions of rural population.

* To develop appropriate technology for supporting the growth of agro-based industries.


About the Infrastructure
The university campus is spread over an area of 1510 acres and has approximately 4615 acres of land on outlying different regional stations, research substations and seed farms located under 6 different agro-climatic zones of the state.

The university has elaborate physical facilities in terms of building laboratories, lecture rooms, instructional and research farms, modern instrument farm machinery, transport and library facilities.

The University has vast playgrounds for athletics, basketball, badminton, cricket, football, handball, kabaddi, volleyball, and lawn tennis . For hockey there is an Astroturf ground, in addition there is a swimming pool , a Cycling Velodrome and Indoor stadium having the facility of badminton court, table tennis, gymnastic, wrestling and weight lifting . The university has one Open air theatre for holding cultural activities and a students' home for the conduct of miscellaneous extra curricular activities .

It has highly distinguished and qualified faculty of about 1250 members positioned at the main campus as well as regional research stations.

The faculty members and the postgraduate students of the university have won numerous national and international awards and honours such as Padma Bhushasn , Padma Shri, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Memorial Prize, Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Award, Hari Om Ashram Trust award, ICAR, Best Teacher Award, Jawahar Lal Nehru Award etc. and fellowship of the prestigious professional scientific academies / societies like Third world academy of sciences, Indian National Science Academy , National academy of Agricultural Sciences and National Academy of Veterinary Sciences in recognition of their outstanding contributors.

Widely acclaimed as Best Agricultural University in Asia , the PAU has achieved distinguished status at the national and international level. It has played a unique role in ushering green revolution in India and has the distinction of winning the first Best Institution Award of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research for the year 1995. At present the university offers 5 bachelors, 51 Masters and 42 Doctorate programmes in 50 departments of 5 constituent colleges. It also offers Bachelor of Education programme and 5 Diploma programmes in its 5 constituent colleges viz. : College of Agriculture , College of Agricultural Engineering, College of Veterinary Science , College of Home Sciences, and College of Basic Science and Humanities. An Institute of Agricultural has been established at Gurdaspur. In 1988 the university shifted from trimester to semester system and in 1993 from letter grade system to evaluation to 10.00 credit point average scale.

Educational Streams
The university is a leading player in technical education conducting Undergraduate, Master's and PhD programs. The course curriculum is constantly revised and restructured to keep pace with the latest developments in agriculture and allied fields. Extension of education is materialized through Kisan Mela, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Farm Advisory Services, Farm Operations and Facilities for Farmers. Research projects are based on Production of transgenic crops and application of newer tools of genetic engineering for better use of agro-biodiversity, nutritional and other quality attributes to match international standards with emphasizing natural resource management through generation of environment-friendly technologies. Application of Geographical Information System (GIS) and Geographical Positioning System (GPS) for precision farming and management of natural resources is also the key theme of research at PAU Ludhiana. The university has its research centers at several locations in Punjab.

Facilities
The University presents best of facilities as it possesses well equipped laboratories, lecture rooms and elaborate farms. MS Randhawa Library, one of the best libraries in the region, is a five storey building, centrally air-conditioned and surrounded by lush green lawns. The library, which is fully computerized and automated, also networks with other libraries. Internet and photocopying services are available in the library. Accommodation is arranged in the university hostels for students.

Faculties/Departments
* College of Agriculture

* College of Agricultural Engineering

* College of Basic Sciences & Humanities

* College of Home Science

Misson
Excellence in teaching, research and extension.

Developing quality manpower.

Undertaking basic, applied and adaptive research.

Improving socio-economic conditions of the farming community through cost-effective technologies.

Developing effective mechanism to transfer knowledge and technology to farmers and agricultural organizations through extension services

Developing & promoting appropriate technologies for supporting agro-based industries & generating self-employment opportunities for the youth.

Seeking appropriate solutions to emerging problems & challenges.

Stuff



Images / newspaper cuttings related to Punjab Agricultural University PAU

Slow death for Punjabi literature at PAU (Punjab Agricultural University PAU)
News: 21st July, 2014
Slow death for Punjabi literature at PAU
PAU gets Rs 310 crore (Punjab Agricultural University PAU)
News: 17th July, 2014
PAU gets Rs 310 crore

Programme on social evils (News)
Farmers urged to build biogas plants to conserve energy (News)
PAU journal aims to popularise new farm techniques (News)
Course on tissue culture at PAU (News)
Assistant Soil Scientist (Job Vacancy)
Mixed response from PAU scientists (News)
PAU scientist creates vaccine from GM crop (News)
PAU scientist gets US patent (News)
PAU introduces course on tissue culture (News)
PAU plans to set up rain harvesting system (News)
MET MCA (Entrance Test)
PAU Scholar gets National Award (News)
PAU license technology to make aromatherapic clothes (News)
PAU makes new strides in research programmes, VC (News)
Purchase of various types of paper (Tender)
B Tech in Agril Engineering (Admission Notice)
B Tech in Agriculture Engineering (Admission Notice)
Swiss scientist Peter Marty visits agri varsity (News)
Budding biotech scientist award for PAU student (News)
6378 take PAU CET for UG courses (News)
Pallavi Sharma bags first position at PTU (News)
Students suffer as PAU fails to deliver roll no. on time (News)
PAU outsources architecture work at high costs (News)
PAU hostellers sweat under power cuts (News)
MBA Programme (Admission Notice)
PAU made white onion and yellow watermelon (News)
PAU retires association seeks release of pension (News)
PAU course aims at instilling moral values in students (News)
Mechanical training to begin at PAU from May 19 (News)
DC inspect 5 vote counting centres set up at PAU (News)
Degrees conferred on 78 PhD, 313 PG (News)
Hostel washrooms at PAU need urgent repair (News)
Training course on agro industries concludes at PAU (News)
Prof Sarabjeet Singh presents paper on human values in Australia (News)
Students raise awareness about new farming techniques (News)
Cyclist of different age groups take part in races on PAU campus (News)
PAU Parker House in appalling shape (News)
Two years delay in PAU magazine publication upsets students (News)
BSc in Agriculture (Admission Notice)
Twenty Crore granted to PAU by Punjab Govt (News)
PAU eases admission process (News)
Work on Nek Chand Rock Garden restoration at PAU commences (News)
PAu students awarded IRRI scholarship (News)
Hall of fame writing of Ludhiana varsity second VC to be preserved (News)
PAU college starts BSc honours course in interior designing (News)
Students hold awareness rally to use franchise wisely (News)
Ways to expand potato seed production discussed at PAU (News)
Controversy hits PAU over appointment of soil sciences department head (News)
Agri Varsity drops six year agricuture honours program (News)
PAU raises number of seats for UG courses (News)
PAU student bags Int'l scholarship (News)
PAU comes out with high yield rice variety (News)
PAU authorities turn blind eye towards printing press (News)
UG and PG Programme (Admission Notice)
Adopt baby corn cultivation to enhance profit (News)
Sale of prospectus begins at PAU (News)
Students demand immediate repairs road (News)
Khushwant done no work from England (News)
CM advisor intervenes to release pending PAU funds (News)
GTB Dasua drubs PAu (News)
PAU Kisan Mela kicks off at Faridkot (News)
PAu releases 8 new crop varieties (News)
Seminar on rural development at PAU (News)
PAU holds biogas awareness camp (News)
Retired PAU Professor honoured at Gujarat Science Congress (News)
PAU inks MoU with Agrineer food Ltd (News)
PAU students, staff get 29 merit scholarship, six travel grants (News)
Students win bronze medal in national youth fest (News)
PAU College sets up club to create consumer awareness (News)
Students shite at youth fest (News)
48th Annual Athletics meet begins at PAU (News)
Preferential seats in PAU for Africans (News)
PAU scientists get ISWS fellow award (News)
Ex VCs turn down delayed invite (News)
PAU suggests water crisis as thrust area (News)
Former VCs not invited to inaugurated meet (News)
Munafe ki surang banegi PAU ki tunnel (News)
Sair me kamai to tax bhi do bhai (News)
PAU prof held guilty of financial irregularity (News)
Pili kungi di bimari to ghabraun di lod nahi, Dhillon (News)
PAU Management Board vallo kai aham niyuktiya (News)
No Badal in Coffee table book on farming, PAUs draft scrapped (News)
Kali Gajjar Cancer rokan de samarth, Dr Gill (News)
Cancer khatam karegi Punjab black beuty (News)
PAU dumps Rs 9 cr machinery given by ICAR (News)
PAU dumps Rs 9 cr machinery given by ICAR (News)
PAU profs work lends historic tourch to poetry (News)
PAU 2nd alumni meet on December 23 (News)
PAU postpones Saturday exam (News)
Post of seeds director vacant at PAU (News)
PAU comes up with flour for diabetic patients (News)
PAU says no funds to maintain it (News)
Peer review team visits PAU (News)
Experts from Netherlands, POSCON visit PAU (News)
Chrysanthemum show starts at PAU (News)
Chrysanthemum show to be held at PAU (News)
PAU vallo zameen bachao lai lambandi (News)
Unnecessary whip (Advertisement)
17 francis visit PAU (News)
Golden Jubliee celebrated (News)
Audit confirms soil was sold against norms (News)
PAU pensioners to hold protest march today (News)
PAU experts highlight importance of value addition to products (News)
VC inaugurates bio control lab (News)
PAU student gets International award (News)
Production of Honey is 37 percent in Punjab (News)
PTU students flay decision to set faraway centres (News)
Agri Univ to participate in Youth Fest (News)
PAU signs pact to intensify research on potato improvement (News)
50 lakh guarnteed (News)
Colourfull program by B Tech students on Youth fest (News)
Supply of Entomology (Tender)
Trails for Kabaddi world cup conducted at PAU (News)
Shalini Agnihotri cleared IPS exam (News)
University try to make Agricultural machine (News)
PAU signs deals for licensing machines, developing porridge (News)
Harnoor wins table tennis tourney at Agri University (News)
Scientist in Damdama Sahib to save two 17th century trees (News)
PAU team in Takht Sri Damdama Sahib to save 17th century trees (News)
Non exclusive licensing (Advertisement)
B Pharm course started (News)
Narjeet get best actor award (News)
Mann Tadur book released in PAU (News)
Scientist visit PAU (News)
PAU students sell homemade cakes (News)
Audience enjoyed in Youth fest (News)
Clay modelling, debate, mark day 2 of PAU youth fest (News)
PAU grant released (News)
Poster making compitition held (News)
Sri Sri Ravi Shanker mahasatsang at PAU grounds (News)
Additional Director of Research (Job Vacancy)
Ramnath Elected as Chairman of Progressive Front (News)
Students won cricket championship (News)
Construction of Pilot Plant (Tender)
PhD Programme (Admission Notice)
Australian scientist visit PAU (News)
Punjab doubles PAUs budget (News)
Purchase of Spectroflourometer (Tender)
5000 Kisans done suicide in 10 years (News)
PAU visit America and Afganistan (News)
PAU strikes deal with Gujarat firm on Bt cotton hybrids (News)
VC lashes out at farmers (News)
Tempers run high at Kisan Mela, VC lashes out at farmers (News)
Kisan Mela held (News)
PAU passes new wheat variety at emergency meet (News)
Illegal Licence (Public Notice)
PAU accepts students demands, hostellers etc (News)
Students dharna for demands (News)
PAU students meeting with authorities ends on dead note (News)
PAU staff parent a damp squib (News)
Join classes for face action, varsity tells students (News)
Students dharna against Admin (News)
PhD students get Borlaug fellowship (Profile)
Dharna against University Admin (News)
Training course started (News)
Debt relief in name only (News)
Gurudwara Singh Sabha beneficial for students (News)
Students ne bhens ke agae been bajai (News)
Kisan Mela on 10th of Sept (News)
PAU me halaat tanavpuran (News)
Const of Plant Growth Chamber (Tender)
Dharna of PAU students for demands (News)
Students continue till VC cancels punishment (News)
Ludhiana cop caught on camera taking bribe (News)
Extension Workshop (News)
Punjab to resurvey farm suicides (News)
Students boycott classes (News)
Faulty export policy to blame for onion prices (News)
Auction for Store article on guest plant (Advertisement)
Kisan Mela started from 10th of Sept (News)
PAU students boycott classes (News)
PAU campus still in miserable state (News)
Auction for plant (Advertisement)
Experts discuss diversification of farming at agri university (News)
PAU wins district level spelling bee competition (News)
Water sample test (News)
Khushmeet Kaur visit South Korea (News)
Ludhiana whiz who manages billionaires (Profile)
Seminar on Education (News)
Clerks (Job Vacancy)
Dean, Additional Director (Job Vacancy)
Horticulture development officer (Job Vacancy)
Purchase of packaging material (Tender)
Seminar on water conservation (News)
Faremers awards, PAU invites forms (News)
BTech in Agril. Engg (Admission Notice)
Deligation of pensioners met comptroller (News)
5971 students gave JET (News)
Chala marke vadh rahi hai Punjab de adhtiya di kamai (News)
5971 students gave CET exam (News)
PAU me ek seat par 23 umeedvar (News)
Sikhlai camp (News)
Construction of Processing Hall (Tender)
Discussion on PAU pensioners problems (News)
Cotton area stagnates, PAU mulls guar option (News)
PAU Kisan club di mahinavar milni ayojit (News)
More than 1.3 billion tonn food wasted (News)
Dr Sharma speaks on Durdarshan Jalandhar (News)
World wich 1.3 billion tonn food jaiya janda (News)
PAU Estate Officer caught drunk watchman (News)
PAU di vitti halat davadol (News)
MBA Programme (Admission Notice)
PAU ki vitiye halat davadol (News)
Training program for 2 days (News)
Gurbhajan Gill felicitated on retirement (News)
Kisans ko achi kismo ke rice lagane ki apeal (News)
Training to 50 Mahila Kisan (News)
Bibi Karamjeet Kaur new member of PAU Board (News)
PAU ki saska ne manaya Jashan E Bahara (News)
Annual day celebrated (News)
Organic farming to be taught (Profile)
Comptroller and Additional Comptroller (Job Vacancy)
Scholarship to PAU Students (News)
PAU Students get research assistantship (News)
Kheti vann suvanta bare sarvotam kender nu parvangi (News)
PAU me fasal vividhikarn centre manjur (News)
198 crore di lagat naal banaya jayega Centre (News)
Desh da kanun sikha lai anna ho chukka hai, Hera (News)
Jhonna de bijja de rate ghataye (News)
Depression to Dr Surjeet Singh Gill (News)
Jhone de beej di kimat ghatai (News)
America visit PAU (News)
Beej technology me scientist le dilchaspi (News)
Seeds tech me scientist le dilchaspi (News)
Clerk caught for artificial number plate on motor cycle (News)
Scientist visit PU (News)
End of Workshop (News)
Changes in Vacancy (Corrigendum)
BSc in Biotechnology (Admission Notice)
Training to Pashu Palak (News)
Agricultural day celebrated (News)
Hangame ke baad PAU pensioners dofad (News)
Onion of more then 1kg (News)
Jhona diya naviya kisma (News)
Historical tour of Students (News)
Grow vegetables in home (News)
Monsanto's Beachell Borlaug award to Mitali Bansal (News)
Dont term pesticides as poison, PAU Scientist (News)
Students get SBS state youth award (News)
Tuned on crops and seeds (News)
Students won 6 medals in Youth Fest (News)
Additional Director and Asstt Director (Job Vacancy)
Shiv Kumar new member of 4th class union (News)
Kisan Scientist krishi ko apnaye (News)
PAU sells soil for peanuts, buys it at highly inflated rates a month later (News)
Vetan na milne se bhadke PAU employees (News)
300 crores in Budget (News)
Tender sharat di item number 20 da udaya majak (News)
Thekedar nu fayda pahunchaun lai kitta rules nu taar taar (News)
Manukhi sehat te pashu dhan sambhal lai vigyanik pasar jaruri, Dr Taneja (News)
Kisan Mela in PAU (News)
Akarshan ka kender raha Dashmesh solar system ka stall (News)
Kisam Mela kal (News)
Scientist and Teachers ne VC office ghereya (News)
PAU awarded Agriculture Science centre of Muktsar (News)
Teachers and Employees ne VC office ghera (News)
Kisani utpado ki jankari di (News)
Kisano ne li Boparaye ke utpado ki jankari (News)
Standard combine PAU Kisan Mele wich first (News)
Boparaye Motor Starter kisana di pehli pasand (News)
Environmental sambhal and kharach ghatane ka sandesh (News)
Discussion on Environmental care (News)
PAU me Gas Plant sathapit (News)
Vridha se lootpaat karne wale kabu (News)
PAU de Students vallo blood donation camp 19 march nu (News)
Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometery system (Tender)
PAU ne jari ki Basmati ki nayi kisam (News)
PAU vallo basmati di navi kisam jari (News)
Jadi butiyo aur sugandhit faslo ki kashat par diya jor (News)
Kisano ki arthik dasha sudharne hetu Krishi gyan mele jaruri (News)
PAU ke maintenance store me lakho ka ghapla (News)
Hastkala ki vichitar pardarshni lagai (News)
Certificate and Diploma Course in Safe and Judicious use of Pesticides (Admission Notice)
Bharat me Kisano ke liye koi sapasht krishi niti nahi, Jayani (News)
Switch to maize production, PAU VC to paddy farmers (News)
Starting of Kisan Mela (News)
Auction for Vehicles (Advertisement)
PAU vallo Kisan mele di ladi ballowal sekhdi toh (News)
Kisan Camp (News)
PAU ke naye registrar honge P K Khanna (News)
End of Flowers Fair (News)
California de vafad vallo PAU da daura (News)
Sikh Student hairs cut after spearhead (News)
Trace Material Analyzer and Acid Purification Sub boiling Unit etc (Tender)
Jammu Kashmir de Kisana da 5 days Sikhlai course shuru (News)
Dharmik sanstha vivad mamle me 15 par case (News)
Krishi Scientist faslo ki gunvakta badhane ke liye karenge search (News)
5 members of Jarmany PAU ke daure par (News)
PAU ne lagaya jagriti camp (News)
32.51 land on lease (News)
Krishi vigyan kender me navintam takniko ko pardarshni lagai (News)
Hammer through me Sukhchain Singh first (News)
First Kisan Mela in PAU from 1 st March (News)
PAU ko mila 10 cr ka project (News)
Kurukshetra and Lucknow di Hockey teams final wich (News)
PAUs vision 2040 document, running on empty (News)
Naamdhari aikadash ne Ludhiana ko haraya (News)
Vitti vadhe lai haan pakhi hungara (News)
Kisan mele ka PAU ne kiya ailan (News)
PAU vallo fruits and vegetables diya 9 kisma release (News)
Auction Notice for Trees (Advertisement)
University Students bunk the classes (News)
Francis vafad PAU de daure te (News)
Gardners Training Course (Admission Notice)
University Students bunk the classes (News)
PAU Students ne laya dharna (News)
Bhadke Students ne kiya PAU ka gate band (News)
Dharna of PAU Students (News)
BSc agri good for Students (News)
Aaram ke liye mili holidays, bna hacker (News)
Batch ke vilaya par bhadke Students (News)
PAU wich ladkiya agva karn di koshish (News)
Scientist bujurgo ki dekhbhal ke liye denge training (News)
Punjab ke kisano ko nai disha pardan karne me juta (News)
Comptroller and Biochemist etc (Job Vacancy)
University employes karenge VC Office ka gherav (News)
Desh ki sirmour sanstha hai, PAU (News)
PAU me training camp 4 ko (News)
PAU Employes ka sangharsh 33 th day jari (News)
Science seminar in PAU (News)
PAU Enployes da sangarsh 33 th day wich dakhil (News)
Cancer se bachata hai kinnu (News)
Hind Pak vichale kheti upja de apsi vapar nu milega hulara (News)
Sarhad te kheti vikas model usaran di salah (News)
19 members Pakisatani shishtmandal mahanagar pahuncha (News)
PAU de purane students da 2 roja samagam ajj to (News)
PAU mahiro ne dukh bhanjini ka nirakshan kiya (News)
PAU employes union sangharsh 22 th din wich shamil (News)
No move to grab PAU land VC (News)
Naujvana nu murgi pallan da dhanda apnaun da sadda (News)
PAU me Kisan pratik chinh hal sathapit (News)
Meeting of Deputy CM and VC from today (News)
PM and CM sahit 4 shakshiyat doctorate degrees se sammanit (News)
Need time for Environment (News)
PM ne Badal ko janamdin ki badhai diu (News)
Suraksha karmiyo ne nahi hone diya Dr Kalkat ko samaroh me dakhil (News)
Media ki adha darjan points par hui talashi (News)
Mitti ne bhari thi press gallery (News)
PAU Golden jubli convocation ki jhalkiya (News)
Badal completes students demands (News)
My Golden Students (Profile)
PAU gears up for PMs visit today (News)
PM PAU daure ko lekar parshasan agrasar (News)
PM 8 ko ayenge PAU (News)
Opening of Conference (News)
International Conference in PAU Ludhiana (News)
PAU ki 230 zameen par daka durbhagyapurn, Sandhu (News)
Punjab Vikau Hai (News)
Mukharji ke sath 3 Helicopter aye (News)
Prez relishes makki di roti, sarson da saag (News)
Grib desho me abadi and dhan ka utpadan badha (News)
Chairman of Pollution Control Board talk to Scientists of PAU (News)
230 acre property of PAU use for Education (News)
Krishi me naye technology ki jarurat (News)
Those who have done the University proud (Profile)
Golden Jublie Celebration in PAU (News)
Govt eyes PAU centres land to set up edu city (News)
Scientists reached PAU (News)
PAU wich komantri conference da udhghatan (News)
PAU vallo Ganganagar de Kisana nu sikhlai (News)
PAU de VC nu milia Punjab Rattan puraskar (News)
Shabad gayan pratiyogita ka chayan (News)
Agriculture di study school paddar te shuru karn da vichar (News)
Delhi pickle maker takes home PAUs Champion woman farmer award (News)
Agriculture Science centres bare komi conference da udhghatan (News)
PAU me sune Punjab Sarkar Murdabad ke nare (News)
Opening of National Conference in PAU (News)
PAU vallo prali sametan sambandhi machinery di pardarshni (News)
President and PM ayenge PAU (News)
2 baagvan mahiro ko International satar ka samman (News)
Cross Country Championship 2 ko (News)
PAU inks pact with Mexico wheat centre (News)
PAU me dono Punjab ke CM me hogi varta (News)
PAU ke Professor Gupta ka room seal (News)
End of PAUTA meenting (News)
Dharna of Employes on VC Office (News)
Need to raise economic status of farmers (News)
kanak Khoj Program nu hor samarth banaun di lodh (News)
GNDU ne jeeti Hockey Championship (News)
PAU Golden Jubli antar university hockey tournament (News)
Gehu utpadan me Punjab ka hissa ghata (News)
GNDU bani Golden Jubli Champion (News)
End of Hockey Tournament (News)
PAU Golden jubli antar University hockey tournament (News)
GNDU and PAU 4, 4 ki barabari par (News)
GNDU and PAU 4, 4 ki barabari pe (News)
Supercomputer promises pioneering research at PAU (News)
PAU da Punjab di kheti wich aham yogdan (News)
Contrbution in Punjab Agriculture (News)
Controller, Senior Biochemist and Asstt Professor etc (Job Vacancy)
PAU vallo hockey tournament ajj toh (News)
Dr Kalsi awarded with Life time Achievement award (News)
PAU ne Badal ke naam par bane bhavan ka naam badla (News)
Kero di tarah Badal de naam te bhavan nahi (News)
PAU ne 14.96 crore ka Indo izroyal project hasil kiya (News)
Tyoharo ke mausam me ghar bani mithaiyo ka paryog kare (News)
Const. of Office cum Lab Building etc (Tender)
PAU to make low cost sanitary napkins for needy women (News)
End of Youth Fest (News)
Youth Fest me kivz and theatre mukable ayojit (News)
Dr Dhillon awarded with National Award (News)
Youth Fest dhum dhaam naal shuru (News)
Rupit ne kiya Creative dance (News)
University ne uthaya arthik tangi ka mudda (News)
PAU Punjab da nahi samuche Bharat da Maan (News)
PAU ko World Class banayenge, Sukhbir (News)
PAU ne badhaya Punjab ka Maan (News)
Foundation day on Golden Jubli year (News)
Art gallery ayojit (News)
Banda bahadur de naam PAU vikhe Chair sathapit kitti javegi (News)
PhD Programme (Admission Notice)
Painting ke madhyam se jindagi par focus (News)
Poly and Net House banane ki vidhi bare diya prashikshan (News)
Hockey maidan ke beech lagi kursiyo par ja bethe Pawan Teenu (News)
PAU nu bachaun lai Mali madam mangi jaan laggi (News)
PhD Programme 2012 (Admission Notice)
Engg shetar ko samarthan dene ki jarurat (News)
PAU te Albarta di Sikhiya sanstha vichale samjhota (News)
Indian Oil ne BSF ko maat di (News)
Lagat badhne se kheti chorahe par, Pande (News)
Ek mobile call ne muattal karva ditta SDO (News)
PAU vallo nave teachers di niyuktiya (News)
Amritsar winner in Women Hockey league (News)
PAU dvara adhikariyo ki niyuktiya (News)
Kisan Mela in PAU (News)
Annewah jehra toh mukt hovegi basmati (News)
PAU de 2 roja Kisan Mela samapit (News)
Lifes juicy for kinnow queen (Profile)
Natural Resources ko sambhalne ki sakhat jarurat (News)
Opening of Golden Jubli Kisan Mela (News)
Kisan Mela meeh di maar heth (News)
PAU wich ban reha Badal Bhawan (News)
Republic of Ginni ambassador Visit PAU (News)
PAU di jaanch wich v pani de sample fail (News)
PAU de teacher best reseach paper award naal sanmanit (News)
PAU University da Kisan Mela ajj (News)
Gajar buti ki rokthaam ke tips diye (News)
PAU ne laya Faridkot vikhe Kisan Mela (News)
PAU di team ne Pind Isapur wich pani de 8 sample (News)
Khana banaun lai sahi oil te chiknai di varto karo (News)
Na Baba Na, A A O nai banna (News)
Nigeria de vafad vallo Agriculture University da daura (News)
PU ne Africi desho ne talmel badhaya (News)
PAU Hospital wich testing band, pensioner te mulajam preshaan (News)
PhD Programme me karenge sehyog (News)
PAU ne kiya backword class ka kota behal (News)
Research Associate (Job Vacancy)
PAU wich ragging virodhi Committee te uddan dasteya da gathan (News)
PAU ne jangrav ko haraya (News)
Drought, PAU draws up contingency plan (News)
PAU College de pehle deen Dr Grewal sawargvaas (News)
Direct seeding of paddy, Pepsi honours tillers (News)
Fertilizers not cause of uranium in water (News)
Maujbik ki University se PAU ka samjhota (News)
Manjabik di University naal PAU vallo vidiya (News)
Gavoh ke Digital maanchitra wala pehla rajya bna Punjab (News)
Asstt Professor in various streams, Research Engg, Draftsman and Estate Officer etc (Job Vacancy)
Sub Divisional Engg, Tractor Driver and Comptroller etc (Job Vacancy)
Suraksha Guards ko di jayegi Training (News)
Students Masco toh Training laike wapis parte (News)
Rs 189 cr will put PAU on track (News)
CET me bethe 4232 Students (News)
VC vallo Patrol pump te Hostels di checking (News)
Hidden Cameras on PAU doors (News)
Admission test me bethe 1219 Students (News)
Kisana nu salah den wali University da khoj kendar bepravah (News)
Regarding dates (Corrigendum)
University mulajma toh mantri te vidhayak ne votta mangiya (News)
University kamiya da sangharsh 28th din wich dakhil, sarkar khilaf narebaji (News)
Safai sevka vallo University prashasan khilaf rosh pradarshan (News)
BTech and MBA Courses (Admission Notice)
University farm wich naad nu agg lai (News)
Agriculture University ne lagai naad ko aag (News)
PAU nu lodidiyan granta jari kittiya jaan (News)
Graphics Course shuru (News)
University Kamia vallo rosh rally (News)
PAU de adhikariya ne naad sadeya (News)
Const of field lab etc (Tender)
Vishav ki nazar PU par (News)
Agriculture Dept selling paddy seed rejected by PAU (News)
PAU lai vishesh kendri khoj project mangeya (News)
MTech in Remote sensing (Admission Notice)
Six years BSc Agri(Hons) (Admission Notice)
PU pahunch khush huye Australians (News)
Karminder veer and Shalini best debater (News)
Administrative building and Training Hostel etc (Tender)
Rajkaval Singh Dhillon and Pavneet Khara PAU de Sarvotam Athlete bane (News)
PAU di 46th Athletic meet shuru (News)
Khelon se aati hai anushasan ki bhawna (News)
Construction of Building and Green Housess (Tender)
PAU diya Buildings di halat khasta (News)
BSc,MSc and MBA Programmes (Admission Notice)
UG and PG Courses (Admission Notice)
Construction of Bio Control Lab and New Boundary wall etc (Tender)
Kisano ko kudrati tattav bachane ka sandesh dia (News)
PAU can only function through govt funding (News)
PAU ke purane Students ko Advisor banayenge (News)
Na khadkeya Balla te na hoyi khoj sarkar gayi mukh moud (News)
Bagwani Utpadan bdhane ki jarurat (News)
PAU te khumba da mada beej den da dosh (News)
Khetri kendar Bathinda vikhe Kisan mela 14 nu (News)
PAU Board vallo naviya niyuktiya (News)
Varsity kamiya vallo dharna (News)
Bhalla barred from performing after he urges govt to disburse salary on time (News)
Two days Flower Festivel earlier in PAU (News)
Nano Technology se prabhavit hogi Krishi (News)
PAU wich fulla da 2 dina mela shuru (News)
Chief Secretary Punjab da PAU dora (News)
Research takes back seat at PAU (News)
Jado VC ne mulajam jathebandi nu sangharsh wapis len layi keha (News)
Khetibadi Vigyaniya te pasar mahira di 2 roja vichar goshti (News)
University Kameya da Sangarsh 19 ve din ch dakhil (News)
PAU de komantri paddar te malla maran vale Students sammanit (News)
University kamiya ne VC office campus de gate rok ke kitta pradarshan (News)
Ex VC Kang to attend Global Food Security meet (News)
Dr Aulakh and Dr Thind dvara likhi gai kitaab jari (News)
Jaswinder Bhalla nu milega Gopal sehgal sanman (News)
Duniya ko jodti hai kitabe (News)
Azad Kabaddi cup mullapur dakha 10 nu (News)
PAU kisan meleya di ladi wich vadha (News)
PAU Employes vallo rosh rally (News)
DAS atwal nu yaad kardiya (News)
PAU wich returning officers khilaf rosh pradarshan (News)
Convocation in PAU (News)
250 Students ko Degrees mili (News)
PU me france ke deligate ka daura (News)
Francis vafad vallo PAU da daura (News)
Achievements of PAU (Profile)
PAU me sthapit hogi Anaj Janch Lab (News)
Nave gyan da palla fadan layi anushasan di sakhat lod (News)
PAU Hostel me Student ne kia Suicide (News)
PAU layi 2011 reha sankatmai (News)
Auction Notice (News)
PAU karamchari pander Punjab Champion banaya (News)
Shaheed Utpadan wich Punjab Mohri Raj baneya (News)
PAU vallo chiku and avle diya 5 kisma jari (News)
Vivadat Proffessor nu mud action lagaoun di tiyari (News)
Students ne Ru Ba Ru huye Dr Kyum (News)
PAU nu 20 crore release (News)
Sarkar te University Prasashan khilaf ros pradarshan (News)
PAU wich fulla de premiya ne guldaundi show dekheya (News)
PAU Employes form ki jeet (News)
Khetibari College di salana milni wich Pakistan toh 8 membri vafad shamil (News)
14 years ke baad mile Yaar Anmulle (News)
Degree pakar sapno ko lage pankh (News)
49th Annual Alumni Meet (Alumni Meet)
University kamiya vallo Sarkar khilaf Pradarshan (News)
Vigyan kisan and Sarkar ka sumel jaruri (News)
Taalmel badhane me jute umeedwar (News)
PAU Dr V P Sethi nu President Puraskar miliya (News)
Dearest Montu of Dilpinder Singh Chahal (Bhog etc)
Varsity te Golden Jublie jashna de pehle pdah vajjo samaroh shuru (News)
Repair and renovation of Buildings (Tender)
Progressive fund da vivad Suljheya (News)
University kamiya ne Ghereya Thapar haal (News)
Komi te Komantri (News)
BSc Agriculture (Admission Notice)
Anaj Jarurta di Purti layi Bariki wali Kheti bina Gujara nahi (News)
Punjab Agriculture University (News)
Punjab Agriculture University Printing Pressdi Hound Khatre ch (News)
PAU wallo upkulpati Office da Ghirao (News)
PAU Employes union chunav 2 ko (News)
Annual Convocation (Convocation)
PAU de kisan ghar di halat khasta (News)
PAU University kamia di bhukh hadtal (News)
Hun PAU nu Traleya wich Bechne pe rahe ne Seeds (News)
PAU mulajma da Sarkar khilaf rosh dharna (News)
PAU yuvak council vallo Students di bhalayi layi aiham faisle (News)
PAU teyar karega krishi Shabdavli kosh (News)
Kender te Vigyan te Technology Vibhag de Sciencedana wallo PAU da doura (News)
Punjab ki sabse badi Nursery PAU ko dene ki tayari (News)
Technical Staff (Job Vacancy)
Sarkar te University prashasan vichale meeting besitta (News)
PAU employes vallo rosh march, pensioner hamayat te uttre (News)
PAU de mele wich Shabad gayan wich home science college di sardari kayam (News)
Science or Kala ka Mael Jaruri (News)
PAU mulajma da dharna dasve din dakhal (News)
Kheti khoji wali jamin te nahi Pungreya Cricket Stadium (News)
PhD Programme (Admission Notice)
University Hostel di Students nu Satt Baje da time Manjur nahi (News)
Yuva mele me Students ne bikhere rang (News)
PAU di Condition Dawadol (News)
PAU sijenta Company wich khoj te parsar nu majbut karn lai ikrarnama (News)
PAU vibhag vallo ajnala kand de virodh wich rosh dharna (News)
PAU wich mulajma di hadtal shuru (News)
Ph D Programme (Job Vacancy)
Cost of Sarso will be fixed (News)
PAU Pansionors ne ghereya upkulpati Office Campus (News)
PAU de Mulajma di tankha ruki union aggu Badal nu mili (News)
Cardiac surgery performed on infant at JIPMER (News)
University Mulajam jathebandiya di meeting benatija rahi (News)
Fake credentials given for jobs (News)
Farm Manager and Programme Assistant Professors (Job Vacancy)
Upkulpati wallo Kanun Banaoun di Mang (News)
Assistant Proffessor in Rodents and Biotechnology etc (Job Vacancy)
Few rural students can solve two into two finds PAU (News)
PAU Scientists locate a new strain of high yield paddy (News)
Laparwahi se Pollute ho rha hai Environment (News)
Punjabi University ke Raja Bhalindra sports complex me mukkabaji Championship ayojit (News)
PAU ne North agro ko kiya Sammanit (News)
Kheti University de kisan mele diya praptiya (News)
Construction of new Hostel for Boys and Field Lab etc (Tender)
Punjab staff abroad on one way ticket (News)
PAU khoj te Bavikh Mukhi jatan (News)
VC ne liya kisan mele ki tayari ka jayja (News)
Krishi Vigyan kender wich podeya di rakhiya sambandhi Technology Diwas manaya (News)
PAU kamiya di rally wich hangama (News)
Suba Padri Kisan Mela sir te (News)
University mulajma ne ghereya upkulpati office campus (News)
PAU Varsity wich Punjab Sarkar virudh nare (News)
PAU vallo Faridkot kisan mela bhalke (News)
Natak dukh dariya da manchan PAU vikhe 13 nu (News)
PAU de khetri khoj kender ballowal vikhe ek roja kisan mela (News)
Governor held up for an hour in city (News)
PAU VC exhorts farmers to cultivate Basmati rice (News)
PAU vallo Ballowal Sokhdi vikhe kisan mela 8 nu (News)
East or West Punjabi is Best for him (News)
Upkulpati and Mulajma jathebandiya vichale meeting (News)
Nayi Takniki se badhega utpadan (News)
Biotechnology ke istemal par ekjut ho sansthaye (News)
Bhog and Antim Ardas of S Gurdit Singh Kang (Bhog etc)
PAU teachers give Rs one and half Crore to Varsity (News)
Usari ghutaliya di janch layi commety bani (News)
Upkulpati di apil te teachers vallo one and half crore rupaye den da ailan (News)
Chip in to overcome PAU fiscal crunch (News)
August me makki ki buai faydemand (News)
VC Scientists nal rubaru hounge (News)
PAUs astroturf to dress up in blue and pink (News)
After years PAU releases new wheat cotton varieties (News)
Stress on Sustainable agriculture (News)
PAU de upkulpati da auhda Dr Dhillon ne sabhaliya (News)
PAU Kisana di seva wich (News)
Changeri soochna lai 360 degree da drishtikon jaruri (News)
Facebook par snakes ke sath photo dalni padi mehngi (News)
Doctor te durvihar karan da dosh (News)
BSc layi 90 seats arjiya 3580 (News)
PAU kisan club ne kiya VC ka Swagat (News)
Surinder Pal PAU Employs de Chairman bane (News)
DR Baldev Singh Dhillon PAU de Upkulpati Bane (News)
BS Dhillon is new VC of PAU (News)
Dhillon new PAU VC (News)
Change in admission notice (Corrigendum)
Monsoon can be heavy on PAU (News)
Virodi dhira ne sattadhari khilaf kholleya morja (News)
First Barsi of Dilpinder Singh Chahal (Bhog etc)
Hun atta mud daneya wich hovega tabdeel (News)
Change in tender notice (Corrigendum)
Bhog of Baljeet Singh Kahlon (Bhog etc)
Six in the fray for PAU VC post (News)
Upkulpati ne Mulajam aggu da maran varat tudvaya (News)
PAU de Pradan mundi maran varat te (News)
PAU wich ud rahiya ne Sarkari Hukma diya Dhajjiya (News)
I did not humilate Kang CM (News)
Badal humilated me but i saved prime PAU land (News)
Navreet kang PAU de karajkari VC bane (News)
Registrar or IAS lee Sakdee aa charge (News)
PAU da Canada uldas College vichale vidyak khoj karja layi samjhota (News)
Surakheya mulajma ne kheti university de gate nu lock lagaun da ditta ultimate (News)
Kang ja fir koi hor (News)
Upkulpati de aohde layi dod tej (News)
PAU da 356 crore 94 lakh da bajat paas (News)
Grant of PAU Rs 25 cr stop (News)
PAU te gadvasu vichale vivad de aasar (News)
PAU wich Students di bhukh hadtal shuru (News)
Kisan Mele te Hangama Students ne Udghatan Rokkea (News)
Students ne University gate nu lagaye Lock (News)
Vajpa Aggu te University Mulajam vichkar Jhadap (News)
Khetibari vidyarthia walo classa da baikat te rose march (News)
PAU management board di meeting wich aham faisle (News)
PAU me Croro Rupeye ka Ghutala (News)
PAU machine in Australian fields (News)
Punjab Sarkar ne PAU di Crora di Grant roki (News)
PAU Di Badli Nuhar (News)
PAU di viti halt davadol (News)
PAU students pulled rickshaws ()
PAU Mulajma nu milega Mobile bhatta (News)
PAU surakheya niti ch ferbdal karan laye tiyar (News)
Students ki Bukh hadtal zari (News)
Khetibadi khoj vikas te praptiya pakho vadia reha 2011 (News)
University kamiya vallo upkulpati office campus de gate band (News)
Bhog of Prof Kulbir Singh Dosanjh (Bhog etc)
Prabhandka ne PAU nu Gumrah kitta (News)
PAU nu Khuli Behas di Chunoti (News)
PAU vich Hulladbaja wallo Bhann tod (News)
Lakho dkar jate hai PAU ke karmi (News)
Tender Notice ()
PAU nu lahevandh banaouna hi University di khoj da mukh mantav (News)
Closing of PAU campus passage triggers protest (News)
PAU Students wallo hadtal (News)
gate Kholne Ke Liye Kate Pedh (Profile)
University International Subidaye Zero (News)
PAU effort adds to Basmati Rice (News)
Former PAU don shines in stem cell Research (News)
Former PAU Don Shines in stem cell research (News)
Wonder year by PAU (News)
Offiece Automation and Laboratory Operation (Job Vacancy)
PAU De Garden Gandgi Ch Tabdeel (News)
528 vacant posts of Teacher at PAU (Job Vacancy)
WOes Of Pensioners in Court Related to PAU (News)
PAU gets wheat research project (News)
PAU de Crora Rupaye de Project Khatai wich (News)
Auction Notice ()
New office bearers of PAU Employees Union elected (News)
Assistant Proffessor of Computer Science and Sleward etc (Job Vacancy)
Master in Journalism and Mass Communication etc (Admission Notice)
PAU 201 ne kisano aur dukandaro ki lutia duboi (News)
Refund Three Crore RS of Prize to PAU (News)
Two Crore ki Machinery Fank Rahi Dhul (News)
PAU di Fund Branch Wich Lakha Rupea da Ghata (News)
Din Dihade Professor ki Mahila Mittar ka Murder (News)
PAU De Vice Chancellor Da Putla Fukkea (News)
Khetiwadi University te vitty sankat de baddal (News)
Master for Bussiness Administration (Admission Notice)
Alumni Meet ()
MBA (Admission Notice)
B.Sc. M.Sc (Admission Notice)
Kee PAU de vichaaran vich khadot aa geyi hai (News)
AU wants land in Ladowal (News)
Resign Through Vice Chancellor of PAU (News)
48th Annual Alumni Meet ()
Woes of PAU Pensioners (News)
Woes Of the PAU Pensioners (News)
Degree Courses (Admission Notice)
More then Twenty two Thousands Farmers do Suicide (News)
Shtabdi rahi Ludhiana pohounche Gursharan kaur (News)
PAU Prabandki Board di meeting wich Hangama (Job Vacancy)
Ki Banduk hai PAU de modde te (News)
PAU Research Station hits ton (News)
One year Diploma Course in French (Admission Notice)
PAU releases 2 new seeds (News)
CM behaving like a real estate dealer (News)
Construction of Sewage Treatment and Renovation etc (Tender)
PAU kisan mela on sept 30 (News)
America Pratinidhi PAU se prabhavit (News)
PAU Golden jubli samaroh 2 toh (News)
PAU wich MBA admission is vaar MET rahi hounge (News)
Public Notice 2012 (Advertisement)
Const of Stores and Vehicle Shedd etc (Tender)
PhD Programme (Admission Notice)
Fasli vibhinta lai PAU nibhaye mukh bhumika (News)
PM, Badal to get Honorary Degrees (News)
Research land given to private company (News)
Kisan Sarbirinder awarded (News)
PAU Students shines (News)
Bavikh diya chunotiya (News)
Camera ki ankh se sameti prakritik sampada (News)
PAU diya Achievements (News)
Indo israel project to PAU (News)
Office cum Lab building (Tender)
PAU research fellows at wits end (News)
Animal husbandry fair held (News)
Message of Dr Manjit Singh kang to students for getting achievements (Profile)
PAU ki zameen lene ke prastav ka virodh (News)
PAU di pukar (News)

Media coverage of Punjab Agricultural University PAU, Ludhiana Punjab, Punjab

Panjab Agricultural University professor invited as a visiting faculty by a university in USA

LUDHIANA: V.P Sethi, Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) has brought laurels to Ludhiana as he has been invited as a visiting Research faculty by a University in USA. V P Sethi has been invited as a visiting research faculty for three months by North Dakota State University (NDSU), USA, to conduct collaborative research in the field of greenhouse design and micro-climate control for adverse solar regions of USA and India. The preliminary results attained during the visit will be used to write a joint research proposal between PAU and NDSU for seeking further funding support from federal agencies of USA for developing new greenhouse designs and carrying out further experimental studies.

PAU students leave for Moscow for training programme

LUDHIANA: Students of Punjab Agricultural University-Ludhiana will be undergoing training at Moscow State University of Environmental Engineering ( MSUEE) and Moscow State Agro-Engineering University (MSAU) this month.

The Dean of College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology (COAEandT), Dr P.P.S Lubana informed that the students namely Rajkamal Singh Dhillon, Surya Jindal, Sahil Narula, Kiranpreet, Kiran Sharma and Pallvi Goyal will participate in the training which will culminate on June 29. The training is being coordinated by Department of Mechanical Engineering,Assistant Professor, Dr V.S. Hans.

Punjab Agricultural University library: Stocked with books, inspiration

LUDHIANA: Fabled as a Mecca for those appearing for competitive examinations, Punjab Agricultural Universitys (PAU) library boasts of a vast collection of books and journals. The library is a boon for countless students who cannot afford to pay hefty coaching fees and the results have borne fruit with many such candidates coming out with flying colours in the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and other competitive examinations.

PAU student Shalini Agnihotri, who ranked 285 in the UPSC examination, is proud of the library. I am from a middle-class family and was dependent on the library for the preparation for UPSC examination. It is a storehouse of knowledge and for the last one year, the library has become my second home, said Agnihotri, who is from Himachal Pradesh. Besides, you will find many like-minded people here and the spirit of competition and excelling is in the air, she added.

Punjab Agricultural University library: Stocked with books, inspiration

LUDHIANA: Fabled as a Mecca for those appearing for competitive examinations, Punjab Agricultural Universitys (PAU) library boasts of a vast collection of books and journals. The library is a boon for countless students who cannot afford to pay hefty coaching fees and the results have borne fruit with many such candidates coming out with flying colours in the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and other competitive examinations.

PAU student Shalini Agnihotri, who ranked 285 in the UPSC examination, is proud of the library. I am from a middle-class family and was dependent on the library for the preparation for UPSC examination. It is a storehouse of knowledge and for the last one year, the library has become my second home, said Agnihotri, who is from Himachal Pradesh. Besides, you will find many like-minded people here and the spirit of competition and excelling is in the air, she added.


Deluge of e-mail IDs at PAU portal

Ludhiana It is a deluge of e-mail IDs at the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) web portal. From the USA to Ludhiana, the PAU alumni are sending in their email IDs and profiles for updating the data bank of the University.

A test mail sent in by Dr Neelam Grewal, Dean of the the College of Home Science, PAU, reads, You will be glad to know that PAU is updating the data bank of its alumni to strengthen linkages with them. An e-mail group for this purpose has been created for the uniform flow of information and to plug the communication gaps. This test mail is being sent with a request to provide the e-mail IDs of as many alumni as possible who are in your contact so that we can update our data bank.

The response has been huge where the oldest students of the university and the new have come on one page.

So Ravneet Arora, a 2010 MBA batch student, writes, A very good initiative. I would take this opportunity to suggest a reunion of alumni (in batches preferably) whereby valuable industrial and personal experiences can be shared.

Its great to hear that at last PAU too is getting connected. I did my Masters degree in Biochemistry from Basic Sciences and Humanities in the year 2003, writes M S Sidhu, visiting scientist at the Centre for Medical Measurements, Division of Convergence Technology, Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science, Republic of Korea.

There is also 1999 PhD (Biochemistry) pass-out Sanjay Guleria, who is currently the Head Division of Biochemistry and Plant Physiology, S K University of Agriculture Science and Technology, Jammu, to name a few.

So while on the one hand, it is Dr Milkha Singh Aulakh, currently vice-chancellor of MSKJ University of Agriculture and Technology, Banda, Uttar Pradesh, a 1974 pass-out of the University, or Karan Sooch, a manager with HDFC Bank and a 2006 MBA pass-out or Rajesh Jain, a 1976 MBA pass-out currently employed with Syngenta or 2003 MBA pass-out Vikram Bajaj, now working with Monanto, the number of e-mails pouring in to strengthen this data base is increasing with each passing day.

With some mailing their IDs to all instead of just the portal address, the deluge is causing quite a problem to some, which is evident from the messages put out.

Minimum temperature falls in Punjab, Haryana

Cold wave persists in North India Share Rajasthan reels under cold wave Share Cold wave continues, claims 75 lives in North India Share Chandigarh: Cold wave today renewed in most parts of Punjab and Haryana with mercury dipping by upto four notches below normal, while dense fog disrupted normal life in the region.The minimum hovered between one to four degrees Celsius below normal in most parts of Punjab and Haryana, the MeT office said here.

Meanwhile, three persons, including two in Haryana, died due to severe cold conditions in the region in the past 24 hours, officials said.Since the onset of winter in the region, seven persons have lost their lives due to cold in Punjab and Haryana. Out of the deceased, five are from Punjab.Several towns, including Ambala, Narnaul, Rohtak, Bathinda, Patiala, Ludhiana and Rohtak, remained engulfed in a thick blanket of fog reducing visibility to just few metres.Besides cold, frequent power cuts also added to the woes of the people in the region.Amritsar was coldest in the region with a low of 2.3 deg C, which was two notches below normal. While Ludhiana recorded 3.4 deg C, four notches below normal, the minimum at Patiala was 4.1 deg C

Among other places in the region, Chandigarh recorded a minimum temperature 5.2 deg C, one notch below normal.The MeT forecast mainly dry weather in the region with fog and misty conditions prevailing in most areas.Some transmission lines of the Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam tripped today due to dense fog affecting power supply largely in districts of Sirsa, Fatehabad, Bhiwani and Hisar, an official spokesman said.Experts of the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) have advised farmers to irrigate lightly to protect vegetables from the frost and chilly weather.

Badal demands R 1,800 as MSP for wheat

Chandigarh: Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal has demanded that the Minimum Support Price (MSP) of wheat be fixed at Rs 1,800 per quintal for 2012-13 to account for the increase in the cost of agricultural inputs which had put a burden of Rs 800 crore on the already beleaguered peasantry.In a statement here, the Chief Minister said that his demand was based on a study on the impact of recent hike in prices of farm inputs conducted by the experts of the Punjab Agricultural University Ludhiana.Badal described as cold-blooded and inhuman the Centres opposition to the already inadequate recommendations by the Commission on Agriculture Costs and Prices (CACP) which had asked the Union Ministry of Agriculture to raise the MSP by a meager 10 per cent.

Have the costs of agricultural inputs gone up by just 10 per cent? Also has the increase in the prices of essential commodities risen only by that margin? If not, what is the basis for a highly discriminatory MSP of Wheat, asserted Badal.The Chief Minister said that on one hand the prices of major agricultural inputs like Diesel and fertilisers have already increased manifold in the recent past but on the other hand by making such reckless proposals and subsequently back tracking on them the Union government was trying to rub salt into the wounds of the distressed farming community which was already reeling under the mounting debt.

Badal said that such a negligible hike in the MSP of Wheat at a time when the prices of the agricultural inputs, especially the DAP and Urea had touched the sky would break the back of peasantry as the agriculture profession already not a profitable proposition now due to its anti-farmer policies.The Chief Minister cautioned if the Centre does not desist from implementing such anti-farming policies then Union government would be solely responsible for the decay of agriculture thereby leaving the nations entire peasantry in quandary especially of the Punjab.

Make PAU a central university, demands university’s employees union

Ludhiana: If the state government does not have any funds, it should make efforts to convert PAU into a central university. Simply having a university and not being able to provide for its needs shows callous attidute of the state and is harmful for the university employees as well as the students. This was declared by the university’s employees union in a protest rally. The union’s general secretary Avinash Sharma also demanded that the university should release the employees’ arrears.The employees kept the Thapar Hall of the university closed for about one hour. They said that if the university gets the status of a central university, the employees would be able to get timely salaries and other facilities as well. Even the standards of research wold improve which would ultimately benefit the state.The PAU employees pensioners association has also lent its support to the protesting university employees. The president of the PAU employees union Harbans Singh Mundi also addressed the gathering during the protest rally.

Ludhiana has received plentiful rainfall this year

Ludhiana: The city has received plentiful rainfall this year. Ludhiana received 964 mm of rainfall in June, July and August, which is 231 mm more than the rain received by Ludhiana normally in a year. Normally, 733 mm of rainfall is received in the city per year. Although the monsoon is over, rains have continued and the city is likely to receive rains in the next two days. The rains, this year, have affected the day-to-day life of people.On Saturday, the city received 400 mm of rains and on Sunday and Monday, the city received 3 mm and 14.6 mm of rainfall. The observatory of Punjab Agricultural University has never rain figures so high.In September, 1998, 600 mm of rains were recorded. Ludhiana has received 497 mm of rains in August so far. The city normally receives 114 mm of rains in July and 66 mm in June; however, the city has received 353 mm of rains in June and July. A total of 964 mm of rains has been received by the city in June, July and August, which is quiet high as 733 mm of rains are generally received.

According to the weather experts of the Panjab University, the sky will be overcast in the coming two-three days and showers are expected.

Jalandhar residents living in constant fear of snakes

Jalandhar: The staff of the civil surgeon office here are a harried lot these days. No, they are not overburdened with work neither they are being pressurised by their senior officials. They are troubled by snakes.Several people have approached the civil surgeon office complaining about the menace of snakes that they are facing. Residents of Friends Colony are the worst affected as they complain that snake hideouts in the barren field near the colony has become a prime concern for them these days.Residents have complained that they are living in constant fear of poisonous snakes.While the residents have a valid reason to worry, officials at the civil surgeon office are confused how get rid of the problem. They have sprayed the insecticides in and around the area inhabited by the snakes but also blamed the locals for the problem.People dumb garbage in the area inviting rats and other rodents which subsequently become food for snakes, they said.Residents can prevent snakes from sneaking into their house by using phenyl in their house frequently, say experts.People having their residence near open field or park must use phenyl in wiping the floor of their house. Doing this can prevent snakes from entering the house, Dr. Prasad, head department of zoology, Punjab Agricultural University (PAU), said.

New varieties of wheat, desi cotton available

Farmers will have now option to sow two new disease resistant varieties of wheat and cotton with State Variety Approval Committee (SVAC) today approving these varieties for cultivation in the state.

The varieties which have approved are PBW-621 of wheat and FDK-124 of desi cotton.

The new wheat variety will be resistant to yellow rust disease which has extensively damaged winter crop of PB 343 variety this year.

Moreover, it is also resistant to black rust disease though it has not attacked crop in India, Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Director Research S S Gosal said on Wednesday.

Revealing another feature of wheat variety, Gosal said the height of this semi dwarf variety is 15 centimeter more than that of other wheat varieties, hence it will lead to generation of more straw for farmers for extra income. Wheat straw fetches Rs 500 to 600 per quintal in the market.

He said PAU has sufficient seed of new wheat variety which will be given to farmers ahead of sowing in rabi season. Though over 90 per cent area is under Bt cotton, PAU developed new variety FDK-124 of desi cotton that would be resistant to Cotton Lead Curl Virus (CLCV).

CLCV has affected Bt cotton but the new variety will be highly resistant to it, he said. In Punjab, 5 to 8 per cent area is still under desi Cotton.

He said it is an early maturing and high yielding variety of desi cotton. Taking about 160 days to mature, the variety gives an average seed cotton yield of 9.28 quintals per acre, he added.

Sufficient seed of FDK-124 is available for multiplication, he said.

PAUs MSc biotechnology course receives overwhelming response

Ludhiana: Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) MSc biotechnology course has received an overwhelming response from the students as 80 students cracked the entrance test for the high profile course.Interestingly, only 10 seats are available for the course.Nearly 99 students took the entrance exam for the course, which was conducted on Friday. The PAU administration opted for Optical Mark Recognistion (OMR) sheets were used in the test and the result was announced the same evening.The selection committee, which will be selecting the final 10 students for the course, faces a daunting task to pick some of the best brains out of the 80 qualified students.

Inderjeet versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Inderjeet, B-IX-286-287, Chauri Sarak,
Nikka Mall Saraf Chowk, Ludhiana-141008.
-------------Complainant.

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 551 of 2011

Present:-
None on behalf of the complainant.
Shri Sawaran Singh, Senior Assistant on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The respondent had submitted on previous date that information had been furnished to the complainant through registered post. The complainant, however, was absent on that date. Therefore, the case was adjourned to 22.6.2011 to confirm that the complainant has received the information to his satisfaction.

2. However, the complainant is again absent today without intimation. The respondent reiterates that the information had been furnished to the satisfaction of the complainant. In view of this, the complaint case is closed.

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

PAU students visit Moscow for water engineering training

Ludhiana: In what could help students of the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) to get real time training about water engineering, four students of the university will be going to the Moscow State Agro Engineering University (MSAU) to learn the nuances of water science.A student exchange programme was agreed upon between both the premiere agricultural institutes during the term former Vice-Chancellor (VC) Dr. Kirpal Singh Aulakh and former MSAU dean Dr. SK Sondhi. Over 50 students have already been benefited since the exchange programme was launched.PAUs agricultural engineering students Abhay Grover, Sunanda, Vasudha Sharma, and Rishika Saini are already away to Moscow. Dr. Rohnish Khurana has been made the in-charge of the team.Apart from Dr. Khurana, training units in-charge Dr. Satish Kumar Gupta and MSAUs vice-rector M Constantine will also be helping the students during the training period.

901 students appear for PAUs six-year agricultural course test

Ludhiana: 901 students appeared for Punjab Agricultural Universitys six-year course that offers only 80 seats. 946 students had registered for the entrance exam.This course is applicable for only class X passouts and is modeled on a similar course offered by the Karnataka Agricultural University. It is aimed for the wards of farmers and agriculturists.Though priority will be given to students with rural background, if all seats are not filled, city aspirants can also get a look-in.Admission will be based on the AAT and merit. Marks secured in class X will be given 65 per cent weightage, AAT 20 per cent and personal interview 10 per cent.The interviews for the course will be conducted on July 11.

Search for new PAU Vice Chancellor to be over soon

Ludhiana: The Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) is finally going to get a Vice Chancellor (VC) as reports are that three names have been short listed for the esteemed chair. The Board of Management will take the final decision on these names.The selection committee, which consists Dr. GS Kalkat, chief secretary SC Aggarwal and commissioner (finance) Navreet Singh Kang met here on Friday to finalise the names. Chief Secretary SC Aggarwal confirmed that three names have been finalised for the VCs post but he did not revealed those names. Aggarwal said the list of names have been sent to Board of Management.The final decision will be taken in the next weeks meeting of the Board of Management.Though the names of the names short listed for PAU VCs post have not been made public, reports are Dr J S Samra, CEO of National Rainfed Area Authority is all set to take over the charge of the university. Dr. Samra has a total experience of 37 years in the field of agricultural research, development and management. He was also the director of the Central Soil and Water Conservation and Research and Training Institute for six years.

Inderjeet versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Inderjeet, B-IX-286-287, Chauri Sarak,
Nikka Mall Saraf Chowk, Ludhiana-141008.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.
The Public Information Officer
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 551 of 2011

Present:- None on behalf of the complainant.
Shri Sham Lal, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The respondent places on record letter No.11730-32 dated 30.5.2011 alongwith its enclosures which are taken on record. A copy of the letter alongwith its enclosures should also be sent to the complainant through registered post, who has sent a written request stating that he is unable to attend the proceedings of the case today.

2. Let the complainant confirm if he is satisfied with the information now furnished to him.

3. To come up on 22.6.2011 at 10.30 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
May 31, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

PAU still without any Vice-Chancellor

Ludhiana: Nearly a month after the last date to apply for the post of Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Vice-Chancellor (VC) expired, the esteemed chair is still lying vacant as the state government is yet to make any appointment.The final decision in this regard will be taken by the chief minister Prakash Singh Badal. Sources privy to the development said that the appointment of PAUs VC has been delayed due to Badals busy schedule. Chief Secretary is also on leave, which has added to the delay.It is probably for the first time in PAUs history that the VCs chair has been lying vacant for such a long period of time.

Meanwhile, the concerned authorities have shortlisted names of six scientists for the post. University sources said that Dr, Jaagir Singh Samra was the top contender for the plum post. Dr. Samra has been the CEO of National Rainfed Area Authority of India for the last four years.Dr. Samra has a total experience of 37 years in the field of agricultural research, development and management. He was also the director of the Central Soil and Water Conservation and Research and Training Institute for six years.

Student lands in trouble for rescuing snakes, posting pictures on Facebook

Ludhaina: Yadvinder Singh, a Punjab Agriculture University student, landed himself into trouble when he posted few pictures on social networking site, Facebook, showing him rescueing snakes.The pictures somehow got the attention of Wild Life Department, which probed the whole matter and questioned Yadvinder.The department wants to investigate if Yadvinder catched the snakes from reserve area. It wants to probe whether Yadvinder left the snakes after catching them or not.On the other hand, Yadvinder is trying hard to prove his innocence. He says he rescued the snakes which appeared in the PSU premises, fearing they might get killed by people.

Inderjeet versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Inderjeet, B-IX-286-287, Chauri Sarak,
Nikka Mall Saraf Chowk, Ludhiana-141008.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.
The Public Information Officer
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 551 of 2011

Present:-
Shri Inderjeet complainant in person.
Shri Sham Lal, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

PIO places on record a letter bearing No.10831-33 dated 16.5.2011, with a copy to the complainant.

2. The parties request for an adjournment, which is allowed. To come up on 31.5.2011 at 10.30 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
May 18, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Punjab agri university crippled with salary crisis

Ludhiana: The Punjab Agricultural University has witnessed several vice-chancellors and unions come and go, but what has remained unchanged is its poor financial condition.The salaries that earlier used to come on the last day of a month, later stared coming in the first week of the following month and then as late as second week of that month.Thanks to the ignorance on the part of the politicians, the files remain stuck for days in the finance department.
Now when the post of the vice-chancellor itself is with the finance commissioner, the salaries have not been given till May 16.They are expected to come in a day or two.Though the delay has caused trouble to the scientists, the clerical staff and Grade-IV employees are the worst affected.The problem of delay in salary disbursement began during the tenure of Dr Amarjeet Singh Khera. Prior to his tenure, the employees used to get their salaries on the last day of a month or maximum on the first day of the next month.The employees union protested against it for quite long. D P Maud, who was the chief of the union for eight years, kept demanding that the system for salary disbursement be made proper.

Financial Commissioner of Punjab is new PAU Vice Chancellor

Ludhiana: Navreet Singh Kang, the Financial Commissioner of Punjab, has been appointed as the new Vice Chancellor of the Panjab Agricultural University on Wednesday. The decision was taken by the PAU Board of Management.The post had become vacant after the retirement of the previous VC, Dr Manjit Singh Kang. The new VC will only hold the office till a regular Vice Chancellor is appointed.

Navreet Singh Kang held meetings with university officials after assuming charge. Director of extension education Mutiyar Singh Gill , director research Dr S S Goyal, coordinate research Dr C J S Pannu and deans of all colleges participated in the meeting.

PU girls to get new hostel soon

Ludhiana: Some good news for girl hostellers of Panjab Agricultural University (PAU). Soon, the authorities of PU would construct a new girls hostel with a capacity of around 250 inmates.The hostel was inaugrated by Vice Chancellor Dr Manjeet Singh Kang on Wednesday.The Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR) has generated funds for this project.The three-storeyed hostel building would have 25 rooms on each floor.Chief Engineer Dr Jaspal Singh said, the construction work would take around 2.5 years time.Dr SS Sooch said, from the past few years the number of girl students in the university is increasing remarkably.From the past few years, the need for construction girls hostel was being felt by the college administration.The girls hostel is being constructed at the back side of the college.
The Dean and Directors of all colleges were present during the function.

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Satish Kumar, 2836,Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College, Gill Road, Ludhiana.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. -------------Respondent.

CC No. 888 of 2011

Present:- Shri Satish Kumar complainant in person.

Shri Sham Lal, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
The complainant had moved an application to PIO/Hon’ble Governor of Punjab in his capacity of Chancellor of the University on 18.11.2010 which was forwarded by the office of the Chancellor to the PIO/Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The information-seeker had sought details of the action taken on his earlier complaint submitted to the Chancellor on 20.10.2010, followed by reminder on 15.11.2010. It appears that both these complaints were also forwarded by the Chancellor to the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

2. The Plea of the PIO/University is that the RTI request dated 18.11.2010 was received by him on 5.1.2011 through the office of the Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana as forwarded by the Chancellor. The reply was sent by the Registrar’s office vide memo No.Admn.2/AU/2011/797-98 dated 19.1.2011 with a copy to the Secretary/Governor of Punjab, Chandigarh.

3. The grouse of the complainant, however, is that so far no action has been taken on the alleged irregularities pointed out by him in his complaint dated 20.10.2010. He further pleads that action has also not been taken to make the Vice Chancellor accountable for his action or inaction by amending Rules.
4. I have heard the parties. The present complainant had filed number of complaints in the State Information Commission seeking amendment in the relevant rules/statute to make the Vice Chancellor of the University accountable. Those have been separately disposed, after hearing the parties.

5. In the present case, reply has been duly sent by the PIO/Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana after he received the RTI request from the Chancellor via office of the Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. The complainant, however, is not satisfied as the issues raised by him have not been solved by conducting an inquiry or by amending the statute of the University, to make the Vice Chancellor accountable.

6. The jurisdiction of this Commission is limited to furnishing of the information. It is not for this Commission to direct the concerned authorities to take or not to take action on the alleged irregularities which the information-seeker may have pointed out in his complaint or to direct any amendment of university Rules/Statute.

7. In the present case, the respondent states that no action has been taken on the complaint dated 20.10.2010. In view of this categorical statement made by the respondent that no action has been taken, the information sought by the complainant stands furnished to him. Hence no cause of action is left.

8. With the above observations, the complaint case is closed.

(R.I. Singh)
April 26, 2011. Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Inderjeet versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Inderjeet, B-IX-286-287, Chauri Sarak,
Nikka Mall Saraf Chowk, Ludhiana-141008.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
-------------Respondent.

CC No. 551 of 2011

Present:-
Shri Inderjeet Singhon behalf of the complainant.
Shri Sham Lal, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Parties have made an attempt to reconcile the deficiencies in the information by mutual discussion.

2. It transpires that some of the queries of the present complainant have not been replied because no record exists. This fact may be confirmed in writing to the information-seeker.

3. Similarly, a copy of the office noting vide which the Vice Chancellor had approved the purchase has been furnished to the complainant, but signatures of the Vice Chancellor are not legible. Therefore a fresh copy of the noting shall be furnished to the complainant.

4. Copies of the office notings, where purchase order was cancelled, shall also be furnished to the information-seeker.

5. The complainant submits that the University has been delaying the furnishing of the information. The respondent shall also explain the delay why action should not be taken under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

6. To come up on 18.5.2011 at 10.30 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
April 26, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sponsors PAU project

Ludhiana: Punjab Agriculture University (PAU) has been granted Rs 47 lakh by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for undertaking a project to identify the changes being witnessed in the financial condition of the state, agriculture, poverty etc. The project will be of three years duration (2011-14), but the time period could be extended by another five years if needed.According to Manjit Singh Kang, the Vice Chancellor of PAU, the project will focus on rural poverty. The principal investigator will be Dr R S Sidhu, the Dean of College of Basic Sciences.He also told that the project earlier was being run by the National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research at several places but Punjab was not covered under it.

PAU to offer integrated M.Sc to freshers from new academic year

Ludhiana: The Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) is set to introduce a new integrated Master of Science (M.Sc) in Chemistry for freshers from the upcoming academic year.Students, from both medical and non-medical streams, applying for this course must have scored at least 50 per cent marks in class 12 boards.

PAU will also allow students lo leave the course after three years with a B.Sc degree.Speaking to Dainik Bhaskar, Dr RS Siddhu, Dean College of Basic Sciences, said, The new course will throw open avenues for students in pharmaceuticals, food processing and fermentation industries as well as teaching.The last date for applying for the course is May 12.PAU had also offered a string of new courses in the last academic year including M.Sc in Microbiology, Biology, Botany and Zoology.

PAU: From now, families can accompany foreign students

Ludhiana: Accepting the long-time demand of foreign students at the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU), the government has given its nod allowing the married students to live with their families during their study tenure.An official announcement in this regard was made by Agriculture Minister Suchha Singh Langah during the inauguration of the newly-built international hostel for the foreign students.Speaking at the function, Langah said that with this, the long-time demand of married foreign scholars was finally met.

Minister also had words of praise for the research department of the university. Langah said that despite being short of proper resources, the work done by the varsity in the field of research was exceptional.

Notably, around 20 per cent of the research scholars of PAU come from NRI quota and keeping in view their requirements, five years ago, work began for a state-of-art hostel exclusively for foreign students.

Vigilance Bureau questions PAU on Building Scam

The multi-crore building scam at Punjab Agricultural University would not have come to light had the Vigilance Bureau Punjab not sprung into action. Noteworthy here is that in March this year PAU VC Dr Manjit Singh Kang had withdrawn work from the then XEN Deepak Gupta and ordered an inquiry into the office of executive engineer. This inquiry is to be conducted by a four-member committee which is to look into the irregularities into construction of three new buildings involving a cost of Rs 13.5 crore. The three buildings include a state of the art auditorium, international guest house and seed and technology sale centres.

However, the ground reality is that the PAU swung into action only after the Vigilance Bureau Punjab demanded comments on a complaint filed with it. Information available shows that a resident of Ludhiana had filed a complaint with the VB in October 2010 and VB had registered this complaint in December last. The VB in turn sent the complaint to Office of Director Agriculture Punjab on December, 19, 2010 which was in turn sent to PAU on January 18, 2011. It was a month later that PAU swung into action.

Secondly, the renovation work of Thapar Hall, the main administrative building which was finalised at Rs 17 lakh was enhanced to Rs 38 lakh without any tenders. Materials used like polycarbonate sheets, MS pipes, cement, bricks, sand, steel etc were also of inferior quality.

Further, for the construction of three major works namely auditorium, international centre and technology sales centers have been allotted to outside architects who have been paid Rs 36 lakh which is a burden for cash strapped university. The complaint also raises fingers about appointment of people from agricultural background to the post of engineers. While PAU preferred to remain tightlipped about the issue, Balwinder Singh Sindhu, Director Agriculture Punjab when contacted said, “Our office had received a letter from the VB which we sent to the Vice Chancellor PAU for necessary comments and actions. We are still to receive a reply on the issue.”

RAM SARAN ARORA Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHER LPA No 82 of 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.


Date of Decision: March 23, 2011

Ram Saran Arora …Appellant
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others …Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN

Present:
Mr. Naresh Prabhakar, Advocate, for the appellant.

1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? YES

2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

M.M. KUMAR, J.
1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 22.7.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant
claiming that on the basis of interview call received by him in Advertisement No. 4/91 (P-1), he was also entitled to be considered in the subsequent selection process initiated about three years later on the post of Administrative-cum-Accounts Officer at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

The learned Single Judge rejecting the aforesaid contention has held that in the subsequent
advertisement the requirement for appointment to the post of Administrative-cum-Accounts Officer was different, which the appellant did not fulfill.

LPA No. 82 of 2011
2. In the earlier advertisement three years supervisory experience as Superintendent or equivalent in a Government office or educational institution, preferably in a University with good record of service was stipulated whereas in the subsequent advertisement three years supervisory experience as Superintendent Grade-I or equivalent in a Government office or educational institution, preferably in a University with good record of service was required. The appellant was considered against the first advertisement where he fulfilled the qualification but he did not fulfill
the qualification of the later advertisement and, therefore, he could not be sent an interview call because he was not holding the post equivalent to the post of Superintendent Grade-I. He was only working as an Office Manager in a Cooperative Mill and the pay scale of the Office Manager was less than that of the Superintendent Grade-I. It is, thus, obvious that the appellant was working on an inferior post of Office Manager and accordingly he was not given interview call.

3. We have heard learned counsel at a considerable length and are of the view that there is no indefeasible right vested in the appellant to be considered for appointment to the post of Administrative-cum-Accounts Officer, particularly when he did not answer the qualification prescribed for that post. In the earlier advertisement the qualifications were different whereas in the later advertisement he needed to have held a post equivalent in status to that of Superintendent Grade-I, which he lacked. The criteria to assess that status was the pay scale, which he was drawing. On an examination of the pay scale of the post which he was holding and that of Superintendent Grade-I, the learned Single Judge has opined that the appellant could not have been called for interview. For the aforesaid view we draw support from the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Tarsem Singh v. State of Punjab, 1994 (4) SLR 577. In para 9 of the judgment following pertinent observations have been made:-

9. ......Promotion as understood under the service law jurisprudence means advancement in rank, grade or both. Promotion is always a step towards advancement to a higher position, grade or honour. ......

4. The higher pay scale, thus, represents higher status and rank. The appellant, in fact, has pay scale lower than that of Superintendent Grade-I and, thus, was rightly not called for interview.
Moreover, he has retired around the year 2005 and the instant petition was filed in the year 1995. In any case, no useful purpose would be served at this stage because he cannot be considered for appointment. Therefore, the conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge is upheld and the appeal is dismissed.

(M.M. KUMAR)
JUDGE

(T.P.S. MANN)
JUDGE

Inderjeet versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Inderjeet, B-IX-286-287, Chauri Sarak,
Nikka Mall Saraf Chowk, Ludhiana-141008.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. -------------Respondent.

CC No. 551 of 2011

Present:- Shri Inderjit complainant in person.
Shri Sham Lal, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The complainant had moved an application on 9.10.2010 to the PIO/Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana seeking information on 14 points. The information was voluminous and after compiling the same a reply was forwarded by the PIO vide PAU’s No.1485 dated 21.1.2011. The respondent has today placed on record a letter bearing No.7258-60 dated 17.2.2011 pleading that the information stands already furnished vide letter dated 21.1.2011 referred to above.

2. The plea of the complainant, is that there are deficiencies in the information furnished to him. However, he has not specified these deficiencies in his complaint petition filed in the State Information Commission. Therefore, the complainant is directed to file in writing the deficiencies and shortcomings. A copy of the same should also be conveyed to the respondent-PIO before the next date which is fixed for 8.4.2011.

3. To come up on 8.4.2011 at 10.30 A.M.

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

PAU allows contractor to loot public

Ludhiana: Contractors at Farmers Fair in Punjab University are having a grand time as the varsity leaves visitors to suffer at the hands of the contractors.

Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) administration has given away five parking areas to contractors in the area without taking any money from them. The visitors are, however, are not getting any benefits of the freebie.The contractors are making money out if the parking lots. Moreover, the administration secretly gave the parking lots to the contractor. Also, this is not the first time that PAU has taken such a step. The parking lots have been allotted to the contractor for free for several years in a row now. The surprising part is that PAU never invited tenders for the parking lots and merely hands over them to the particular contractor.

N S Tomer versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr. N.S.Tomer r/o 10/87, New Campus,
CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar.
-------------Appellant

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

FAA- the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
-------------Respondents.

AC No. 173 of 2011

Present:-
Shri N.S.Tomar appellant in person.
Shri Sham Lal, APIO on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

The appellant had moved an application on 7.8.2010 to the PIO/Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana seeking details of his own Provident Fund. The respondent has furnished the information to him but the appellant has pointed out certain deficiencies in the same.

2. Considering that the information being sought is purely personal information of the appellant, he was called upon to show how any public interest /cause is involved in the disclosure of this information.

3. I have heard the parties. The nature of the information being sought is purely personal and is clearly covered by exemption under Section 8(i)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. However, the respondent-university, which is the employer of the information-seeker, as a good employer should remove the deficiency in the information and ensure that the Provident Fund of the employee is given to him as per Rules. The employee had retired six years back. It is unfortunate that he has not received a part of provident fund’s payment. It does not reflect well on the management of the University. A copy of this order shall be endorsed to the Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana by name for appropriate action.

3. In view of the above, the appeal case is closed.

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

Shri Manjit Singh Kang,
Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana

SURENDER KAUR AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS WIDOW OF SHRI AJ Vs SUKHDEV SINGH @ SUKHMINDER SINGH AND OTHERS FAO 6479 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(O and M)

Date of Decision. 09.03.2011

Surender Kaur aged about 54 years widow of Shri Ajmer Singh and another ......Appellants
Versus
Sukhdev Singh @ Sukhminder Singh and others .....Respondents

Present:
Mr. Jagjit Gill, Advocate for the appellants.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

K. KANNAN J.(ORAL)
1. The appeal is for enhancement of claim for compensation for death of a male aged 59 years. He was a Scientific Assistant in Agriculture University, Ludhiana. He was an income tax assessee till he took compulsory retirement. It was contended that he had taken premature retirement to pursue agricultural operations. It was also contended through the legal representatives that he used to take agricultural property on lease and was earning an income. With no definite proof available regarding such operation on lease, the Tribunal took the income at Rs.4500/-, made a deduction of 1/3rd, adopted a
multiplier of 9 and awarded a compensation of Rs.3,34,000/-. I do not find any error either in the choice of multiplier or in the manner of assessment of multiplicand. The compensation awarded is just and appropriate and would not require any intervention.

2. The award is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.

(K. KANNAN)
JUDGE

Kulwant Singh Basra told that PAU will restart 1964 model press

LUDHIANA: Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) is soon going to revive its 46-year-old printing press. The university has decided to buy new machines and equipment for the press to revive it. This project is in its final stage. Kulwant Singh Basra, press manager PAU said, 'The PAU printing press was a service department established in 1964 to cater to the printing and stationery requirements of the university. This press has three sections -- letter press section, offset machine and binding section.'' Basra further informed, 'At the time of its establishment, it was decided that the press would serve on 'no profit and no loss' basis. Later on, as the press was suffering heavy losses, the authorities decided to stop its functioning. But, some documents need to be printed confidentially so we have decided to revive it.'

The university has also decided to hire staff on contractual basis for the reviving of the press, which will most importantly print the degrees of university students. Singh informed, 'The authorities have planned to buy a mini offset machine worth Rs 7 lakh. Being a single man operated machine, it will minimize the staff, besides undertaking the low run jobs which are at times accomplished from outside presses. This will be a cost effective proposition for the university.

Students of the university are excited about the re-starting of the press. Reetinder Singh Brar, a student in the varsity said, 'Being a student of journalism here at PAU, I know that this press is really beneficial to educate new comers about the printing processes in previous times. The PAU printing press consists of two sections letter press and off set. One can rarely see these kinds of presses anywhere in this era of technological development.' Sheenam, another student said, 'When I took admission in this university, my department organized an orientation trip of the printing press to make us aware about the printing machines and colour formations used in it. That was really very knowledgeable for us.''

Multinational conference on agricultural production in PAU

Ludhiana: A conference to discuss ways for increasing the production of food grains in South Asia was held in the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU). Representatives from four countries participated in the event which was held as a part of the Cereal-system Initiative for South Asia (CISA) project.The conference which began on Monday is attended by the Hub Mangers of International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Melinda Gates Foundation and United States Agency for International Development (USIAD).The conference will continue till February 23 and will also have a project review to make preparations of future projects.Representatives of Bangladesh, Nepal, Philippines and Mexico are participating in the conference. M S Rao, CEO of CISA discussed on the importance of proper fertilizers, photosynthesis in his speech.

SURJAN SINGH Versus PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND ANOTH Civil Revision 399 of 2011 (O AND M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Revision 399 of 2011 (O AND M)

Date of Decision 21.02.2011

Surjan Singh ...... Petitioner
VERSUS
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and another ...... Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL

Present:
Mr.Avtar S.Khinda, Advocate, for the petitioner.

A.N.JINDAL, J:
Assailed in this petition is the order dated 11.05.2009
(Annexure P-4), passed by the Distt. Judge, Kapurthala, setting aside the order dated 08.04.2008, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kapurthala whereby the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC, moved by the petitioner-plaintiff has been allowed.

Having scrutinized the impugned order, the same does not
suffer from any illegality warranting interference by this Court.

No grounds to interfere.

Dismissed.

(A.N.Jindal)
Judge

Hailstorm hits wheat crop; rains good for rabi crop

Rains accompanied by hailstorms are feared to have hit the wheat crop over 4,000 acres of land in a few areas of Punjab but experts feel downpour is beneficial for winter crop in improving crops productivity.

We have come to know that hailstorm in few areas of Punjab including Dhuri in Sangrur and Morinda have hit wheat crop over 3000-4000 acres of land, Punjab Agriculture, Director, BS Sidhu told PTI on Wednesday.

The official said he had ordered for conducting a survey of affected areas to assess the extent of the crop damage.

Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) experts said widespread rains at this point were beneficial for crop growth but hailstorm would completely damage early sown wheat crop.

Rains are beneficial for wheat crop which is at heading stage (post tillering stage). The rainfall will help improving crop yield, PAU, Wheat Incharge, Indu Sharma said.

PAU bags best agricultural university award

Ludhiana: The prestigious Punjab Agricultural University added one more feather into its cap on Monday when it was adjudged as country’s best agricultural university for the year 2011.The university bagged the coveted Mahindra Samriddhi India Agri Award 2011 by succeeding over 22 universities from across the country.A jury headed by Agriculture Secretary PK Basu announced PAU’s name for its excellent contribution to all forays of agricultural research.The university outclassed its competitors on all parameters including infrastructure, academic excellence, research projects and other aspects.Expressing his happiness over PAU’s latest achievement, V-C Dr. Manjit Singh Kang attributed it to the joint hardworking efforts of both its teachers and students.Kang will receive the coveted award on behalf of the university from Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar at a national-level function on 21st of this month.

PAU striking students meet Badal and Financial Commissioner Development-Agriculture Navreet Singh Kang

Students threaten to intensify stir
PAU AGITATION - Give govt time till tomorrow for ‘some kind of positive assurance’; Dhanda says will arrange a meeting with the CM. With the state government and Punjab Agricultural University authorities not paying heed to their problems, the agitating students of College of Agriculture have threatened to intensify their agitation. They have set February 3 as the deadline for the state government to resolve the issue.

Asking the government to fill 1,000 posts lying vacant with the Department of Agriculture, these students have been protesting for 11 days now, including a six-day relay hunger strike. The students distributed pamphlets among the public on Tuesday to highlight their demands. Ludhiana West MLA and Chief Parliamentary Secretary Harish Rai Dhanda, meanwhile, met the students on Tuesday and assured them of a meeting with Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal. “I heard the students out and have invited them to my office on Wednesday so that they can explain their issues in detail, which I will take further to the chief minister,” said Dhanda.

PAU Students’ Association president Ravinderpal Singh Randhawa said: “The MLA did give us some assurances but at the same time he also told us that the Punjab government was working under severe financial constraints and hence there was a delay in filing the posts. Dhanda wanted us to suspend the protest till we meet the CM, but the students decided against it. The protest will go on till we get some kind of positive assurance from the state government.”

Vice-Chancellor Dr Manjit Singh Kang has already written to Badal, informing him about the agitation and seeking his intervention. Kang wrote that a meeting of the students was arranged with Agricultural Minister Sucha Singh Langah about a week ago and the latter had assured the students that the government would fill some posts in the near future. He also conveyed the students’ request to arrange a meeting of their representatives with the CM to discuss the issue.

PAU students burn degrees, hunger strike on
The hunger strike by students of College of Agriculture, Punjab Agricultural University, entered fifth day on Monday. Angry over the “indifference” of both the state government and PAU officials towards their demand, the protesting students held a massive rally outside the Thapar Hall at PAU.

They blocked the entrance to the hall for close to 15 minutes. Twenty-odd students burnt their graduation and post-graduation degrees as a mark of protest against the lack of jobs.

“These degrees could not secure jobs and hence were of little use to the students,” said Ravinderpal Singh Randhawa, president of the PAU Students’ Association. The protesting student received a shot in the arm after some members of the PAU alumni visited them and heard their grievances.

PAU students meet Badal
A delegation of the protesting students of College of Agriculture, Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) met Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal in Chandigarh on Sunday. They claimed that the meeting turned out to be a productive one.

“The CM patiently listened to the grievances of students and asked the financial commissioner (development) and agriculture director to prepare a detailed report on the staff crunch in the state’s agricultural department. A meeting with the officials was fixed for February 18 and 22. It was decided that the notification regarding the number of posts will be announced latest by February 23,” said one of the student leaders who attended the meeting.

Agriculture Minister Sucha Singh Langah, Chief Parliamentary Secretary Harish Rai Dhanda, Agriculture Director Balwinder Singh Sidhu and Financial Commissioner (Development), Agriculture, Navreet Singh Kang were present during the discussion. All of them empathised with the students, terming their demand for jobs against vacant posts in the agriculture department a genuine and pertinent need.

The students said PAU Dean Students’ Welfare Dr P S Aulakh, who accompanied them, presented facts about the shortage of staff in the department. He apprised the authorities of the need to clear the glut in the agricultural machinery so that it might attain the required acceleration.

The students also decided that their hunger strike, which entered eighteenth day on Sunday, would continue till further notice.

PAU strike enters Day 13
Ludhiana: Students' hunger strike entered its thirteenth day, with it being carried on at gate number 2 of Punjab Agriculture University ( PAU) on Tuesday. Though the authorities were on the defensive as they feared the students could disrupt proceedings of the international conference being organized at the university, true to their promise, the students continued the protest in a peaceful manner. It remains to be seen as to whether the authorities would be able to keep their word wherein they had committed to students that they would be taking up their cause with the government.


Members of Punjab Agricultural University Student Association (PAUSA) said the university was scheduled to hold many conferences in the coming months and any laxity on the part of the authorities could result in an uprising among the students. A student representative said they were maintaining patience, which should not be taken for granted by the authorities and something must be done for students' benefit.

The association members said the XIX biennial All India Coordinated Research Project (AICRP) home science workshop scheduled for February 16 and 17, Mahindra Samriddhi India Agri Awards 2011 slated for February 21 and national level honey festival-cum-beekeepers participatory interactive workshop, scheduled for February 22, are some of the events coming up at the university. The authorities should not, time and again, request students to maintain peace while ignoring their needs.

'Vacant posts in various agricultural departments should be filled. Neglect in this respect has added to deterioration in the agricultural scenario in the state,' said a student. While support has been received from various student, labour and state organizations, students are against the situation being lent political hues. While various leaders have been addressing students, others who seem to matter are absent from the scene. With the young and educated having to resort to such means for getting jobs, rot has visibly set into the system, said a student.


78% mothers-in-law apathetic towards female foeticide: PAU survey

Ludhiana: A survey conducted by the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) has revealed some startling facts. According to the study, 78% of all the mothers-in-law surveyed accepted female foeticide as a social evil but said that it would not cause gender imbalance in the society. They also say that its better for women not to be born than to lead a life of sorrow and misery.12% said that it was okay to practice female foeticide, while 10% were against the practice.

Amongst daughters-in-law, 77% said that they were against female foeticide.The women also said that dowry practice was the main reason behind peoples aversion for the girl child. They agreed on the fact that educating girls and making them independent is important.

The survey was done amongst Jat-Sikh mothers and daughters-in-law and included 200 samples. Only those daughters-in-law were surveyed who already had a girl child and wanted to have another child. A study of their economic status, family and education was also done before the survey.The survey was conducted by Niharika Joshi under the guidance of Dr Ashu Kalaraman.

78 per cent women approve of female foeticide: Study

Ludhiana: A study conducted by the Punjab Agriculture University (PAU) revealed that the women do not consider female foeticide is wrong.

The study said, that even though the women know the ill effects of female foeticide and its effect on the sex ratio, they still believe that it is not wrong.Dr Ashu Kalaraman conducted the study and found out that 78 per cent of the women here approved of female foeticide since the child would not be happy in this world.According to the study, 64 per cent women feel that the parents should decide if they want a girl or a boy. So that they can have one girl and one boy.

As far as mother-in-laws are concerned, 12 per cent believe that female foeticides are not wrong and 78 per cent neither approved of female foeticide nor did they call it wrong. 77 per cent of daughter-in-laws disapproved of female foeticide.Six villages of Ludhiana were covered in the study.

Farm commissioner, Rajewal meet PAU students on strike

Ludhiana Disappointed after they could not meet Minister for Agriculture S S Langah on Thursday, the protesting students of PAU received a shot in the arm as they were able to meet Agriculture Commissioner Gurbanchan Singh and were visited by Bhartiya Kisan Union leader Balbir Singh Rajewal. The hunger strike by the students of College of Agriculture, demanding jobs in the states agriculture department against vacant posts, entered the eighth day on Thursday.

Heavy security arrangements could be seen at PAU after rumours spread that the students planned to gherao the agriculture minister. We have been sitting on a peaceful protest and will continue to do so. We want to meet the minister and more than that we want a meeting with the chief minister and that is all, said one of the protesting students. In his address to the students, Rajewal said: The agriculture sector in the state continues to remain neglected. There are over 15 lakh agricultural families in Punjab suffering at the hands of the Punjab government and its policies, and nearly 2 lakh farmers have committed suicide till now. To add to the woes of the peasantry, there is a committee of chief ministers from Punjab, Haryana, West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh pushing to increase privatisation in agriculture.

Rajeawal blamed the government for the suicides in Punjab and termed the neglect as a conspiracy of ministers and their touts for minting money. He added that Langah had been handpicked for the service of farmers and agriculture in the state but he turned a traitor and joined politics. The union pledged support to the students and said it would take up their cause with each and every authority in the state. The students, meanwhile, presented a memorandum to Gurbachan Singh, who assured the students that he would take their voice to the Centre.

New Director Student Welfare of PAU Dr P S Aulakh, too, assured the students that he would take up their demand with the authorities concerned. Continuing with the relay hunger strike, the students increased its duration from six to nine hours on Thursday.



Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana



03-02-2011 MAMTA Versus AMRITPAL SINGH FAO M 111 of 2009

In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

(O and M)

Date of decision : 03.2.2011

Mamta ..... Appellant
vs
Amritpal Singh ..... Respondent

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

Present:
Mr. K. S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. Raman Mahajan, Advocate, for the respondent.

Rajesh Bindal J.
1. The wife is in appeal before this court against the judgment and decree dated 27.2.2009 of the learned court below whereby in a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”), the husband has been granted a decree of divorce.

2. The facts as are available on record are that the marriage of the parties was solemnised on 17.9.2004 according to Sikh rites at Ludhiana.

The husband filed a petition for divorce on 25.2.2006. The plea raised was that after the marriage the wife did not reside with him. The marriage was consummated but no child was born out of the wedlock. At the time of marriage, the appellant was working as Information Officer in Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. After the marriage, she continued with her job and occasionally joined the company of the husband, who is residing at Mohali. She did not even resign from her job at Ludhiana or agree to join any service at Mohali or Chandigarh.

She did not share with the husband as to how much was her salary and how much she was spending or saving. She was not obedient. Her conduct was always irritant. She caused mental
harassment and agony to the husband. Her living apart and depriving the husband pleasure of matrimonial relations, was a constant source of mental torture. Maintaining secrecy, the wife got visa for UK and left on 23.7.2005 and since then she was not in contact with the husband and also did not disclose her place of residence or what she was doing there.

3. After issuance of notice, the appellant wife filed reply to the
petition under her signatures but as is evident from the evidence, she was not present in India at that time. While admitting the factum of marriage, she admitted that no child was born out of the wedlock but it was on account of the fault of the husband and his family members who got the pregnancy terminated. While denying the allegations regarding her service
at Ludhiana or visit to Mohali, she stated that at the time of engagement, entire facts about her service and salary were disclosed. For the purpose of obtaining visa, the documents were got prepared by the husband himself.

She was always obedient and performed her duties as a good Indian wife.

To keep the matrimonial bonding, she used to visit Mohali thrice a week.

The real problem, in fact, was that the husband and his family members were greedy persons and they used to harass and taunt her for not bringing sufficient dowry. On their pressure, her father had sent a cheque of ` 2 lacs, which was deposited in the joint account of the parties. Efforts were made to get a job near Mohali but the same did not yield any result. Her going to UK
without the knowledge of the husband was denied by stating that the husband had got all documents prepared himself. In fact, the husband had gone to the Airport to see off the appellant. The telephone number given by her to the husband was misused by him by abusing and demanding dowry.

Even the email address was also misused by writing the stuff which no normal person can read.

4. The stand taken by the wife in the reply was denied by the
husband in the replication filed and whatever stated in the petition, was reiterated.

5. After completion of pleadings, the following issues were
framed:-

1. Whether the respondent has reiterating the petitioner with cruelty? OPP
2. Whether the petition is not maintainable in the present form ? OPP
3. Relief

6. In support of their pleadings, the parties led evidence. The
husband besides himself produced in evidence his father Baldev Singh as PW2 and Paramjit Singh husband of his sister as PW3. The stand taken in the pleadings, was supported by them. Whereas on behalf of the wife, her brother Jaswinder and mother Smt. Pushpa appeared as RW1 and RW2 respectively and she herself appeared as RW3.

7. The noticeable fact is that after the wife was partly crossexamined, she did not present herself for further cross-examination, despite opportunities. Finally the learned court below, considering the evidence produced on record by the parties came to the conclusion that the appellant having treated the husband with cruelty, he was entitled to a decree of divorce.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the judgment and decree of the learned court below is totally contrary to the settled principles of law. The husband filed the petition for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty. Merely because the wife had gone to UK with the consent of the husband and to his knowledge, if for some unavoidable reasons, she could not come back for some time, it will not entitle the husband to grant divorce to the wife. The marriage is a long life relation. It is a mutual understanding between the parties. If the wife had gone abroad, it was keeping in view the future prospectus of the family. The wife alone will not be the beneficiary of her higher education and employment there. It was only on the asking of the husband that she had applied for visa of UK. In fact, both of them had applied but the husband did not get it. However, this fact was not disputed that after the appellant went to UK on 23.7.2005, she came back to India only once in March 2008 for the purpose of appearing as a witness in the divorce proceedings.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that fair opportunity was not afforded to the wife for leading evidence. In the present case the husband had approached the court and the onus was on him to prove that there existed ground for passing a decree of divorce. In fact, if the evidence led by the husband alone is considered, that itself is not sufficient to pass a decree of divorce then there was no need for the wife to lead any evidence.

10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent
submitted that the judgment and decree of the learned court below is strictly in conformity with the law. Denial of pleasure of matrimonial life by the wife amounts to cruelty. In the present case, the marriage of the parties was solemnised on 17.9.2004.

The wife at that time was serving at Ludhiana.

She did not leave her job. She occasionally visited Mohali, where the husband was residing, to join his company in the matrimonial home.

11. It was further submitted by learned counsel for the respondent that about 10 months after the marriage, the wife left for England and till date, she visited India only once in March 2008 at the time of recording of her evidence. She did not disclose to the husband even the factum of her going to UK nor she disclosed her address, telephone number or what she
was doing there. The wife is contesting this litigation in proxy with a view to harass the husband. Reply to the petition was filed, though under her signatures but when she was in England. After she was partly crossexamined, she did not appear for further cross-examination. Ever since then, she did not come back and even during her evidence, her address, phone number or what she was doing there, was not properly disclosed by her.

Even her family members, who appeared as witnesses, did not disclose these facts. Even the present appeal was filed in this court by the mother of the appellant, as attorney.

12. Learned counsel for the respondent also submitted that no
effort was ever made by the wife to remain in touch with the husband or to take him also to UK, or come back occasionally, in case her claim is that the intention was not to live separate and deny pleasure of matrimonial life to the husband. He further submitted that though the plea was sought to be raised that there was a demand of dowry or that the husband used some
filthy language on the telephone number given by her or sent some mails on her email address, but no material was produced in support thereof. These were merely bald allegations.

13. Concluding his submission, learned counsel for the husband
submitted that the judgment and decree of the learned court below cannot be faulted with as it is a clear case of cruelty whereby the wife has denied the pleasure of matrimonial life to the husband practically ever since the marriage had taken place. She has no respect for the husband. She left for UK and the husband is not knowing her whereabouts.

14. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record.

15. The fact that the wife went to England on 23.7.2005 and came back to India once till date i.e. in March 2008, is not in dispute. Between the period from 17.9.2004 to 23.7.2005, there is dispute regarding the wife not living in the matrimonial home, as the claim of the husband was that the wife occasionally visited Mohali whereas the stand of the wife was that she used to visit Mohali thrice a week.

16. Another fact, which the husband has been able to prove on
record is that ever since the wife left for England, there is no
communication by her as even in her evidence she has failed to rebut the contention raised by the husband in that regard, though a vague stand was taken up that on telephone number disclosed by the wife, the husband has used some filthy language and also sent certain badly worded emails.

17. The stand was also taken that the husband and his family
members were demanding dowry but there was nothing on record to prove this allegation nor any type of complaint made to any authority in this regard. Even in the affidavit filed by her in examination-in-chief, she had not disclosed as to where she was living in England and what she was doing there. The claim was made in the pleadings by the wife that ` 2 lacs were demanded by the husband after the marriage which were ultimately deposited in the joint account of the parties. However, in her part crossexamination, she had admitted that out of that amount, she had withdrawn ` 1.50 lacs on 19.2.2005 and deposited the same in FDR in her own name.

18. Further perusal of copy of passport of the wife, Ex. RW3/B
shows that the passport was initially issued on 21.4.2004 in the name of Mamta with the column of surname blank. Even though she was married on 17.9.2004, later on she got an entry made in surname column of her passport as 'Malhotra', which was her maiden caste as the caste of the husband is 'Ghattaora' as is evident from the marriage certificate available on record at page 94. Another fact which is relevant in the passport is that the column of spouse's name was also blank. Meaning thereby that when the wife got her surname added in the passport after the marriage, she did not disclose the factum of her marriage to the passport authorities. A perusal of the visa granted to the wife shows that it was for multiple entries valid from 20.6.2005 to 20.6.2006 under 'highly skilled migrant programme'.

19. The another glaring fact on record is that though undisputedly the wife after leaving for England on 23.7.2005 had visited India only in March 2008 to appear as witness in the case but still reply to the divorce petition was filed under the signatures of the wife mentioning her resident of House No. 908, Gaushala road Harbans pura Ludhiana and adding with the pen 'now at U.K.' It was not bearing any date. The counsel signed the reply and appended the date as '26/9/06' with the pen. Even at the time of evidence, brother and mother of the wife had not disclosed her address or employment details.

20. During the pendency of the petition before the learned court
below, one application was filed by the wife for grant of maintenance pendent lite mentioning her address of Ludhiana with no place where the same was signed. Apparently the signatures appended on the reply and on this application differ on many counts. It is not in dispute that on 18.4.2007 the wife was not in India, when the aforesaid application was filed. As to
who signed that application is not borne out from the record.

21. There is another undated application for grant of maintenance pendente lite filed by the wife on which she has not appended her signatures. While appearing in court on 7.4.2008, she produced in evidence her affidavit dated 18.3.2008 in chief. The signatures appended thereon are apparently different as compared to signatures on other documents. She was partly cross-examined and the case was adjourned for remaining crossexamination.

At that stage, the wife filed application for seeking 4-5 months
adjournment as she had to go to UK for appearance in her examination and also to attend last rites of her close relative.

The case was adjourned for 8.4.2008. On 8.4.2008, the case was adjourned to 12.8.2008 for further cross-examination on which date the wife was not present and the case was adjourned to 28.8.2008 subject to payment of ` 500/- as costs.

On 28.8.2008, the wife did not appear for her remaining cross-examination.

Under the circumstances, the court closed the evidence of the wife and the case was adjourned for rebuttal, if any, and arguments.

22. What is required to be noticed is that though on 7.4.2008 when the wife was partly cross-examined and the case was to be adjourned for her remaining cross-examination, adjournment for 4-5 months was sought which was declined by the court. But the fact remains that thereafter the case remained pending in the court for one reason or the other and arguments were concluded on 27.2.2009. No effort was made by the wife in the period of more than 10 months to get her remaining cross- examination completed. The aforesaid fact shows that she was not really interested in contesting the case.

23. It is further relevant that that after the closer of the evidence of the parties, the husband filed application dated 8.10.2008 for permission to produce on record a copy of the enquiry report of Deputy Superintendent of Police (S), S. A. S. Nagar. As per the said enquiry, both the parties had settled the dispute. A sum of ` 2 lacs was to be paid to the wife by the husband. It has been further reported therein that the wife will file her affidavit regarding giving no objection to grant divorce to the husband.

The settlement was signed by the mother and brother of the wife. However, when the matter was compromised, it was only the mother of the wife who did not agree to the settlement and filed application in the Women Cell, Mohali, alleging harassment by the husband and his family members for bringing insufficient dowry. It was found by the police that the allegations levelled by the mother of the wife were false as the wife after some time of
the marriage had left for England. The police has also reported that after investigation, no allegation of demand of dowry or harassment was found.

To this application, reply dated 15.10.2008 was filed by the wife under the signatures of her counsel only. Even at that stage no prayer was made to get her remaining cross-examination completed.

24. Besides the aforesaid facts, nothing has been brought on record by the appellant wife that any effort was made by her at any stage to take the husband to UK or visit India ever since she left for UK and if for any reason she could not do any of the aforesaid things, no justifiable reason therefor.

Even in the affidavit filed by her in her examination-in-chief no where it has been stated that she is still willing to come back or making efforts to take the husband along or willing to live with the husband. The husband in the present case has been able to establish that the wife is depriving him the pleasure of matrimonial life without any justifiable reason. The wife has not
been able to rebut that contention.

25. In Samar Ghosh vs Jaya Ghosh 2007 (2) RCR (Civil) 595,
Hon'ble the Supreme Court gave certain illustrations which would amount to cruelty. The instances mentioned at serial number (xii) and (xiv) are relevant for the case in hand, which are reproduced as under:-

(xii) Unilateral decision of refusal to have intercourse for considerable period without there being any physical incapacity or valid reason may amount to mental cruelty.

(xiv) Where there has been a long period of continuous separation, it may fairly be concluded that the matrimonial bond is beyond repair. The marriage becomes a fiction though supported by a legal tie. By refusing to sever that tie, the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the feelings and emotions of the parties. In such like situations, it may lead to mental cruelty.

26. In Jasbir Kaur alias Pinky vs Dr. Harjinder Singh 2008 (3) CCC 386, this court dealing with a similar situation opined as under:-

Continuance of long separation of wife is certainly covered under the definition of mental cruelty, as provided by various judicial pronouncements under matrimonial law.

Leaving the husband all alone will inevitably damage the health both mentally and physically without any fault on his part.

27. In Manisha Tyagi vs Deepak Kumar 2010 (2) RCR (Civil)
199, Hon'ble the Supreme Court opined that to establish cruelty, it is not necessary that physical violence should be used.

However, continued ill treatment, cessation of marital inter- course, studied neglect, indifference of one spouse to the other may lead to an inference of cruelty.

28. If the facts of the present case are examined in the light of the enunciation of law, as referred to above, it can very well be opined that there is no will of the appellant wife to continue with matrimonial bonding as she has intermittently lived in the matrimonial home only between 17.9.2004 and 23.7.2005, when she went to England. In the last more than five years, she neither looked back to the matrimonial home nor made any effort to call the husband to England or visit India.

29. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find that there is any error in the judgment of learned court below whereby it passed the decree of dissolution of marriage between the parties.

30. The appeal is dismissed.

(Rajesh Bindal)
Judge

PAUSA hunger strike continues for the fourth day

Ludhiana: The Punjab Agriculture University Students Association continued their relay hunger strike for the fourth day. The strike which has been going on since January 27 was continued even on Sunday. The demonstration was held outside gate number 2.The students are demanding admission to departments of agriculture, gardening and soil conservation. Four M Sc final year students participated in the relay hunger strike.A workers association came in support of the students on Friday as well. The Agriculture Technocrat Association has already rendered its support to the students movement.

PAU students end classes boycott, begin hunger strike

Ludhiana: Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) students ended their week-long strike on Thursday. The students have been staging protests to demand hiring of agricultural department officials.Deciding to end their strike and boycott, the students began hunger strike on Thursday to continue their protest against the vacant posts.M.Sc students began the hunger strike on day one and promised that a relay strike will be carried on until the authorities assure them of filling the 1000 vacant posts in Agriculture Department.

Jaspreet Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Jaspreet Singh,
House No- 3572, New Tagore Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana- 141001. ________Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 973 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh. Jaspreet Singh, appellant in person.
ii) Sh. Sham Lal , Supdt-cum-APIO, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard .
The respondent has made a written submission that no time table pertaining to the departments of Botany and Chemistry for the year 2001-02, for any class which was required to be compulsorily attended by Ph.D students, is available in the records. However, he has made an offer to the appellant that he can inspect all the records and in case he can locate any information concerning the time table which is of use to him, a copy of the same would be given to him.
No further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
20th January, 2011

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Satish Kumar, 2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College, Gill Road, Ludhiana.
-------------Complainant.
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Guru Angad Dev Vet. & Animal Sciences University,
Ludhiana. ----------- Respondent.

CC No. 3725 of 2010

Present:-
Shri Satish Kumar complainant in person.
Shri Hari Singh, Superintendent on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

I have heard the parties and gone through the record. Except for Sr. No.1, information on all the other points has been furnished. The only plea of the complainant is that the information has been furnished in one word ‘NO’ and he has requested that explanatory note should be given in respect of all the points raised by him. The respondent has agreed to this. Accordingly a fresh reply may be given to the complainant within 10 days.

2. As regards Sr.No.1 of the query of the information-seeker, the respondent states that the audit report has not been placed before the management and therefore, the same cannot be supplied. The information, therefore, may be treated as nil.
3. To come up on 18.1.2011 at 11.00 A.M.

(R.I. Singh)
January 6, 2011 Chief Information Commissioner
Punjab

Stock of medicines missing from PU hospital

Ludhiana: The authorities have found out that the stock of medicine from the Punjab Agriculture University is missing even this year.There are no records of sale of these medicines.The authorities said, this has been happening for the past 17 years. The staff at university has changed but still manipulations in the medicine stock report continue.
The problem came to light when RTI activist Rohit Sabarwal checked the internal and external audit report of PU.He found out that irregularities in the stock report have been happening since 1993. But, no action has been taken till now.Even last years audit report has pointed out that even after repeatedly asking for the reports of 1997, 1999 and 2009 the authorities have failed to submit it.Defending himself the PU hospitals Dr HS Punni said, most of the irregularities occurred before in joined.

Jaspreet Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Jaspreet Singh,
House No- 3572, New Tagore Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana- 141001. ________Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 973 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh. Jaspreet Singh, appellant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard .
In compliance with the orders dated 09-12-2010, the classes studied by the students for different semesters have been intimated to the appellant by the respondent.

Insofar as the prescribed time tables for Ph. D students are concerned, mentioned at point no. (ii) of the application for information of the appellant, it had been stated by the respondent that there is no fixed time table for Ph. D students. They attend classes on the date and time fixed according to the mutual convenience of the concerned teacher and the student. Today, the appellant has shown to the Court a photostat copy of a typical time table of semester-1 of 2010-11 of the department of Plant Pathology, which the appellant states are for theory classes which are required to be attended by the Ph. D students as well. A Photostat copies of two other time tables of the Department of Bio-chemistry and Department of Plant Breeding have also been submitted by the appellant. He has further clarified in the Court today that “theory classes” include the supporting and other minor courses necessarily required to be attended by the PhD students. In view of the submission made by the appellant, photostat copies of the time tables submitted by him are sent along with these orders to the respondent, with the direction that copies of the time tables of the theory classes (of any kind) which the Ph.D students were compulsorily required to attend during the first and second semesters 2001-2002 in the departments of Botany and Chemistry, should be sent to the appellant with in seven days of the receipt of these orders.
The respondent or any authorized representative is also required to attend the next hearing of this case on 20-01-2011 along with a copy of the communication sent to the appellant in compliance with the orders being passed today.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 20-01-2011 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
30th December, 2010

Drizzle likely to dazzle New Year

Ludhiana: Though the city saw no rain drop in the month of December, the weather department hints that a drizzle dazzle may arrive for the welcome of the New Year. The weather department has said that the rainfall is likely in the next two days. According to weather experts, the rainfall is likely due to the effect of western disturbance.According to Dr KK Gill, the Agro Meteorologist of Punjab Agriculture University, the western disturbance is affecting the weather of North India.The minimum temperature has increased from 2.6 to 6 degrees. However, according to Gill, the rain will benefit the farmers.

Jaspreet Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)
Sh. Jaspreet Singh,
House No- 3572, New Tagore Nagar,
Haibowal Kalan,
Ludhiana- 141001. ________Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 973 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh. Jaspreet Singh, appellant in person.
ii) Sh. Nirmal Sharma, Suptt.-cum-PIO and Sh. Tek Chand and Sh. Amarjeet Singh, Sr. Assistants.
ORDER
Heard .
The information for which the appellant had applied has been given to him by the respondent except that the classes studied by each students individually has been given for both the semesters as a whole, and the appellant has clarified in the Court today that he requires the list of classes studied by each student for the first and second semester separately. The respondent states that this information will be given to the appellant within ten days.

Insofar as the specific time-table is concerned, the respondent states that the concerned file does not contain any fixed time-table for Ph.D students. He further states that at the Ph. D level, there are only one or two students who are guided by the advisor and the timings for the theory and practical classes are kept flexible and are arranged according to their mutual convenience.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 30-12-2010 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
9th December, 2010

Jita Ram Bansal versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Jita Ram Bansal,
BXX-2238, Krishna Nagar,
Civil Lines, Ludhiana- 141001. ________Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 993 of 2010

Present:
i) None on behalf of the appellant.
ii) Sh.Nirmal Sharma, Suptt.-cum-PIO.

ORDER
Heard .
The information required by the appellant has been provided to him by the respondent vide his memos dated 27-10-2009, 22-04-2010 and 03-09-2010.
The appellant is not present. Apparently, he is satisfied with the information supplied to him by the respondent.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
9th December, 2010

Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director Student’s Welfare,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

CC No. 1680 /2009

Present:
Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO and Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent, on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. On 20-04-2010, the case had been disposed of and closed with certain observations which were beyond the ambit of the RTI Act, 2005.

2. The respondent initiated action on my observations and vide letter No. RTI/X/31912-13, dated the 5th October, 2010 submitted response for perusal. Accordingly, on his request an opportunity was given to the respondent-PIO to submit response in person.

3. During the proceedings today, the Respondent-PIO explains that the inquiry had been held with regard to the veracity of the signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur. The Inquiry report has brought out that :-
“Since S. Hardyal Singh Gajnipur has admitted himself that he has signed all these letters and his signatures are not forged, it was,

therefore, not necessary to take statements of Dr. M.S.Kang, Vice Chancellor- cum- Chairman, Board of Management and Dr.R.K.Mahey, Registrar-cum- Secretary, Board of Management in relation to this matter. It was also not required that S. Gajnipur’s signatures are got tested from Forensic Science Laboratory. “

4. No further action be initiated in this case since the respondent has taken necessary cognizance of my observations.

5. Copies of the order be sent to the respondent only and to the Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:11-11-2010 State Information Commissioner

RAJINDER KUMAR Versus PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND ANOTH Civil Writ Petition No.18609 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision : October 13, 2010.
Rajinder Kumar .....Petitioner
versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and another .....Respondents

CORAM : HONBLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
Present : Mr.Sharwan Sehgal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
-.-
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
---
Surya Kant, J. (Oral)
The petitioner joined the respondent-University as a Clerk on 4.8.1995. He, thereafter applied for the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) in the respondent-University itself and was appointed as such on 22.9.1999. The petitioner now seeks a mandamus to direct the respondent-University to promote him to the post of Sub Divisional Engineer (Civil) against the post reserved for Scheduled Caste category to which he belongs. It is averred that the next roster point falling in the cadre of Sub Division Engineer (Civil) is reserved for Scheduled Caste category and the petitioner being the senior most eligible candidate in that reserved category, is entitled to be promoted against the same.

The above stated claim has been raised by the petitioner by way of a legal notice dated 2.9.2010 (Annexure P-4) also. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, however, without expressing any views on the merits of the petitioners claim, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to the respondent-University to consider and dispose of the petitioners claim as contained in his legal notice dated 2.9.2010 (Annexure P-4) by passing a speaking order, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti.
(SURYA KANT)
JUDGE

RAJINDER PARSHAD Versus RAJINDER KAUR C.R. No. 3868 of 2010



PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA and OTHERS Versus STATE OF PUNJAB and OTHERS Civil Writ Petition No.14936 of 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others
Vs.
State of Punjab and others

Present: Mr.Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate, for the petitioners.

RANJIT SINGH, J.
Let the petitioners, at the first instance, appear before the court at Jalandhar and raise objection in regard to jurisdiction on the ground of territory, if it is so. At this stage, it will not be appropriate to interfere in the writ petition as court will have to see whether any cause of action or part of cause of action has arisen at Jalandhar or not. Dismissed.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool,
101 D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana 141001. ---------- Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana- 141 004. -------------Respondent


CC 2349 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Nirmal Sharma, APIO - cum - Superintendent, RTI Cell and Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Assistant, RTI Cell, O/o Registrar, Pb. Agriculture University, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to a service matter. Initial request was filed on 6.7.2010 and simultaneously the Complainant filed an appeal with the Commission received in the office of the Commission on 28.07.2010.

2. During the proceedings today, the Respondent states that the requisite information has already been supplied to the Complainant vide Memo. No. 10799 dated 21.04.2010 and No. 24551 dated 29.7.2010. He states that a written submission has been sent to the Commission vide letter No. 26869 dated 11.8.2010.

3. In view of the foregoing, the case is disposed of and closed.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.


Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana 141001. --------Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana- 141 004. --------- Respondent


CC - 2354 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Nirmal Sharma, APIO cum Superintendent, RTI Cell and Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Assistant, RTI Cell, O/o Registrar, Pb. Agriculture University, Ludhiana.

1.The case relates to a service matter. Initial request was filed on 6.7.2010 and simultaneously the Complainant filed an appeal with the Commission received in the office of the Commission on 28.07.2010.

2.During the proceedings today, the Respondent states that the requisite information has already been supplied to the Complainant vide Memo. No. 10799 dated 21.04.2010 and No. 24551 dated 29.7.2010. He states that a written submission has been sent to the Commission vide letter No. 26869 dated 11.8.2010.

3. In view of the foregoing, the case is disposed of and closed.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.

Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Dated: 17.08.2010. Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana- 141001. ----------Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana- 141 004. ---------- Respondent


CC - 2350 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Nirmal Sharma, APIO cum Superintendent, RTI Cell and Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Assistant, RTI Cell, O/o Registrar, Pb. Agriculture University, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to a service matter wherein the initial request was sent on 5.7.2010 and the Complainant sent a copy of Form A simultaneously to the Commission received in the office of the Commission on 27.7.2010.

2. During the proceedings today, the Respondent states that the initial request of the Complainant was received in his office on 26.7.2010 and the information will be provided as per the stipulations laid down in the RTI Act, 2005. A written submission has been sent to the Commission giving full details of the case vide letter No. 26870 dated 11.8.2010.

3. Since the Complainant has approached the Commission without giving opportunity to the Respondent, his appeal is without any merit. The case is disposed of and closed.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.

Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Dated: 17.08.2010. Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool,
101 D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana 141001. -----------Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana- 141 004. --------------Respondent


CC – 2355 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Nirmal Sharma, APIO cum Superintendent, RTI Cell and Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Assistant, RTI Cell, O/o Registrar, Pb. Agriculture University, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to a service matter wherein the initial request was sent on 6.7.2010 and the Complainant sent a copy of Form A simultaneously to the Commission received in the office of the Commission on 28.07.2010.

2. During the proceedings today, the Respondent states that the initial request of the Complainant was received in his office on 26.7.2010 and the information will be provided as per the stipulations laid down in the RTI Act, 2005. A written submission has been sent to the Commission giving full details of the case vide letter No. 26868 dated 11.8.2010.

3. Since the Complainant has approached the Commission without giving opportunity to the Respondent, his appeal is without any merit. The case is disposed of and closed.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.

Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Dated: 17.08.2010. Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana


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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool,
101 D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana- 141001. ------------ Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana- 141 004. -------------Respondent


CC – 2356 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Nirmal Sharma, APIO cum Superintendent, RTI Cell and Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Assistant, RTI Cell, O/o Registrar, Pb. Agriculture University, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to a service matter wherein the initial request was sent on 6.7.2010 and the Complainant sent a copy of Form A simultaneously to the Commission received in the office of the Commission on 29.07.2010.

2. During the proceedings today, the Respondent states that the initial request of the Complainant was received in his office on 19.7.2010 and the action has been initiated as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. A written submission has been sent to the Commission giving full details of the case vide letter No. 26867 dated 11.8.2010.

3. Since the Complainant has approached the Commission without giving opportunity to the Respondent, his appeal is without any merit. The case is disposed of and closed.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.

Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Dated: 17.08.2010. Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Dhiraj Kathuria versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Dhiraj Kathuria,
S/o Sh.Pindi Dass,
3-D, Rajguru Nagar,
Ludhiana- 141012. ---------- Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Director,
Punjab Horticultural Postharvest Technology Centre,
Punjab Agricultural University Campus,
Ludhiana- 141 004. ------------ Respondent


CC – 2359 of 2010
ORDER

Present: Sh. Dhiraj Kathuria,Complainant in person.
Sh. V.B.Mahajan, Senior Horticulturist and Sh. Sarvesh Pal Sharma, Administration Assistant, O/o Punjab O/o Pb. Horticultural Postharvest Technology Centre, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to seeking information regarding functioning of the Punjab Horticultural Postharvest Technology Centre, Pb. Agricultural University Campus, Ludhiana. Initial request was filed on 8.3.2010. A part of information was provided to the Complainant vide letter No. 317 dated 8.4.2010 and subsequently after inspection of documents on 21.5.2010. He filed an appeal on 28.07.2010.

2. During the proceedings today, the Complainant demands the deficient information especially pertaining to Item No. 2 of his original request dated 8.3.2010. The Respondent is willing to provide information. However, he states that keeping in view the magnitude of the information, the Complainant may visit his office for inspection/collection of the requisite information. Accordingly, with the mutual consent, the Complainant will visit the office of the Respondent on 23.8.2010 at 11.00 A.M. to inspect and collect the deficient information. The Respondent agrees to provide authenticated information to the Complainant.

3. To come up for confirmation of compliance of orders on 31.8.2010 at 2.00 PM.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.


Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Dhiraj Kathuria versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Dhiraj Kathuria,
S/o Sh.Pindi Dass,
3-D, Rajguru Nagar,
Ludhiana- 141012. ------------ Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Director,
Punjab Horticultural Postharvest Technology Centre,
Punjab Agricultural University Campus,
Ludhiana- 141 004. --------------Respondent


CC - 2362 of 2010
ORDER

Present: Sh. Dhiraj Kathuria,Complainant in person.
Sh. V.B.Mahajan, Senior Horticulturist and Sh. Sarvesh Pal Sharma, Administration Assistant, O/o Punjab O/o Pb. Horticultural Postharvest Technology Centre, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to seeking information regarding functioning of the Punjab Horticultural Postharvest Technology Centre, Pb. Agricultural University Campus, Ludhiana. Initial request was filed on 15.06.2010. A part of information was provided to the Complainant vide letter No. 317 dated 8.4.2010 and subsequently after inspection of documents on 21.5.2010. He filed an appeal with the Commission on 28.7.2010.

2. During the proceedings today, the Complainant demands the deficient information. The Respondent is willing to provide information. However, he states that keeping in view the magnitude of the information, the Complainant may visit his office for inspection/collection of the requisite information. Accordingly, with the mutual consent, the Complainant will visit the office of the Respondent on 23.8.2010 at 11.00 A.M. to inspect and collect the deficient information. The Respondent agrees to provide authenticated information to the Complainant.

3. To come up for confirmation of compliance of orders on 31.8.2010 at 2.00 PM.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.

Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Dated: 17.08.2010. Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Tarlok Nath versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Tarlok Nath,
S/o. Sh. Nand Lal,
R/o. Near Sharma Bakery, Kothey Bhim Sain,
Dina Nagar,
District- Gurdaspur. ________Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University ,
Ludhiana.
__________ Respondent
CC No. 2258 of 2010

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant

ii) Sh. Nirmal Sharma, Supdt., Sh, Chander Mohan,Supdt., Agronomy and Sh. Ashok Kumar, Clerk, KVK, Gurdaspur on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard
The respondent states that the G-4 arrears of the complainant have been disbursed to him and he is satisfied with the action taken by the University.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
5th August, 2010

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool,
S/o Sh. Kasturi Lal,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
ludhiana- 141001. ------------Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. ----------------Respondent


CC – 2265 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Assistant, RTI Cell, O/o Registrar, PAU, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to a service matter. Initial request was filed on 12.7.2010 and on not receiving a response, the Complainant filed an appeal with the Commission on the plea “The PIO, PAU has refused to accept the application

2. During the proceedings today, the Respondent makes a written submission vide letter No. 25889 dated 02.08.2010 which is taken on record. The Respondent present states that on receipt of the application from the Complainant information was sought from various Departments vide letter No. 22870 dated 14.07.2010.

3. Since the request of the Complainant is pre-mature, his appeal is dismissed and the case closed.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.


Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Dated: 03.08.2010. Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool S/o Sh. Kasturi Lal,
101 D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana 141 001. --------------- Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana. ------------ Respondent

CC – 1935 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Swaran Singh, Senior Assistant, RTI Br., O/o Pb. Agri. University, Ludhiana.

1. On the last date of hearing, on 23.6.2010, the Respondent had sought additional time to provide the requisite information.

2. During the proceedings today, the Respondent makes a written submission vide letter No. 22009 dated 5.7.2010. Through this letter, the Respondent has confirmed delivery of the requisite information to the Complainant.

3. Since the information stands supplied, the case is disposed of and closed.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.

( P.K.Grover )
Chandigarh Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
Dated: 06.07.2010. State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

30364 STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Satish Kumar,
# 2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1362 of 2010

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Swarn Singh, Sr. Assistant on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has informed the complainant vide his letter dated 21-06-2010 that although the Vice Chancellor passed orders on the file that the suspension period of Sh.N.K.Sharma be treated as non-duty, action was not taken on these orders inadvertently. However, the Registrar has initiated action for the implementation of these orders and as and when any final order is issued regarding treatment of the suspension period of Sh.N.K.Sharma, a copy of the same will be provided to him.

In so far as this case is concerned, the information required by the complainant does not exist, except for the orders of the Vice Chancellor on the noting sheet, which have been provided to the complainant, and no further action is therefore required to be taken.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
24th June, 2010

Vidyasagar Phool versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh. Vidyasagar Phool S/o Sh. Kasturi Lal,
101 - D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana - 141 001. -------- Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana. ---------------Respondent

CC -1935 of 2010
ORDER

Present: None on behalf of the Complainant.
Sh. Kawal Jeet, Clerk, RTI Cell, O/o Registrar, PAU, Ludhiana.

1. The case relates to a service matter. As per the written submission of the Complainant, the request for information was refused acceptance on 29.4.2010. Accordingly, the Complainant filed an appeal with the Commission received in the office of the Commission on 7.6.2010.

2. The Complainant is not present. The Respondent present makes a written submission vide letter No. 21117 dated 22.6.2010. He states that the application though dated 29.4.2010, was submitted by the Complainant only on 2.6.2010. The Respondent seeks time to provide the requisite information.

3. Accordingly, the case is adjourned to 06.07.2010 at 2.00 PM.

4. Announced in the hearing. Copies be sent to both the parties.


Chandigarh ( P.K.Grover )
Lt. Gen. (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Thirsty in the land of rivers

Thirsty in the land of rivers The land of five rivers is fast running out of water and its people are losing their cool. As the Punjab groundwater table sinks and a major crisis looms on the horizon, tempers are beginning to rise. But the state government seems unperturbed.

One recent incident should have served as a wake-up call. But one isnt sure that it has. In Jalandhars Basti Sheikh, when a municipal corporation tanker was supplying drinking water, a violent altercation between two neighbours ended in the death of one of them.

Trouble erupted when one Nand Lal and his son were filling their buckets. Another Basti Sheikh resident, Vikas Manchanda, tried to jump the queue. Nand Lal protested. Fisticuffs ensued. The punches that Manchanda threw at Nand Lal proved fatal. The latter succumbed to the blows.

This tragic incident occurred just before the norwesters brought some relief from the blazing sun. It highlighted the magnitude of the water shortage that Punjab is in grip of today. The state is anything but water-deficient, but the manner in which its residents have over the years exploited the life-giving resource has pushed Punjab to the brink of what could prove to be a catastrophe.

The state is in the throes of a severe water crisis that is getting worse with each passing year. Indiscriminate exploitation of groundwater for both agricultural and drinking purposes has led to rapid depletion. Of the 12,423 villages of Punjab, 11,849 are facing a shortage of drinking water. The water level in 30 per cent of the state was found to be 20 metres below the ground in 2005. Moreover, the water that is being drawn from the ground has alarmingly high sodium carborate content.

A survey conducted jointly by the Punjab Agricultural University and National Bureau of Soil Survey discovered that 57 seven per cent of ground water was not fit for consumption. In Muktsar, only 38 per cent groundwater is fit for drinking and agricultural purposes, in Faridkot 33 per cent, in Mansa 35, in Bathinda 19.77 per cent and in Moga 14.98 per cent.

The total area under cultivation in the state is 42.68 lakh hectares and the requirement for water is 43.7 lakh cubic metres. Availability is only 31 lakh cubic metres. The groundwater table has been going down 30 cubic meters per year. The water level has declined dangerously in 108 of the 138 development blocks that constitute Punjab. Most of the affected blocks are situated in the Malwa region. Despite the water crisis, Punjab has not formulated a water management policy. Union sports minister M.S. Gill has this to say about the worsening situation: �We are dependent on canals, dams, tube-wells and rain water for irrigation. If these sources dry up, the agricultural tracts in the state will turn into wasteland. When I was the development commissioner of Punjab from 1985 to 1988, I had suggested that tube-wells should be installed only by licence and that a rule be framed for not boring beyond a particular limit. All should get an equal share of water irrespective of their economic status.� Gills fears werent unfounded. If such indiscriminate use of water continues, the land of five rivers, Thirsty in the land of rivers Indias granary, will be reduced to a barren desert. Agricultural experts hold that water shortage is linked to the issue of water pollution. These two issues cannot be viewed separately. Along with misuse of water, there is excessive use of fertilisers and pesticides to get bumper crops. According to a survey, Punjab utilises twice as much fertilisers and pesticides as the rest of the country put together.

Most areas in Punjab are under wheat and rice cultivation. The latter is more dependent on water, so paddy cultivation has aggravated the water crisis in the state. The state government had passed an ordinance forbidding paddy plantation before June 10. The main aim of this ordinance was to curb the use of tube-well water. Monsoon hits Punjab only in late June but farmers seeking two crops of paddy start plantation early by using tube-well water. This has led to the depletion of the groundwater table. This year, paddy plantation in Patiala was started as early as end-May this year.

The government has been turning a blind eye to this flagrant violation of the ordinance. Organic farming campaigner Umendra Dutt says: �Water is a gift of nature and is considered a purifying agent. We have polluted it so much that it has turned poisonous. We will have to pay a heavy price in the future.�

Dutt says that the responsibility for water conservation does not lie with the government alone. The entire population should be become a part of this essential mission. �Punjab should have a water budget and proper water management should be introduced across the state. This should be done at the individual, town and zonal levels. Irrigational, industrial and household use of water should be regulated.�

The water crisis is also related to loans that farmers take for agricultural purposes. H.S. Randhawa, former professor of chemistry, Punjab Agricultural University, says: �Earlier farmers would obtain loans for tractors or threshers, but now they are seeking loans in order to sink tube-wells too. But as the groundwater table goes down, these bore-wells are rendered unusable after a couple of years. The farmer is still repaying the old loan when the need for another loan arises.� If something isnt done about the water situation, Punjab agriculture might be living on borrowed time.

Vijay Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Vijay Kumar,
# 121 A, Aggar Nagar,
Ludhiana. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1800 of 2010

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Nirmal Sharma, Supdt. on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent states that the information could not be provided to the complainant earlier because he had not deposited the prescribed fees. He has made a written submission today that the fees has been deposited by the complainant and he has now been given the required information.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
17th June, 2010

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Satish Kumar,
# 2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1362 of 2010

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant .
ii) Sh. Vijay Sharma, AAO, Sh. Nirmal Sharma , Suptt-cum-APIO., on behalf of the respondent.
ORDER
Heard.
The complainant has sent a written communication stating that it will not be possible for him to attend the hearing today. He has, however, made some submissions concerning point nos. 3, 4 and 5 of his application for information dated 01-01-2010, and these are discussed as follows:

1) The complainant’s submission regarding serial no.3 of the items of information and the reply of the respondent has been seen. I find that the information which has been asked for is required to be properly dealt with by the respondent under Section 4 of the RTI Act, 2005. The respondent has mentioned that necessary action in this regard is being taken. The information, otherwise, is too open ended and vast and the respondent cannot be required to prepare the same since this would disproportionately divert his time and resources.

2) The respondent confirms that the transfer policy framed prior to 1989 is the most recent policy which is in force, since the policy made in 1989 was never acted upon . This point is therefore taken care of, as mentioned by the complainant himself.

3) The respondent undertakes to bring to the Court on the next date of hearing a copy of the orders treating the suspension period of Sri N.K.Sharma, Senior Assistant, as non duty period .

Adjourned to 10 AM on 24-06-2010 for further consideration and orders.


(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
3rd June, 2010

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Satish Kumar,
# 2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College, Gill Road,
Bathinda. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana __________ Respondent

CC No. 1379 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh. Satish Kumar complainant in person .
ii) Sh. Nirmal Sharma, Suptt. , on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
Vide his application dated 02-01-2010, the complainant has sought to be informed about the decision and action taken by the PAU authorities on his representations, referred to in his application dated 27-05-2009, made under the RTI Act, 2005.

The respondent has clarified in the Court today that no action has been taken on the letters dated 06-02-2009, 09-04-2009 and 28-04-2009 of the complainant. These letters were submitted to the Vice Chancellor, who has decided to file them.

No further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
28th May, 2010

Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr.Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director, Students’ Welfare,
Panjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Panjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent
CC No. 1680/2009

Present:
None is present on behalf of both the parties.

ORDER

1. Case was fixed for confirmation of compliance of orders dated 20.04.2010.
2. A letter is received from the PIO of Punjab Agricultural University, bearing Memo No. PIO-RTI/2010/14752, dated 13.05.2010 along with a receipt from Mrs. Virpal Kaur wife of Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar in which the PIO has stated that the requisite amount of Rs. 6,000/- (Rupees Six thousand only), awarded as compensation by the Commission, has been paid on 13.05.2010 vide Bankers’ cheque No. 394045, dated 07.05.2010 and the same has been delivered to Mrs. Virpal Kaur wife of Dr.Dulcha Singh Brar, at his residence as Dr. Brar was on leave.
2. PIO pleads that the case may be closed as the orders have been

complied with.
3. Since the orders of the Commission have been complied with, the case is disposed of.
4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:20-05-2010 State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Satish Kumar,
# 2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1328 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh. Satish Kumar, complainant in person .
ii) Sh. Vijay Sharma, AAO, Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Asstt. and Sh. Nirmal Singh, JE(Elect), on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
There are two applications for information of the complainant in this case, dated 06-11-2009 and 15-11-2009. The alleged deficiencies pointed out by the complainant in the information provided to him by the respondent in response to his application dated 06-11-2009 have been considered and found to be baseless. Insofar as serial no. 3 of the items of information mentioned in the complainant’s application dated 15-11-2009 is concerned, the required information has been brought by the respondent and is enclosed with these orders .
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
20th May, 2010

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Satish Kumar,
# 2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1362 of 2010

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant .
ii) Sh. Vijay Sharma, AAO,Sh. Swaran Singh, Sr. Asstt. and Sh. Nirmal Singh, JE(Elect), on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
There are two applications for information of the complainant concerned with this case, dated 01-01-2010 and 09-11-2009 .

The alleged deficiencies pointed out by the complainant in the information provided to him in response to his application dated 09-11-2009 have been found to be baseless, except that with regard to item no.2 of the items of information mentioned in the application, the respondent states that the case of entitlement of leave to Sh. Amar Singh is still under consideration.

The respondent has not brought any reply to the alleged deficiencies pointed out by the complainant in respect of his application dated 01-01-2010, because the concerned papers were not sent to him along with the notice for today’s hearing through an oversight. The same has been supplied to the respondent today and he is directed to bring his reply on the next date of hearing.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 03-06-2010 for further considerations and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
20th May, 2010

Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, SECTOR-17-C,CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)
Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
c/o Vigilant Citizens’ Forum,
Gill Road Chapter, 3344, Chet singh Nagar,
Ludhiana- 141003. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 336 /2009

Present:
None is present on behalf of appellant.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO and Shri Nirmal Sharma, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. The case was fixed for confirmation of orders dated 13.04.2010. The respondent places on record a photocopy of Bankers’ cheque No. 394048, dated 07.05.2010 of State Bank of India for Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) and he also produces a photocopy of receipt taken from Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira, the appellant, who has received the amount of compensation.

2. Since the orders of the commission have been complied with, the case is disposed of.

3. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:11-05-2010 State Information Commissioner

Joginder Pal Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh.Joginder Pal Singh,
H No- 336, Phase 2,
Sector-54, Mohali. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1501 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh.Joginder Pal Singh, complainant in person .
ii) Dr. H.S.Thind, Sr.Soil Chemist and Sh. Nirmal Sharma, Supdt.,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
This complaint has been found to be without any basis because copies of the complete records which are available in the office of the respondent have been given to the complainant with regard to his applications for information dated 15-01-2010 and 09-02-2010 . The alleged deficiencies pointed out by the complaint have been seen . I find that each item of information mentioned by the complainant has been dealt with by the respondent . Either the information, if available in the records of the University , has been given to the complainant , or the reason for its non-availability has been explained. I therefore find that there is no basis in these alleged deficiencies.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
30th April, 2010

Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, SECTOR-17-C,CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)
REGISTERE
Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director Students’ Welfare,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Respondent

CC - 1680/2009

RESERVED ON 18.02.2010

AND

PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.04.2010

ORDER

1. The case was last heard on 18.02.2010, when after hearing both the parties, the judgement was reserved.

2. The instant case has been heard on 29.07.2009, 17.09.2009, 17.11.2009, 15.12.2009, 28.01.2010 and 18.02.2010 and interim orders were issued after each hearing.

3. The brief history of the case is that Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar filed three applications with the PIO of the office of Registrar, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, one on 11.05.2009 and two on 14.05.2009 alongwith fee of Rs. 10/- with each application for obtaining certain information. On getting no response,he sent reminders to the PIO on 15.06.2009, 17.06.2009 and 23.06.2009. The Respondent supplied some information to the Complainant on 22.06.2009. Dis-satisfied with the information supplied, he filed a complaint with the Commission on 25.06.2009, which was received in the Commission on 26.06.2009 against Diary No. 9850 and Notice of Hearing was issued to both the parties.

4. In the complaint filed with the Commission, the Complainant has submitted that the information demanded by him in Para 5(a) & (b) sub-paras (xi), (xiii), (xvii), (xviii), (xix) and (xxi) has been denied by the PIO on the following pleas:-
(1) That the documents desired by the applicant cannot be supplied as per Clause 8(h) of Chapter I of RTI Act, 2005 as the inquiry is in progress

(2) Mrs. Usha Sharma has already withdrawn her request/complaint, hence no action/copy is required to be supplied.

(3) The transcript was supplied by obtaining approval of the Vice-Chancellor, PAU.

(4) Only CD was available with the office which was before the Inquiry Committee. No other copy of CD was available, hence transcript was got prepared as per verbal orders which was supplied. No correspondence/noting in this regard has been prepared.

(5) The letter of members of BOM regarding incorrect reporting of proceedings of the 237th meeting of BOM held on 31.03.09 have already been withdrawn by the members of Board of Management before taking any action in this regard. Thus no copy is required to be supplied.

5. During hearing on 29.07.2009, the information supplied to the Complainant on 22.06.2009 was discussed in detail. The Complainant submitted that there is difference in two scripts of CD, one which has been supplied to him and the other which he himself has prepared from the CD, supplied to him. Both the scripts were taken on record for comparison. Accordingly, Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar, was directed to be present in person on the next date of hearing alongwith an affidavit and original record and directions were also issued to the officials, who prepared CD to give a statement under Section18(3)(a)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005.

6. The PIO supplied some information/reply in respect of Paras (xvii), (xviii), (xix), (xx) and (xxi) alongwith authenticated documents to the Complainant vide Memo. No. PIO/RTI/2009/21591-92, dated 11.09.2009. Besides, reply to the queries raised by the Complainant vide letter dated 26.12.2008 was also supplied vide Memo. dated 06.01.2009 after obtaining sanction from the Vice-Chancellor.

6. During hearing on 17.09.2009, the Complainant placed on record a copy of Forensic Expert Report of CD(Compact Disc) bearing Serial No. 8003 21RD 3233 of 23.05.2009 by Mr. Prabhu D Rathore, New Delhi, who opined as under:-
“in my opinion the given voice sample in the given voice record sample is not consistent or one time recording. The sample is tempered.”

This report was not given any cognizance as this report cannot be used as a legal document in the Court. This is for out of court purpose only. However, the Complainant is free to use this document in the court of law.

The Complainant also placed on record a report by Shri Devendra Prasad, Forensic Document Expert, House No. 619, Sector: 8-B, Chandigarh about the correctness of the signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur on a letter dated 27.04.2009 addressed to the Vice Chancellor and Chairman, Board of Management, PAU, Ludhiana, which reads as under:-
“The person, who wrote the standard signatures Marked A-1 and A-2, did not write the questioned signature marked Q-1. The questioned signature marked Q-1 is a product of copied forgery.” Since this report was again from a private Forensic Document Expert, Deputy Registrar, State Information Commission, Punjab, was asked to get the opinion on the signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur from Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Mini Secretariat, Sector:9, Chandigarh.

7. The Complainant requested that necessary action for imposition of penalty upon the PIO may be taken for the delay in the supply of information and he may be given compensation for the loss and detriment suffered by him, under the provisions of RTI Act, 2005. Accordingly, a Show-Cause Notice was issued to Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar, for imposing penalty on him for the delay in the supply of the information and for awarding compensation to the Complainant under the provisions of RTI Act, 2005. The case was adjourned and fixed for 17.11.2009.

8. In response to the Show-Cause Notice issued to Shri Jaswant Singh, PIO, he submitted an affidavit dated 12.10.2009, a copy of which was sent to the Complainant, in which he has submitted as under:-
“That the documents/information desired by the applicant/complainant, Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar were supplied to him within the stipulated period of 30 days as per details in the Annexure appended herewith mentioned at Sr. Nos. 1, 6 to 12, 14 to 18 except at Sr. No. 2 to 5 and 13. The information/documents mentioned in Sr. No. 2 to 5 and 14 were obtainable from other departments of the University as detailed in Column No. 4 of the Annexure. On the receipt of information/documents from other departments, the same were supplied to the complainant/applicant. The delay occurred due to reasonable causes mentioned in Column No. 4 of the Annexure. As claimed by the applicant, no information is delayed for nine months. Moreover, the applicant has not demanded compact Disc under RTI. There was no malafide denial of the request of the information/documents. The PIO has given correct/complete and true information as per request of the applicant after obtaining the same from the concerned departments. The deponent has acted with due diligence and bonafidely. He has not caused loss determinant to the complainant/applicant as fully explained in the Annexure.” In the Annexure, the PIO has stated that the Complainant filed a number of applications dated 15.12.2008, 24.04.2009, 11.05.2009, 14.05.2009(two), 25.05.2009(two), 08.06.2009, 22.06.2009(two), 02.07.2009, 06.07.2009, 07.07.2009, 08.07.2009, 10.07.2009, 10.07.2009, 13.07.2009, 28.07.2009, 03.08.2009 and 25.08.009 and the requisite information/reply was supplied to him in annotated form in respect of each application within stipulated period as per the provisions of RTI Act. He has further stated that all the concerned Departments were issued instructions to supply the requisite information within 30 days failing which they will be held responsible for delay and more-over Rules of RTI Act, 2005 were also circulated to them. In the last he has submitted that the complete information has been supplied to the Complainant in respect of his applications dated 11.5.1009 and 14.5.2009 as per the orders of the Commission dated 17.09.2009.

9. The result of examination was received from Director Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Chandigarh vide letter dated 28.01.2010 in which Dr. Seema Sharda, Assistant Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Chandigarh has stated as under:-
“I have carefully and thoroughly examined the red enclosed questioned signature stamped and marked Q1 and have compared them with the relevant standard signatures from the original documents in all aspects of hand-writing identification and detection of forgery with the help of Scientific aid and it has been concluded
that:-
1. The person who wrote the red enclosed standard signatures stamped and marked A1 to A4 and S1 to S9 did not write the red enclosed questioned signature similarly stamped and marked Q1. “

The above-said report of the Director Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Chandigarh proves that the signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur have been forged. Therefore, Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana may get an inquiry conducted by a senior officer of the University and take necessary action against the concerned officers/officials on the basis of the Inquiry Report. The Complainant is also free to approach the Court of Law in this regard for redressal of his grievances, if any.

10. During hearing on 28.01.2010, CD provided by the PIO was operated and heard in the court and it was found that the talk between Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar and Mrs. Gurbinder Kaur, Social Welfare Officer was held in a cordial atmosphere and nothing unparliamentary came to the notice of the Commission.

11. After going through the case file and the interim orders issued vis-à-vis the submissions made by both the parties, from time to time, I arrive at the conclusion that the PIO tried his level best to supply the requisite information to the Complainant at the earliest possible. To ensure timely supply of the information, instructions were issued to all the concerned Departments and even Rules of RTI Act were circulated to them. Thus the delay occurred in the supply of information is not intentional and it was rather procedural delay. No malafide is proved on the part of the PIO. Therefore, the PIO cannot be held responsible for the delay. Hence, no penalty is imposed upon the PIO for the delay in the supply of information.

12. So far as the request of the Complainant for giving him a compensation for the loss and detriment suffered by him is concerned, I do feel that the Complainant has suffered a lot physically, financially as well as mentally as his image in the public has been tarnished/damaged very badly and thus he deserves a very heavy amount of compensation. However, remaining within the provisions of RTI Act, 2005, a compensation of Rs. 6000/-(Rupees Six thousand only) is awarded to the Complainant for the visits he made to Chandigarh from Ludhiana to attend the proceedings in the instant case in the office of the Commission, to be paid to him by the Public Authority i.e. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana through Bank Draft before the next date of hearing.

13. The case is fixed for confirmation of compliance of orders on 20.05.2010 at 10.00 A.M. in Court No. 1 on second floor of SCO No. 84-85,

14. Copies of the order be sent to all the parties by Registered Post.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated: 20. 04. 2010 State Information Commissioner

CC: Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University , Ludhiana.

Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
C/o Vigilant Citizens Forum,
Gill Road Chapter, 3344, Chet Singh Nagar,
Ludhiana 141003. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC 336-2009

Present: None is present on behalf of the Appellant.
Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. A fax message has been received today in the Commission Office from the Appellant intimating the Commission that he has received the requisite information. He has requested that penalty may be imposed upon the PIO for the delay in the supply of the information and he may be given compensation for the detriment and loss suffered by him in obtaining the information.

2. A perusal of the case file reveals that the Appellant demanded information in a format provided by him in his application dated 21.01.2009. After receiving the application, the PIO vide his letter No. 3672, dated 12.02.2009 informed the Appellant that the information desired by him is lengthy and related to different Departments and the Departments have been requested to provide the information immediately and as soon as the information is received the same will be supplied to him.

3. The PIO has submitted that the process of collecting requisite information from different Departments of the University was started immediately after the receipt of the application of the Appellant and some information was supplied to the Appellant on 13.07.2009. Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira filed first appeal with the first Appellate authority but no directions were issued to the PIO by the First Appellate Authority. The PIO has submitted that the information was to be collected from 60 Departments of the University and some of the Departments had to further collect the information from 16 KVKs, 12 FASs, 16 Regional Stations and 4 Regional Sub-Stations located in different District of the State. He has submitted that the delay has not been caused intentionally and rather it is only a procedural delay as the information was to be prepared in the specific format provided by the Appellant.

4. On the directions of the Commission the excess charges of Rs. 90/- claimed by the University after a period of 30 days, has been refunded to the Appellant.

5. After going through the submissions made by the Appellant and the PIO vis-à-vis the affidavit submitted by the PIO and keeping in view the facts and circumstances narrated above, I arrive at the conclusion that no intentional delay has been caused by the PIO. Rather he has tried his level best to collect the information at the earliest possible but the delay has occurred as the information was very voluminous and was to be prepared in the specific format provided by the Appellant after collecting it from a large number of Departments, KVKs, FASs, Regional Stations and Regional Sub-Stations located in different Districts of the State. Thus the delay caused is merely a procedural delay and no malafide is proved on the part of the PIO. Therefore, no penalty is ordered to be imposed upon the PIO. However, a compensation of Rs. 5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) is awarded to the Appellant for the detriment and loss suffered by him in obtaining the information in the instant case to be paid to him by the Public Authority through a Bank Draft, before the next date of hearing.

6. The case is fixed for confirmation of compliance of orders on 11.05.2010 at 10.00 A.M. in Court No. 1 on the second floor of SCO No. 84-85, Sector: 17-C, Chandigarh.

7. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Surinder Singh
State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. _________ Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 770 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh.Satish Kumar, appellant in person.
ii) Sh. Nirmal Sharma, Suptt.-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
In compliance with the orders of the Court dated 15-01-2010, the respondent has sent to the appellant copies of all relevant provisions of the Haryana & Punjab Agricultural Universities Act and Statutes framed there under, related to the terms and conditions of the appointment of the VC, the Registrar and the Comptroller of the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. It has been stated in the covering letter that there is no other provision in the Act or the Statutes on the subject. The appellant has pointed out that section 15 (iii) of the Act ibid states that “the emoluments and other conditions of service of the VC shall be such as may be prescribed……..” but the orders issued under this provision of the law has not been supplied to him. The respondent states that no orders prescribing any entitlement of the VC of the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana have been issued under this section.

With reference to para 1 of the orders dated 15-01-2010 , the respondent states that no information is available in the Act or the Statute of the University regarding the accountability of the Registrar to the VC, other than what has provided in Section 17 (1)(f) of the Act ibid, in which it has been stated that the Registrar will perform such duties as may be prescribed or required from time to time by the VC .
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
8th April, 2010

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Satish Kumar, 2836, Opp. GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana.
_______ Complainant
Vs.

The Public Information Officer
o/o the Registrar, Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. _______ Respondents

CC No. 867 of 2010

Present:-
Shri Satish Kumar complainant in person.
Shri Nirmal Sharma, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

The complainant had moved a number of applications to the Public Information Officer/Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Replies were given by the University.

2. In the present complaint before the Commission, he has not asked for any specific information. A perusal of his request shows that he has merely made a general statement that there is no transparency in the appointment of the Vice Chancellor and there is no provision in the Act to regulate the working of Vice Chancellor and Registrar of the University.

3. These issues are not within the jurisdiction of the Information Commission. The complainant, if he so likes, may flag these issues with the concerned authorities.

2. With these observations, the complaint case is closed.

(R.I. Singh)
Chief Information Commissioner
31st March, 2010 Punjab

Joginder Pal Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Joginder Pal Singh,
H. No-336, Phase 2, Sector-54,
Mohali. ________ Appellant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. The Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 151 of 2010

Present:
i) Sh. Joginder Pal Singh, appellant in person.
ii) Dr. S.S.Thind, Senior Soil Chemist, Sh.M.L.Khullar Senior Assistant and Sh.Nirmal Sharma Suptt-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The appellant states that he has received a reply from the respondent in response to his letter dated 07-10-2009, in which he has pointed out four deficiencies in the information which had been provided to him in response to his application for information dated 04-08-2009. This reply was received by him after he had made the present complaint to the Commission.

The appellant further states that he is satisfied with the information/clarification given to him in respect of points 3 and 8, but the precise information required with reference to points 4 and 5 has still not been supplied to him. The respondent states that there in no specific reason which can be found on record for the “discontinuation” of the scheme which is the subject matter of the appellant’s application from 01-04-2007 to 31-012-2007, because the scheme was never “discontinued” and the staff is recruited on contractual basis for its implementation as and when grants in-aid are received for this purpose from the ICAR. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that no staff was recruited from 01-04-2007 to 31-12-2007 because of inadequacy of the grant in-aid which had been received.

In view of the clarification given by the respondent, no further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
30th March, 2010

Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira
c/o Vigilant Citizens’ Forum, Gill Road chapter,
3344, Chet Singh nagar, Ludhiana-141003. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 336 /2009

Present:
None is present on behalf of appellant.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO and Shri Nirmal Sharma, Superintendent-cum-APIO, on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. As per directions given on the last date of hearing, the appellant has made a submission of his observations through e-mail dated 03.03.2010 at 11.17 AM received in the commission office on 04.03.2010 vide diary No. 3611. The respondent states that they have received the observations and submission of appellant only on 4th March, 2010 at 4.30 PM. They state that they want to submit written submission and the case may be adjourned.
2. Accordingly, the case is adjourned and fixed for further hearing on 13.04.2010 in court No. 1, SCO 84-85, Sector 17C, Chandigarh, at 10.00 AM.
3. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:05-03-2010 State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. _________ Appellant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 770 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh.Satish Kumar, appellant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has requested that an adjournment for another 15 days may be given to collect the information required by the appellant, in compliance with the Court’s orders dated 15-01-2010, since the mother of the Registrar, PAU, expired on 21-02-2010 and he is on leave till 05-03-2010. Accepting the respondent’s request, the case is adjourned to 10 AM on 08-04-2010 for confirmation of compliance of the Commission’s orders.


(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
3rd March, 2010

Shalinder Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Shalinder Singh,
S/o. Sh.Ajit Singh,
Ram Basti, Street No-8-A,
Sangrur- 148001. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjabi University,
Patiala. __________ Respondent

CC No. 3967 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Vikrant Sharma, Advocate, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
In compliance with the orders dated 29-01-2010, the information required by the complainant has been given to him by the respondent vide his letter dated 18-02-2010.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
26th February, 2010 Punjab

Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
C-o Vigilant Citizens Forum,
Gill Road Chapter, 3344, Chet Singh Nagar,
Ludhiana - 141003. Appellant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC - 336-2009


Present: None is present on behalf of the Appellant.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant , on behalf of the Respondent.


ORDER


1. The Complainant, vide letter dated 17.02.2010, which has been received in the Commission on 17.02.2010 against Diary No. 2458, has intimated the Commission that due to some important cases in courts at Ludhiana, he is not in a position to attend the hearing today. He has further stated that if the PIO supplies the requisite information, he would require time to point out the deficiencies and file the rebuttal. Thus he has requested to adjourn the case. In the last he has requested to impose penalty upon the PIO and award compensation to him.

2. Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, places on record a letter No. PIO.RTI.2010/4570-4571, dated 15.02.2010, addressed to the Commission with a copy to the Appellant. The Appellant is directed to send his observations, if any, to the PIO with a copy to the Commission, on the information supplied to him.

4. On the request of the Appellant, the case is adjourned and fixed for further hearing on 05-03-2010 at 11.00 A.M. in Room No. 4, on the first floor of SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector: 17-C, Chandigarh.

5. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
State Information Commissioner

Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director, Students’ Welfare,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

CC No. 1680/2009

Present:
Shri Dulcha Singh Brar, complainant, in person.
Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. Heard both the parties.
2. The case has been received back from the office of Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Chandigarh, in which Dr. Seema Sharda, Assistant Director, has given the result of examination which is reproduced as below:-

“I have carefully and thoroughly examined the red enclosed questioned signature stamped and marked Q1 and have compared them with the relevant standard signatures from the original documents in all aspects of hand- writing identification and detection of forgery with the help of Scientific aids and it has been concluded that :-

The person who wrote the red enclosed standard signatures stamped and marked A1 to A4 and SI to S9 did not write the red enclosed questioned signature similarly stamped and marked Q1.”

3. However, the documents marked as A1 and A2 sent with the file to the office of Director Forensic Science Laboratory have not been received back with the case file. Secretary, PSIC and Deputy Registrar, PSIC may clarify whether the documents marked as A1 and A2 have been received back or not along with the Commission’s file.

4. The judgement is reserved.

5. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:18-02-2010 State Information Commissioner


CC: (i) Secretary, Punjab State Information commission.
(ii) Deputy Registrar, PSIC.

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana.
_________Appellant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 770 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh.Satish Kumar, appellant in person.
ii)Sri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent seeks some further time to give the required information to the appellant . Accordingly this case is adjourned to 10 AM on 05-03-2010 for further consideration and orders.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
18th February, 2010 Punjab

In a new experiment, Rose Garden to produce hybrid varieties



Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director Student’s Welfare,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Respondent

CC - 1680/2009

Present:
Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar, Complainant, in person.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. The forensic report sought vide letter No. 14803, dated 30.12.2009 from the office of Director Forensic Laboratory, Punjab, Mini Secretariat, Sector:9, Chandigarh is still awaited.

2. Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO places on record photo copy of a letter dated 30.12.2009. The Complainant places on record a written submission on the information supplied to him from time to time and one copy of the submission is handed over to the Respondent.

3. On the request of Shri Dulcha Singh Brar, C. D. provided to him under the signatures of Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant-cum-Presenting Officer and Dr. Pam Rajput, the Chairperson of the second Enquiry Committee constituted by Vice Chancellor of Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana is listened today in the court by the under-signed in the presence of Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar, Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant, Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent and the Complainant. One copy of this C.D. has been prepared and taken on record. It is noticed that the talk between Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar and the complainant Mrs. Gurbinder Kaur, Social Welfare Officer has been held in a cordial atmosphere. She is found laughing many times during talk. The Complainant pleads for getting the C.D. checked from Central Forensic Science Laboratory and he has given four address of these laboratories and one is situated in Chandigarh.

4. Decision for getting the C.D. checked or not will be taken on the next date of hearing.

5. The case is fixed for further hearing on 18.02.2010 at 10.00 A.M. in Court No. 1 on second floor of SCO No. 84-85, Sector: 17-C, Chandigarh.

6. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated: 28. 01. 2010 State Information Commissioner

Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
c/o Vigilant Citizens’ Forum, Gill Road
Chapter, 3344, Chet Singh Nagar,
Ludhiana-141003. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Panjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 336 /2009

Present:
Shri Surinder Pal, Advocate, on behalf of appellant.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. Heard both the parties.
2. The respondent states that the complete information as per orders dated 15.12.2009 has been supplied to the appellant. Some sheets of the information supplied are authenticated by Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO in the court today.
3. Shri Jaswant Singh, PIO, states that he assumed the charge of PIO ;in the month of March, 2009. Earlier to him, Shri Suresh Kumar Saini, the then Assistant Registrar of the University was the PIO. The delay of one month is during his period. Therefore, before taking any action, I serve a show cause notice to Shri Suresh Kumar Saini to submit his written statement within a period of 15 days after the receipt of these orders.

4. I, therefore, call upon the Respondent-PIO (Shri Suresh Kumar Saini-former Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO) to show cause why penalty be not imposed upon him under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 for delay in supplying the information. He is also directed to show cause why suitable compensation be not awarded to the complainant under Section 19(8) (b) of the RTI Act, for the detriment and loss suffered by him on account of delay in the supply of information. The respondent is directed to file his affidavit showing cause as afore-mentioned by 15th of February, 2010 with a copy to the opposite party.

5. The show cause notice will be served to Shri Suresh Kumar Saini by Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO.

6. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:28-01-2010 State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp GNE College,
Gill Road,
Ludhiana.
________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 3910 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh, Satish Kumar,complainant in person.
ii) S. Nirmal Sharma, Supdt-cum-APIO,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The information required by the complainant has been supplied to him by the respondent except for the information mentioned at point no. 5 of his application for information. Against this point, the complainant has asked for details of the manner in which the suspension period was treated of all the employees of the University who were suspended during the period 01-01-1995 to 31-05-2009 and in case it was treated as non-duty, whether a show cause notice was issued to the concerned employee. The respondent informed the complainant that no such information is being maintained , i.e., there is no single place or register where this information would be available. The complainant has sent to the respondent a list of 168 employees belonging to different wings and Departments of the University who, according to the complainant, were punished at the end of disciplinary proceedings, and has asked the respondent to give the required information in respect of those who had been suspended.. The complainant states that he wants this information to support his allegation that the show cause notice, which must be issued before a period of suspension can be treated as non-duty, has not been followed by the University. The complainant, however, can make such a complaint to the appropriate authorities for necessary action without this information, and it is not necessary to compel the respondent to spend time and effort to collect the same, as it would be disproportionate to the objective being sought to be achieved by the complainant.

Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
22ndJanuary, 2010

Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Ashok Kumar,
H No- 11322, Habowal Kalan,
Ludhiana- 141001. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana __________ Respondent

CC No. 3028 and 3029 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Ashok Kumar, complainant in person.
ii) S. Swarn Singh, Senior Asstt., S.Daljit Singh, SDO Stores and S. Balbir Singh, Store Keeper, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
An inquiry which had been ordered to be held vide the Court’s order dated 17-12-2009 has been completed and the report was submitted by the respondent today. According to the report, all the available records have been shown to the complainant and the remaining record which could not be shown has been reported as having been destroyed by white ants.
No further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
21st January, 2010

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana.
_________Appellant. Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 770 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh.Satish Kumar, appellant in person.

ORDER
Heard.
The appellant has made the following submissions with reference to his application dated 01-10-2009 :-

1) He states that according to the information supplied to him, the terms and conditions of the appointment of the VC, Registrar and Comptroller have been stated in their appointment letters as being regulated by the Statutes of the University as amended from time to time. The complainant states that he wants copies of the concerned Statutes, in the absence of which the information provided to him is not exact.
2) The complainant states that it is not clear whether there is any other provision which exists in the statutes or regulations of the University which mention the authority to whom the Registrar is responsible, other than what has been supplied to the complainant.
A copy of the complaint of the complainant dated 01-10-2009 is sent to the PIO, o/o Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, who should give his response to the same at 10 AM on 18-02-2010. The respondent or his representative should also bring with him on that date copies of the up-to-date statues which govern the terms and conditions of the appointment of the VC, Registrar and Comptroller.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab
15th January, 2010

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College, Gill Road,
Ludhiana. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 3612 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Satish Kumar, complainant in person.
ii) Sri Nirmal Sharma, Supdt, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
A perusal of the information supplied by the respondent to the complainant shows that proper replies have been given vide his letter dated 18-12-2009 and the letter of the Registrar, Punjab Agriculture University, dated 19-11-2009, to each of the points mentioned by the complainant in his application.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
31st December, 2009 Punjab

Ashok Kumar JE versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Ashok Kumar, J.E. (Retd.),
11322, Pavillar Nagar,
HaIbowal Kalan,
Ludhiana- 141001. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1855 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Nirmal Sharma Suptt.-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has submitted that the reply to the complaint dated 04-10-2009 of Sh. Ashok Kumar along with the information required by him was given to him on 05-11-2009 under proper receipt, which has been submitted to the Court for its record.
In view of the above, no further action is required to be taken on Sh. Ashok Kumar’s complaint dated 04-10-2009.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
29th December, 2009 Punjab

Sh Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Ashok Kumar,
H No- 11322, Habowal Kalan,
Ludhiana- 141001.
________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana __________ Respondent

CC No. 3028 and 3029 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Ashok Kumar, complainant in person.
ii) Sri Nirmal Sharma, Supdt., and Sri Balbir Singh, Store Keeper, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
These cases are being dealt by this single order since the complainant and the respondent and the subject matter of the applications for information in both the cases are identical.
In these two cases, the complainant has asked for inspection of certain records and the respondent claims that what ever record is available in the concerned office of the PIO has been shown to the complainant. The grievance of the complainant is that the stock registers mentioned at sr. nos. 1, 5, 7, 8 and 9 of his application for information dated 17-07-2009 have not been shown to him and he claims that he has evidence to show that these stock registers ought to be available in the office of the Sub Divisional Engineer ( Stores ). Similar is the position with regard to items at sr. nos. 2, 3, 4, 6, 15, 16 and 18 mentioned in the application for information dated 26-08-2009 of the complainant.

In the above circumstances I direct Dr.Gurkirpal Singh, Estat officer-cum-Chief Engineer-cum-PIO to inquire into the allegation of the complainant that the stock registers mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs are available in the office of the SDE ( Stores ), but have still not been shown to him. The inquiry report prepared at the end of the inquiry should be submitted to this Court on the next date of hearing.

Adjourned to 10 AM on 21-01-2010 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Punjab

17th December, 2009

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
c/o Vigilant Citizens’ forum,
Gill Road Chapter, 3344,
Chet Singh Nagar, Ludhiana-141003. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 336 /2009

Present:
Shri Surinder Pal, Advocate, on behalf of appellant.
Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant.

ORDER


1. Case was last heard on 17.11.2009 when it was directed that the PIO will supply the copy of the fiscal reports of the years as mentioned in the application within a period of 10 days through special messenger. The PIO will supply the complete information as per observations made by the appellant on 17.11.2009 within a period of 15 days with a copy to the commission and PIO will submit his written submission that the total information has been supplied and nothing has been left in the instant case filed by the appellant.
2. As per the directions, Shri Jaswant Singh, AR-cum-PIO states that the information as per directions has been supplied on 27.11.2009, which was

AC No. 336 of 2009
received by Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira and his signatures have been taken on the office copy. The respondent states that the complete information as per the arguments held on 17.11.2009 has been supplied.

2. Shri Surinder Pal, Advocate on behalf of appellant states that the information received is not complete and after scrutiny it has been seen that enclosure no. 3 i.e. list of 168 persons punished during the period from 2002 to 2007 is not correct according to RTI application format.

3. Respondent states that some more information has been supplied vide memo No. PIO/RTI/2009/29698-99, dated 14.12.2009 addressed to the appellant with a copy to the commission which has been received by the appellant, Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira, on 14.12.2009 at 5.00 pm with the remarks that the received information contains names of 158 persons is subject to scrutiny of the information (deficiencies) and audit reports have not been supplied.

4. During arguments ld. Counsel on behalf of appellant makes written submission dated 15.12.2009 along with letter written by Senior Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana range to the Deputy Inspector General, Police, Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar Range and one copy is handed over to the PIO in the Court today. The appellant further states that in the letter written by SSP, Vigilance, he has mentioned that out of total amount of embezzlement, Rs.14,65,202-32 paise is that of permanent nature and Rs. 72,45,966.45 paise of 2009 Is that of temporary nature.

5. The respondent states that they have only one case relating to permanent embezzlement of Rs. 14,65,202-32 paise and there is no record of temporary embezzlement of Rs. 72,45,966.55 paise. However, the ld. Counsel on behalf of appellant handed over one copy of the list of temporary embezzlement including the names of the employees to the PIO who have made temporary embezzlements, in the Court. The Assistant Registrar-cum- PIO will verify the facts of the temporary embezzlement and will intimate before the next date of hearing.

6. Ld. Counsel brings to the notice of the commission that the audit reports of the University have not been supplied by the respondent. Respondent states that the complete printed book-let of the expenditure and income of the University, along with the audit reports and fiscal reports starting from the year 1988 to 2007 of the financial years have been supplied. The information so supplied could not be verified in the court as neither the appellant nor the PIO had the copy of the information supplied. The University has not supplied the information/ documents to the Commission. They have sent only the covering letter to the commission about the information supplied. Now it is directed that on the next date of hearing;-
(i) the PIO will supply the audit reports along with the fiscal reports of the University from the years 1988 to 2007 duly authenticated by the competent authority.

AC No. 336 of 2009
(ii) The PIO will maintain the record of University employees on the
web site as per section 4 (a) (b) of the RTI Act; and
(iii) the Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO will clarify and submit documents relating to the temporary embezzlement of Rs. 72,45,966.55 paise before the next date of hearing with a copy to the commission.
7. The case is fixed for final arguments and decision on 28.01.2010 in Court No. 1, SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17C, Chandigarh at 10.00 AM.
8. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties and to the Vice Chancellor, PAU, Ludhiana for information and necessary actiobn.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:15.12.2009 State Information Commissioner

CC: Copy to Vice Chancellor, Panjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, for information and necessary action.

Dr Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director, Students’ Welfare,
Panjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Panjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

CC No. 1680 /2009

Present:
Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar, the complainant, in person and Shri S.P.Sharma, Accounts Officer (Retd) on behalf of complainant.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant.

ORDER

1. Case was last heard on 17.11.2009 when Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO had filed an affidavit dated 12/13.10.2009 along with enclosures. The case was fixed for finalizing the question of imposing penalty on the PIO after getting the report from the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Chandigarh.
2. The case sent to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory is received back with the remarks that :-

CC No. 1680 of 2009
“nkg ih B{z p/Bsh ehsh iKdh j? . fe nkg i/ B/ fijV / d;skt/i G/i/ jB. fJBQK ftu fijVk d;sys gq;Btkue j?. T[; B{z Q 1 wkoe ehsk ikt/ ih. fJ; s'A fJbktk jofdnkb f;zx d/ 5 s'A 7 wzB/ j'J/ d;sys r[ow[yh ftu fijV/ fe gfjbK d/ fe;/ foekov ftu w"i{d j'D ns/ gq;Btkue d;sysK d/ B/V/ d/ ;w/A d/ j'D th n;b o{g ftu fJeZm/ eoe/ G/i/ ikD ih. sK i' T[BQK dk gq;Btkue d;sysK Bkb Gbh GKsh fBohyD eoB T[gozs ;jh fog'N fdZsh ik ;e/ ih.”

3. During hearing, Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, is directed to supply the file where Shri Hardayal Singh Gajnipur, Member, Board of Management has signed in Punjabi. He assured commission that the files relating to the signatures of Shri Hardayal Singh will be supplied within a week. 4. During arguments, Shri Dulcha Singh Brar brings to the notice of the commission that the affidavit filed by Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO is relating to his all applications filed by him under RTI with the PIO, Punjab Agricultural University. He further states that it includes the information demanded by him vide his application filed on 15.12.2008 with the PIO of Panjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

5. During arguments, Shri Dulcha Singh Brar states that the information has been denied by the PIO relating to para No. XVII of his application dated 14.05.2009. The complainant further states that the information

CC No. 1680 of 2009
has been supplied against his applications dated 11.05.2009, 14.05.2009 and 14.05.2009 is late by 63 days, 54 to 102 days and 39 to 64 days to 120 days respectively. The action be taken against the PIO under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act.

5. After arguments and deliberations it is decided that :-
(i) PIO of PAU, Ludhiana will supply the file/ documents where Shri Hardayal Singh Gajnipur has signed in Punjabi.
(ii) Deputy Registrar/ PSIC will send the case to Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh for verification and to submit his report.
(iii) PIO 'cum-AR will submit his written submission as per the deliberations held in the Court today within 15 days with a copy to the complainant and to the Commission.
(iv) The matter regarding imposing of penalty will be decided on the next date of hearing.

6. The case is fixed for further hearing on 28.01.2010 in Court No.1, SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17C, Chandigarh at 10.00 AM.

7. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:15.12.2009 State Information Commissioner

CC: Deputy Registrar, PSIC, for sending the case to Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Mini Sectt. Sector 9, Chandigarh.

KEHAR SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CRM No. M-32153 of 2008

Date of Decision: 15.12.2009

Kehar Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent

CORAM :
Honble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

Present:-
Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Anupinder Singh Grewal, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the respondent-State.

1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.140 dated 01.10.2007 registered under Sections 7 and 12 AA of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Act 10 of 1955) read with clauses 2(h) (2) and 19(a) of Fertilizer Control Order 1985 at Police Station Kurali, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab.

Brief facts of the case are that Thandi Agro Co. is distributing Chemical Fertilizer in Ropar District as a wholesale dealer of Indian Potash Limited, S.C.O. No.443-44, Sector 35-C, Chandigarh, which is a Central Government Agency for the sale of Fertilizer manufactured by Oswal Chemical and Fertilizer Limited (Unit Pardeep) District Jagat Singh Pura,
Orissa (here-in-after referred to as Oswal Chemicals). In this manner,
Thandi Agro Co. is authorized wholesale dealer of Indian Potash Limited to sell their Oswal DAP 18.46% IPL manufactured by Oswal Chemicals and the petitioner is the Managing Director of Thandi Agro Co. Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali sent 150 Quintals of Oswal DAP 18.46% IPC
Fertilizer. On the basis of demand, the order was placed with Indian Potash Limited for the supply of the said fertilizer (here-in-after referred to as DAP). The Indian Potash Limited actually received the DAP from M/s
Oswal Chemicals and the said material was stored in the warehouse of
Indian Potash Limited at Rajpura. Thereafter, Indian Potash Limited on the said demand made to the company directly, supplied 150 Quintals of DAP to M/s Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali. The said supply was made by M/s Indian Potash Limited on 25.08.2004 directly from their Rajpura Godown to Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali by road through their transporter M/s Ashish Road Lines, Old Grain Market, Rajpura.

Thereafter, the Office of Chief Agricultural Officer, Roopnagar drew sample from M/s Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali with regard to various DAP bags.

Learned counsel for the State has not been able to dispute the fact that the sample was drawn from the bags which were stitched and actually manufactured by M/s Oswal Chemicals and Fertilizers, District Jagat Singh Pura, Orissa. It is also not denied that the said DAP bags were originally received by the Government Agency M/s Indian Potash Limited.

Thus admittedly, the sample was collected from stitched bags and there is no allegation in the FIR that the bags were either opened, tampered with or pilfered and admittedly DAP, material in dispute had been manufactured by M/s Oswal Chemical and Fertilizer Limited (Unit Pardeep) District Jagat Singh Pura, Orissa and neither the petitioner nor the company i.e. Thandi Agro Pvt. Ltd. Kharar ever came into possession of the said fertilizer and not even touched the said material as the material was delivered by M/s Indian Potash Limited, a representative of the Manufacturer to M/s Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali and the material was supplied directly from Rajpura to Kurali by the transporter of M/s Indian Potash Limited.

Therefore, no criminal liability can be fastened upon the petitioner, who is
the Managing Director of M/s Thandi Agro Co. The case of the petitioner is fully covered by the judgment of this Honble Court passed in case of Arun Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab 1995(3) RCR (Criminal) 231. Para 2 of the said judgment is reproduced below :-

2. There is no dispute that the Chief Agricultural Officer who has been examined as PW-1 visited the shop of the appellants on 27.06.1984 and
took the sample of the fertilizer. The case of the prosecution is that the fertilizer is substandard and it does not contain the total Nitrogen and Amonical Nitrogen as prescribed standard. The report of the Analytical chemist in the Fertilizer Control Laboratory in Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana was marked Ex. PC. According to P.6, the Analytical
Chemist who examined the sample, the total Nitrogen was 24.5% against 25% and Anomical Nitrogen contents were 11.5% in total nitrogen and 1% in Anomical Nitrogen. The said variation appears to be negligible.

According to PW.6 has not given the permissible limit of the variation in respect of Amonical Nitrogen. Thus, the variation appears to be negligible. Apart from that, the fertilizer was purchased admittedly by the appellants from National Fertilizer Limited, Nangal. His evidence also shows that the fertilizer had been purchased by the appellants from National Fertilizer Limited, Nangal.

The evidence of DW.1 also further shows that if there is any manufacturing defect, the responsibility lies on the National Fertilizers Limited, Nangal as the bags are stitched with automatic machines.

Further, the evidence of PW.2 who was the Enforcement Inspector, who was also present at the time of taking sample from the shop of the appellants, also deposed that the bags of fertilizers found in possession of the appellants, were machined stitched. Therefore, it is clear that the bags of fertilizer, found by the Chief Agricultural Officer and his party had been received by the appellants in their original form without any intermeddling or tampering. If this is the case,it cannot be said that the accused had any culpable mental state for committing any offence either under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act or under the provisions of Fertilizers Control order. If there is any defect, in the manufacturing process and the bags were intact as supplied by the National Fertilizers
Limited to the appellants shop, it cannot be said that the accused were responsible for any substandard in the fertilizer. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the appellants are entitled to have an order of acquittal in their favour. Accordingly, I allow the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by Presiding Officer, Special Court, Faridkot.

The accused is accordingly acquitted. The amount of fine, if paid, is directed to be refunded to the appellants.

Further, the petitioner had only asked the Government Agency M/s Indian Potash Limited to deliver the said bags to M/s Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali, though, the billing is on the name of the petitioners firm M/s Thandi Agro Co. of which the petitioner is the Managing Director.

As such, nowhere, either the Government Agency Indian Potash Limited or the petitioners Company M/s Thandi Agro Co. or M/s Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali are the actual manufacturers of the said DAP (Oswal) which was recovered by the complainant. Thus, it is apparent that the fertilizers were supplied by M/s Indian Potash Limited to M/s Thandi Agro Co. of which the petitioner is a Managing Director and the same was supplied in a stitched bags. As observed by this Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Jagdish Chand and another reported as 2004(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 478, sample of cattle feed was found to be substandard. The same was taken from a stitched bag. This Court was pleased to observed that the accused, who was a dealer, cannot be held guilty. Further, in the case of Arun Kumar and others vs. State of Punjab 1995(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 231, the accused purchased bags of fertilizer from National Fertilizer Limited and kept the same in original form without any tampering. Sample from bags found to be sub-standard.

This Court held that it could not be said that accused had any culpable mental state for committing offence and for manufacturing defect, accused cannot be held responsible.

Admittedly, the said DAP bags were sealed and stitched which were originally supplied by M/s Oswal Chemicals through Government Agency M/s Indian Potash Limited. It is also admitted fact that concerned official opened sealed bags and took sample from the said bags of DAP and sent for chemical examinations.

Thus, even from the perusal of the F.I.R., no offence under Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 is made out qua the petitioner, who is only a dealer and is not responsible for the sub-standard fertilizer in the bag which was ordered from Indian Potash Company Limited, Ludhiana, and neither the petitioner nor M/s Thandi Agro Co. ever came into possession of the said fertilizer. As such, nowhere either the Government Agency Indian Potash Limited or the petitioners firm M/s Thandi Agro Co. or M/s Janta Agro Service Centre, Kurali are actual manufacturers of the said DAP (Oswal) which was recovered by the complainant and the non-compliance of the sub-standard if at all can only be attributed to the manufacturer M/s Oswal Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. (Unit Pardeep) District Jagat Singh Pura, Orissa and not to either M/s Thandi Agro or the Chief Manager, Indian Potash Company Limited.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the F.I.R. No.140 dated 01.10.2007 registered under Sections 7 and 12 AA of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Act 10 of 1955) read with clauses 2(h) (2) and 19(a) of Fertilizer Control Order 1985 at Police Station Kurali, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab qua the present petitioner is, accordingly, quashed.

(NIRMALJIT KAUR)
JUDGE

PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA THROUGH I Vs PUNJAB WAKF BOARD AND OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.R. No.4963 of 2008

Date of decision:01.12.2009

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana through its Registrar …Petitioner
Versus
Punjab Wakf Board and others …Respondents

Coram:-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL.

Present:
Mr. Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Jai Bhagwan, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. M. L. Sareen, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Vikas Suri, Advocate for respondent No.3.

L. N. MITTAL, J (ORAL)
This is revision petition by plaintiff Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana assailing order dated 23.04.2008 (Annexure P- 1) passed by Tribunal (under the Wakf Act), Ludhiana thereby dismissing the petitioners application for secondary evidence.

The pliantiff moved application for leading secondary evidence of the inquiry report along with demarcation report submitted by Mr. R. L. Gupta, the then Financial Commissioner, Development, Punjab alleging that the original report had been summoned from all the concerned quarters, but the same has not yet been received and a copy of the report is in possession of the office of Registrar of the plaintiff-University. In addition thereto, the plaintiff also moved an application for directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 (Punjab Wakf Board) to produce 26 original documents. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 alleged that the alleged documents are not in their custody.

Accordingly, prayer was made on behalf of the plaintiff to permit the plaintiff to lead secondary evidence of the said documents as well.

The aforesaid application and request of the plaintiff for secondary evidence have been declined by learned Trial Court by impugned order.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that permission to lead secondary evidence of the inquiry report along with demarcation report would suffice and no separate permission is required for secondary evidence of the other 26 documents which had been summoned from respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has now obtained a copy of the inquiry report alongwith demarcation report under Right to Information Act from the Government.

Learned counsel for respondent No.3, accordingly contended that if the petitioner has been able to obtain a copy of inquiry report along with demarcation report from the Government, it would depict that original reports are now available and, therefore, permission for secondary evidence thereof cannot be granted.

There is considerable force in the contention raised on behalf of
respondent No.3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner hesitated to admit that the original inquiry report along with demarcation report is now available with the Government, although stated that copy thereof has been obtained by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act. It is not understandable as to how copy of inquiry report along with demarcation report could be supplied to the petitioner if original
thereof had not been available with the Government. In addition
thereto, the petitioner could seek information under the Right to Information Act as to whether the original inquiry report along with
demarcation report is now available with the Government or not.

However, no such information has been sought.

In view of the aforesaid, it is manifest that no ground for permitting the petitioner to lead secondary evidence of the inquiry report along with demarcation report is made out. The instant revision petition is accordingly dismissed.

However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to prove the inquiry report along with demarcation report by summoning the original from the concerned quarter in accordance with law.

( L. N. MITTAL )
JUDGE

SMT DAYAWANTI Vs SMT PREM LATA AND OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

C.R. No. 3066 of 2007

Date of Decision: 01.12.2009

Smt. Dayawanti widow of Sh. Krishan Chand son of Sh. Gela Ram, r/o H. No. 575/1, Panipat. ... Revision-Petitioner
Versus
1. Smt. Prem Lata wife of Gurdial son of Jhanji Ram;
2. Rajni daughter of Gurdial;
3. Amit minor son of Gurdial;
4. Munish minor son of Gurdial;
5. Gurdial son of Sh. Jhanji Ram;

Both respondents No. 3 and 4, being minors are represented through their father Gurdial Singh who is their natural guardian having no interest against them, respondents No. 1 to 5, are residents of H. No. 579/9, Hari
Nagar Colony, Safidon Gate, Jind.

6. Ashok Kumar son of Kishan;

7. Mintu minor son of Ashok Kumar;

minor is being represented through his father Ashok Kumar son of Kishan Chand who is the natural guardian having no adverse interest against the minor.

8. Ved Parkash son of Kishan Chand;

all respondents No. 6 to 8, are residents of Krishna Tyre, Near I.B. College, G.T. Road, Panipat. ...Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER

Present:
Mr. Harkesh Manuja, Advocate, for the revision-petitioner.
Mr. Suryakant Gautam, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2.
Respondents No. 3 to 8, already ex-parte.

SHAM SUNDER, J.
This revision-petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 03.05.07, rendered by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panipat, vide which, the objection-petition, filed by Smt. Daya Wanti widow of Krishan Chand, was dismissed.

2. According to the objector/revision-petitioner, a portion of the property, bearing No. 39, Ram Nagar, Tehsil Camp, Panipat, was purchased by her from Gurdial and Bal Kishan sons of Sh. Jhanji Ram, by virtue of sale deed dated 05.02.98. At the time, the said sale deed, was executed, in her favour, there was no encumbrance/charge, on the said property. It was stated that she had no prior notice of any litigation, pending between the parties, and even otherwise, she had paid the entire sale consideration, to both her vendors. On 04.02.98, Smt. Prem Lata wife of Gurdial Singh, and her three minor children filed a suit for maintenance, against Gurdial Singh and others. It was
further stated that, vide order dated 06.02.98, the parties, were directed, to maintain quo,which was extended, upto 24.11.98. It was further stated that, on the date, she purchased the suit property i.e. 05.02.98, there was no restraint order or injunction, against selling the suit property. It was further stated that the decree-holder, had no locusstandi, to get the property attached.

Accordingly, a prayer was made, that the order of attachment be set aside.

3. In reply to the objection-petition, the decree-holder, Smt. Prem Lata, stated that, the petitioner, was having full knowledge of the proceedings, pending in the previous maintenance suit, since the beginning, as defendants No. 2 to
4, namely Ashok Kumar son of Krishan Chand, his son namely Mintu and Ved Parkash son of Kishan Chand, are related to her. It was further stated that, Civil Suit, for maintenance, was instituted, on 04.02.98. On 06.02.98, order of status quo, against alienation, was passed, and the suit was adjourned, for
26.02.98, for appearance of the defendants, who deliberately avoided appearance, in the Court, as a result whereof, an order for procuring their presence by substituted means, was passed. It was further stated that, on 26.02.98, defendants No. 2 and 4, appeared. It was furhter stated that, on 16.03.98, defendant No. 3, appeared, through Counsel. It was further stated that, in the written statement, filed by defendants No. 2 to 4, a vague objection, was taken, regarding the suit property, having been already sold by defendant No. 1, in their favour, but no particulars or the other details of the sale transaction, were elaborated. It was further stated that the sale deed, in favour of the petitioner/objector, was nothing, but a clever device, resorted to by the defendants, to defeat the claim of maintenance of the decree-holder. Accordingly, a prayer was made, that the objection-petition, be dismissed.

4. After hearing the Counsel for the parties, and, on going through the record of the case, the Executing Court, dismissed the objection-petition, vide the order impugned.

5. Feeling aggrieved, the instant revision-petition, has been filed, by the revision-petitioner.

6. I have heard the Counsel for the parties, and, have gone
through the record of the case, carefully.

7. The Counsel for the revision-petitioner, submitted that, since the sale deed, was executed, by defendant No. 1, in favour of
Dayawanti, objector/revision-petitioner, on 05.02.98, when there was no stay order, regarding the alienation of the property, in dispute, she was the bonafide purchaser for valuable consideration. He further submitted that, even Dayawanti, objector/revision-petitioner, was having no knowledge, with regard to the pendency of suit, having been filed, by Smt. Prem Lata, against her husband namely Gurdial Singh, defendant No. 1. He further submitted that the property, was purchased, by the revision-petitioner, after satisfying, that the same, was without any encumbrance, and not with a view to defeat the execution of the decree, which might have been ultimately passed, in favour of the decree-holder. He further submitted that the order impugned, being illegal, was liable to be set aside.

8. On the other hand, the Counsel for the respondents, submitted that defendants No. 2 and 4, namely Ashok Kumar and Ved Parkash, are the sons of Krishan Chand, whereas, the revisionpetitioner, is the widow of Krishan Chand. He further submitted that defendant No. 3, Mintu, minor, is the son of Ashok Kumar. He further submitted that Ashok Kumar and Ved Parkash, being the sons of the objector/revision-petitioner, and Mintu, being the grand-son of the objector/revision-petitioner, being a party, to the suit filed against Gurdial Singh, it could not be said, that she was not aware of the pendency of the same.

He further submitted that the manner, in which, the sale deed, was got executed, from Gurdial Singh, defendant No. 1, by Dayawanti, objector/revision-petitioner, on 05.02.98, when the suit, was filed, on 04.02.98, in itself, goes to prove, that there was unholy haste on the part of Gurdial Singh, to dispose of his property, so as to avoid the payment of maintenance allowance, if ultimately, granted, in favour of Prem Lata and her minor children. He further submitted that the sale deed, was executed, just with a view, to defeat the execution of the decree. He further submitted that the order impugned of the trial
Court, being legal and valid, is not liable to be set aside.

9. After giving my thoughtful consideration, to the rival contentions, raised by the Counsel for the parties, in my considered opinion, the revision-petition, deserves to be dismissed, for the reasons to be recorded, hereinafter. Smt. Prem Lata wife of Gurdial Singh, defendant No. 1, on her own behalf, and, on behalf of her children namely Rajni, Amit and Munish, filed a suit for maintenance, against Gurdial Singh son of Jhanji Ram, Ashok Kumar son of Kishan Chand, Mintu (minor) son of Ashok Kumar and Ved Parkash son of Kishan Chand. The decree for maintenance, was granted, in favour of Prem Lata, and the other plaintiffs, wherein, it was directed, that maintenance allowance, to the tune of Rs. 3,000/- P.M., was to be paid, by Gurdial Singh. It was also directed, that the said maintenance allowance, was to be treated, as charge of the property, bearing No. 39/17. Gurdial Singh, defendant No. 1, was also restrained, from alienating the suit property, to defendants No. 2 to 4, who were none else, than the sons and grandson of Dayawanti. It means, that defendants No. 2 to 4, belonged to the same family, to which, Dayawanti, belongs. It defies ones common sense, that the sons and grand-son of Dayawanti, being a party to the suit, would not have told Dayawanti, with regard to the pendency thereof. Since the only motive of the defendants, was to defraud the Court, and to defeat the execution of the decree, being, ultimately, passed, a device was evolved, to get the sale deed executed, from
defendant No. 1 Gurdial Singh, in favour of Dayawanti. Had
defendants No. 2 to 4, been not the family members of Dayawanti, the matter would have been different. Even, in the written statement, defendants No. 2 to 4, did not mention the particulars of the sale. The trial Court, was, thus, right in holding, that the sale deed, was nothing, but a fraudulent transaction, entered into, just with a view to defeat the decree.

10. The order of the trial Court, does not suffer from any illegality, material irregularity, or perversity, warranting the
interference of this Court, in its revisional jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and is liable to be upheld. The submission of the Counsel for the revision-petitioner, being without merit, must fail, and the same stands rejected.

11. For the reasons recorded above, the revision-petition, being
devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed.

(SHAM SUNDER)
JUDGE

Dr Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar,
Department Entomology,
Panjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Panjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

CC No. 1680 /2009

Present:
Fl. Lt. Gaurav Preet Singh Brar on behalf of complainant.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent-cum- APIO and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant.

ORDER

1. Heard both the parties.
2. After arguments and deliberations, it is decided that the complainant, Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar, has not demanded the copy of the CD as per the application filed by him on 11.05.2009. No doubt he has filed another appeal with the PIO for which he has not made any reference to the Commission, hence no action is to be taken by the Commission in this behalf.

3. As per directions given on the last date of hearing, the file has been sent to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Mini Sectt., Punjab by the Registry, the report of which is still awaited.

4. As per the directions given to the PIO, Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO has filed an affidavit duly attested by Notary Public on 12.10.2009 along with the enclosures which has been received in the Commission on 14.10.2009. Complainant has also confirmed that he has CC No. 1680 of 2009 received the affidavit along with the enclosures.

5. As the report from the Director, Forensic Lab is still awaited, the question of imposing penalty upon the PIO will be decided on the next date of hearing. It is also directed that the Deputy Registrar will send a reminder to the Director Forensic Lab to send the report immediately.

6. The case is adjourned and fixed for further hearing on 15.12.2009 in Court No. 1, SCO No.84-85, Sector 17C, Chandigarh at 10.00 AM.

7. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:17.11.2009 State Information Commissioner

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
c/o Vigilant Citizens’ Forum, Gill Road
Chapter, 3344, Chet Singh Nagar,
Ludhiana- 141003. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 336 /2009

Present:
Shri Surinder Pal, Advocate, on behalf of appellant.
Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant.

ORDER


1. Heard both the parties.
2. The appellant states that he has not received the copy of the affidavit submitted by the PIO to the Commission vide letter No. 24881, dated 13.10.2009. The respondent hands over a copy of the affidavit to the representative of appellant in the court.
3. Shri Surinder Pal, Advocate, states that he has made submission of the observations to the information supplied to him on 16.11.2009 and he places one copy of the letter dated 17.11.2009 in the Court which has been placed on the record file. After deliberations made by the Ld. Counsel on behalf of appellant and Shri Jaswant, PIO, it is decided that :-
(i) The Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO will supply the copy of the fiscal reports of the years as mentioned in the application within a period
AC No. 336 of 2009 of 10 days through special messenger.

(ii) PIO will supply the complete information as per the observations made by the appellant vide letter dated 17.11.2009 within a period of 15 days with a copy to the Commission. PIO will also submit his written submission that the total information has been supplied and nothing has been left in the instant case filed by the appellant.

4. A show cause notice has already been issued to the PIO on 17.09.2009. The matter with regard to imposition of penalty will be decided on the next date of hearing after getting written submissions of the PIO in the instant case. Case is fixed for further hearing on 15.12.2009 in Court No.1, SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17C, Chandigarh at 10.00 AM.

5. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:17.11.2009 State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite GNE College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. _________Appellant.
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No.616 of 2009

ORDER

Before any action is taken on your complaint dated 01-10-2009 on the subject of your application dated 29-6-2009 made under the RTI Act, you are requested to send to the Commission a copy of the information supplied to you in response to point no. 2 of your application.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
29th October,2009 Punjab

PRITAM KAUR SIDHUVsPUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHER CR 6082 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Decided on: October 22, 2009.

Pritam Kaur Sidhu .. Petitioner
VERSUS
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, and others.
.. Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI

PRESENT
Mr.Pritam Saini, Advocate, with
Mr.Amit Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner.

M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)
The plaintiff-petitioner has not been given opportunity to cross-examine DW.1 Ravinder Singh, who was available in the court on 12.08.2009. It has been informed by counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner that the evidence of defendant has, now, been closed but on account of an opportunity to cross-examine DW.1 Ravinder Singh, having been denied, a prejudice will be caused as cross-examination has been treated as nil. An affidavit of the Advocate Shri N.C.Kapil, has been placed on record indicating that on account of his skin ailment, he was not able to cross-examine
the witness when the evidence of the defendant was closed by order.

Counsel for the petitioner has informed that no other defendants evidence had been produced but only DW.1 was examined-in-chief and his cross-examination was treated as nil.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner. He has stated at Bar that next date of hearing before the trial Court is 26.10.2009 for rebuttal evidence as well as for arguments.

In the interest of justice, the revision petition is allowed and the order dated 12.08.2009, is hereby set aside with a direction that trial Court will give one opportunity to the plaintiff to cross-examine DW.1 Ravinder Singh by recalling him on a particular
date subject to payment of costs of Rs.2500/- to the witness to be
paid by the counsel.

Copy of the order be communicated to the trial Court through FAX.

A copy of order be supplied to the plaintiff-petitioner on payment of usual charges.

It is made clear that in case on the date fixed by trial Court the cost is not paid on appearance of the witness, this revision petition will be deemed to have been dismissed.

(M.M.S.BEDI)
JUDGE

Sh Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite GNE College.
Gill Road, Ludhiana.
________ Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana.
__________ Respondent
AC No.616 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh.Satish Kumar, complainant in person..
ii)Sri Swarn Singh, Sr. Assistant and Sri Ajay Kumar, Jr. Assistant on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The reply given by the respondent to the appellant’s application for information dated 17-05-2009 has been discussed and clarified in the Court as under:-
1. Vide his application dated 12-01-2009, the appellant had asked for information concerning various cases pertaining to Dr. B.S.Sohi, Sri O.P.Soni and sons of Sri O.P.Soni and Sri Gurdip Singh, which was interpreted by the respondent as an attempt to criticize the University authorities. In response to the application for information of the appellant dated 12-01-2009, the respondent had obtained legal opinion which states that the RTI Act does not permit persons to call for an explanation of officers for any act, commission or omission which may have been committed in the discharge of their duties. The sentence, “as per provisions of RTI Act an appeal or complaint before the higher authorities can be filed only if the decisions of the authorities personally effect the complainant” was written as a result of the respondent’s effort to convey and paraphrase the legal advice referred to above. Otherwise, it is obvious that there is no provision in the RTI Act which states that appeals and complaints cannot be made before the higher authorities for this the complainant has personally effected.

P) The second part of the reply given by the respondent concerns the response which was given by him to the complainant to his application for information dated 20-3-2009. Vide this application, the complainant had asked for the details of instances which had taken place during the period 01-0 1-1995 to 31-03-2008

in which the Heads of Departments, Directors of Office and Vice Chancellor have taken decisions which were not in their competence. The reply given by the respondent was that this information is not being maintained and that the action taken by any authority cannot be challenged by the complainant through the provisions of the RTI Act. In his present application, the complainant has asked for the provisions of the RTI Act which support this statement of the respondent. The respondent states that there is no document on the basis of which this information was given to the complainant but it was only his opinion under the RTI Act cannot be used for questioning decisions taken by the authorities.

In view of the above, no further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

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

SMT USHA JINDALVsSHRI SURINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER Civil Revision 4038 of 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: October 13, 2009

Smt. Usha Jindal ...Petitioner
Versus
Shri surinder Singh and another ...Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA

Present:
Mr. I.K.Mehta, Senior Advocate with
Mr. R.K.Dogra, Advocate for the petitioner

RAJIVE BHALLA, J.
The petitioner challenges orders dated 28.09.2002 and 01.04.2005, passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Bathinda and the Additional District Judge, Bathinda, dismissing her application for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 07.02.1994 and her appeal respectively.

Surinder Singh, respondent no.1, filed a suit for recovery of Rs.20,000/- by alleging that Dr. Pawan Kumar Goyal, the defendant, (since deceased, and now represented by the petitioner) borrowed a sum of Rs.20,000/- on 12.05.1989 after executing a pronote and a receipt. Dr. Pawan Kumar Goyal passed away in an accident on 24.10.1989. The petitioner and her mother in law were impleaded as defendants but were proceeded against ex-parte on 15.12.1992. The suit for recovery was decreed ex-parte on 07.02.1994, against the petitioner and her mother in law. In execution proceedings instituted by Respondent no.1, 1/3rd of the petitioners salary was attached. The
petitioner immediately filed an application, on 26.09.2000, under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying that the ex-parte judgment and decree be set aside.

The petitioner alleged that she had no knowledge of the suit, the ex-parte decree and the order passed in execution. She only came to know about these facts, on 07.09.2000 when her salary was attached. The application was opposed by respondent no.1 who alleged that the petitioner was served personally and by publication in a newspaper and was even otherwise aware of the pendency of the suit, the passing of ex-parte judgment and decree and the pendency of execution proceedings.

On the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues:-

1. Whether there are sufficient grounds for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 15.12.1992?OPA

2. Whether the application is within time?OPA

3. Relief.

On 28.09.2002, the trial court dismissed the application as barred by time. The appeal filed by the petitioner was also dismissed.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was married to Dr. Pawan Kumar Goyal on 30.06.1989. The petitioner remained married for a period of four months as Dr. Goyal died in an accident on 24.10.1989. After her husbands death she was turned out of the matrimonial home. She had no knowledge that any loan that had been raised by her late husband, about suit, the ex-parte decree or the execution proceedings as she was never served, whether in the suit or in execution proceedings. The alleged service, in the suit, by publication in a newspaper is null and void as respondent no.1 was directed to serve the petitioner by registered notices and by publication but, admittedly, respondent no.1, did not deposit registered covers. It is further argued that as the newspaper has limited circulation, the petitioner could not be said to be validly served by publication. It is further submitted that report by the process server, that he served the petitioner personally on 11.09.1997, is void as the process server did not record the statement of any witness. It is argued that in view of the above facts the interest of justice requires that the orders passed by the courts below be set aside.

No one is present on behalf of the respondent no.1. I have heard counsel for the petitioner, perused the impugned orders and find no reason to accept the revision or to hold that the courts below have committed any error of jurisdiction as would require interference.

As a general rule, courts tend to favour adjudication on merits, rather than non-suiting parties on technical or procedural impediments.

Where, however, a plea is based upon facts that are false to the
knowledge of the applicant, such a plea must necessarily be rejected, whatever be the circumstances of a party or the considerations in equity.

The untimely death of her husband, and the fact that she was
turned out of her matrimonial home may have entitled the petitioner to a sympathetic consideration but for her false averments and deposition.

The petitioner was impleaded as a legal representative of her deceased husband and despite publication in a newspaper did not put in appearance before the trial Court. The trial court, therefore, passed an ex-parte judgement and decree dated 07.02.1994. The notice in the newspapers, may not have come to her notice but the petitioners allegation that she had no knowledge of the suit, the ex-parte judgment and decree or the pendency of execution proceedings is falsified by the report of baillif, who personally effected service on the petitioner, on 11.12.1977. The process server appeared in the witness box and
deposed that he was entrusted with the summons by the Nazir, vide endorsement. no.2323. He visited Punjab Agriculture University on 11.12.1997 and approached the Head of the Department of Home Science, where the petitioner was working.

He was informed that the petitioner was on leave but could be contacted at her residence. The summons were stamped and signed by Professor Manjit Kaur, the Head of Department. The process server further deposed that thereafter he visited the petitioners house. The petitioner came out of her house and before serving a copy of the summons, he inquired about her name and on being satisfied about her identity thereafter served a copy of the summons. The petitioner signed the summons in his presence.

Though, in his cross examination, he admitted that he did not know Usha Rani personally, he had no reason to make a false report or depose falsely. The deposition of this witness remains unrebutted.

I find no reason to hold that the bailiff has deposed falsely or that he did not effect service upon the petitioner. It would be necessary to mention here that when the petitioner stepped into the witness box she denied her signatures on the summons. The original summons are stamped by the petitioners employer and signed by the Head of her department. Despite these facts, the petitioner chose to deny her signatures. It is therefore, apparent that though the petitioner was aware of the suit, the ex-parte judgement and decree and the execution proceedings at least on 11.12.1997 but she filed the instant application on 07.09.2000, when her salary was attached. As a consequence, the story that she came to know about the suit, the ex-parte judgement and decree and the execution proceedings when her salary was attached on 07.09.2000 was rightly rejected by the courts below. In view of false plea raised by the petitioner, she is not entitled to any relief, whether in law or in equity.

In view of false plea raised by the petitioner, she is not entitled to any relief, whether in law or in equity.

In view of what has been stated herein above and as the findings recorded by the courts below do not suffer from any error of jurisdiction, the revision petition is dismissed.

(RAJIVE BHALLA)
JUDGE

LT COL N K GHAIVsPUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS



Sh Hardas Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Hardas Singh,
S/o Sh. Jagat Singh,
7-B, Kichlu Nagar, Ludhiana. ________ Applicant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

AC No. 526 of 2009

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant
ii) Sri Inderpal Singh, Supdt-cum-APIO, and Sri Vijay Kumar, Sr. Asstt. ,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has supplied to the complainant full records concerning the pension case of Sri Mukhtiar Singh, vide his letter dated 14-1-2009.
No other information is due from the respondent in respect of his application dated 20-10-2008.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
17th September ,2009 Punjab

Dr Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director Students’ Welfare,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

CC No. 1680 /2009

Present:
Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar and Fl.Lt.Gaurav Preet Singh Brar on behalf of Dr. Brar.

Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent, Shri Paramjeet Singh, Senior Assistant and Mrs. Rajni Singh, Steno, on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. The respondent states that the remaining information as per directions given in the last date of hearing on 29-07-2009 has been supplied to the complainant vide memo No.PIO-RTI/2009/21591-92, dated 11.09.2009 addressed to the Commission with a copy to Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar running into 8 sheets.
2. Fl.Lt. Gaurav Preet Singh Brar on behalf of Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar, states that the information supplied to the complainant is not complete and has been supplied after a period of nine months. He explains in detail the reasons

CC No. 1680 of 2009

parawise as to how the information is incomplete and wrong. He has placed on record a copy of Forensic Expert report of CD (compact Disc) bearing serial No. 8003 21RD 3233 of 23.05.2009 in which the forensic expert Mr. Prabhu D Rahore, New Delhi, that :-
“in my opinion the given voice sample in the given voice recording sample is not consistent or one time recording. The sample is tampered. “

In the note, it is written that this document cannot be used as legal document; this is for out of court purpose only. In my view, the examination submitted about CD from the forensic expert cannot be used as a legal document in the Court.
3 Fl.Lt. GPS Brar on behalf of Dr. DS Brar states that the signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur dated 27.04.2009 on the letter addressed to the Vice Chancellor and Chairman, Board of Management, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana are not those of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur. He has made a submission of the report of Devendra Prasad, Forensic Document Expert, House No. 619, Sector 8-B, Chandigarh in which the opinion of Devendra Prasad is re-produced as below :-
“the person, who wrote the standard signatures marked A-1 and A- 2, did not write the questioned signature marked Q-1. The questioned signature marked Q-1 is a product of copied forgery.”

As the report is from the private Forensic Document Expert ,in my opinion it should be from the government agency either from Government of Punjab or CC No. 1680 of 2009 Government of India. It is directed that the original file of the University will be handed over to the Commission in which signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur has been given for getting them tested from the Punjab Forensic Science Lab, Mini Sectt.Annexe, Sector-9, Chandigarh. File containing pages from 1 to 84 is taken in the Commission.

4. Fl. Lt. GPS Brar on behalf of complainant pleads that the information has been supplied late by nine months and it is incomplete and action be taken against the PIO of office of Vice Chancellor and other public authorities.

5. It is directed that the file along with the orders be sent to the Director, Forensic Science Lab. Punjab, Mini Sectt. Annexe, Sector-9, Chandigarh for getting the signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur checked. A show cause notice is also issued to Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO for next date of hearing on 17.11.2009.

6. I, therefore, call upon the Respondent-PIO (Shri Jaswnat Singh ) to show cause why penalty be not imposed upon him under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 for delay in supplying the information. He is also directed to show cause why suitable compensation be not awarded to the complainant under Section 19(8) (b) of the RTI Act, for the detriment and loss suffered by him on C No. 1680 of 2009 account of delay in the supply of information. The respondent is directed to file
his affidavit showing cause as afore-mentioned within 15 days of the receipt of this order with a copy to the opposite party.

7. The case is fixed for further hearing on 17-11-2009.

8. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:17.09.2009 State Information Commissioner

Deputy Registrar, State Information Commission will send the file along with the copy of orders to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Mini Sectt. Annexe, Sector-9, Chandigarh for getting the opinion on the signatures of Shri Hardyal Singh Gajnipur marked in red as “A” on page-7 and “B” on page 25 whether these two signatures are of the same person or not.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:17.09.2009 State Information Commissioner

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
c/o Vigilanct Citizens’ Forum, Gill Road Chapter,
3344, Chet Singh Nagar, Ludhiana-141003.
Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 336 /2009

Present:
Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira, appellant, in person.
Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, Inderpal Singh Superintendent and Shri Paramjeet Singh, Senior Assistant and Mrs. Rajni Singh, Steno, on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. Case was last heard on 03.08.2009. As per directions given on that date, an amount of Rs. 90/- (Rupees Ninty only) has been refunded to the complainant vide cheque dated 08.09.09. The appellant states that inspite of the response given to them on the last date of hearing, no information has been supplied and he pleads that the Commission may pass reasoned and speaking order as per his written submission made on 17.09.2009 in the Court:
(i) Penalty at the rate of Rs. 250/- each day be imposed on each of the erring officials. The application was filed on 21.01.2009 and first instalment of the information was supplied to the appellant only on 13.07.2009 i.e. after more than 170 days of the receipt of the application. The concerned officials are thus liable to be penalized at the rate of Rs. 250/- each day to the extent of maximum penalty of Rs. 25,000/-.

(ii) `The respondent be directed to compensate the appellant for all the costs of filing this appeal, postage charges, stationery charges, traveling expenses incurred for attending the hearings before this Commission and all other expenses in relation to this appeal in addition to compensation for the loss of time and energy of the appellant as provided under Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act, 2005. It is submitted in the Court today and a copy is handed over to the respondent.

2. The respondent PIO states that the information is to be collected from all the concerned offices of the University and a request has been made to them and reminders have also been issued. He pleads that time may be given to collect the information and after getting it collected, the same will be supplied. It is directed that the PIO will get the information supplied immediately to the appellant.

3. Show cause notice is issued to the PIO as to why a penalty may not be imposed upon him for delay in supplying the information and also
compensation awarded to the appellant for the loss and detriment suffered by him. The PIO will submit an affidavit on 17.11.2009 explaining the reasons as to why penalty may not be imposed upon him.

4. I, therefore, call upon the Respondent-PIO (Shri Jaswant Singh ) to show cause why penalty be not imposed upon him under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 for delay in supplying the information. He is also directed to show cause why suitable compensation be not awarded to the complainant under Section 19(8) (b) of the RTI Act, for the detriment and loss suffered by him on account of delay in the supply of information. The respondent is directed to file his affidavit showing cause as afore-mentioned within 15 days of the receipt of this order with a copy to the opposite party.

5. The case is fixed for further hearing on 17-11-2009.

6. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Surinder Singh
Dated:17.09.2009 State Information Commissioner

Shri RS Arora versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

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

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. ________________ Respondent

CC No. 841 of 2009

Present:- Shri R.S. Arora complainant in person.

Shri Inder Pal Singh, APIO on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

Information on all points has been provided to the complainant except Sr. No.3 which relates to refund of Income Tax. If excess income tax was deducted, complainant has to apply for the refund to the Income Tax Authority. As such, the case may be treated as disposed of.

(R.K. Gupta)
State Information Commissioner.
Dated : September 14. 2009

PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANAVsPUNJAB WAKF BOARD AND OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.R. No. 3374 of 2007

Date of Decision: September 11, 2009

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana …..Petitioner
Vs.
Punjab Wakf Board and others …..Respondents

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.

Present:-
Mr. Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner.

M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated August 28, 2006 passed by Wakf Tribunal, Ludhiana, dismissing an application for appointment of Local Commissioner.

Counsel for the petitioner has contended that Tehsildar was appointed as Local Commissioner by the Court for demarcation of land measuring 18 marlas vide order dated September 12, 2003. A report dated May 17, 2004 has been prepared by Tehsildar. The said report has been prepared by the revenue official without following the mandatory provisions for demarcation and without fixing a permanent mark. It has also been contended that Khasra Nos. 14/14 and 14/27 have not been dealt with or measured. The field book has also not been placed on record. He has argued that the report of demarcation of the revenue Department which had been used by the Financial Commissioner, has clearly reflected that there is an encroachment of 18 marlas in Khasra No.14/14.

After hearing counsel for the petitioner at length, I am of the opinion that the revision petition against the order refusing to appoint a second Local Commissioner is not maintainable. This petition is dismissed.

However, it will be open to the petitioners to raise objections against the
report of the Local Commissioner and to prove on record any other report of the Local Commissioner in accordance with law.

(M.M.S.BEDI)
JUDGE

SUDHIR KUMAR Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 13421 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION : 31.08.2009

Sudhir Kumar .... PETITIONER
Versus
State of Punjab and others ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
After arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to pursue his representation already filed before the Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana (respondent No.2 herein).

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE

Sh Ashok Kumar J E (Retd.) versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Ashok Kumar, J.E. (Retd.),
11322, Pavillar Nagar,
Habowal Kalan,
Ludhiana- 141001. ________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o. Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1855 of 2009

Present:
i) Sh. Ashok Kumar, complainant in person
ii)Sri Inderpal Singh, Supdt-cum-APIO, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The information required by the complainant has been given to him by the respondent except that some information remains to be given and the respondent has made a commitment that this also will be done within a week.
Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
21st August, 2009 Punjab

KAVITA BAJAJ Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHERS

CWP No.11053 of 2009

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

Date of decision: 18.8.2009

Kavita Bajaj
Vs.
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana and others.

CORAM:
HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI

Present:
Mr.HS Baath, Advocate,for the petitioner.
Mr. HNS Gill, Advocate,for the respondents.

PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral)
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.

The petitioner applied for the post of B.Sc. Agriculture (Hons.) four years duration for which the prospectus was issued by respondent No.1-University. The prospectus also notified the dates for submission of application forms, the date of entrance test as also the counselling for the candidates who appeared in the Common Entrance Test. It has been specifically notified that after the Common Entrance Test to be conducted by respondent No.2, counselling/interview will be held on 29.06.2009 and 30.06.2009 for which the time notified was 9.00 a.m at Pal Auditorium of the University. The petitioner appeared in the Entrance Test conducted by the University under Roll No.2339 and admit card was issued to her. Copy of the Admit Card has been attached with the petition as Annexure P-2. On the information available on the website of the University, the petitioner has cleared the test and secured 159 rank in general category. It is stated that on the basis of the dates notified in the prospectus for counselling, the petitioner appeared on 30.06.2009 for counselling in the University at the place and time specified therein and came to know that all the interviews for the first counselling have concluded on 29.06.2009. It is further the case of the petitioner that on 30.06.2009, no counselling was held and the petitioner was informed that no counseling will take place on 30.6.2009.

The petitioner along with some other candidates had filed a representation before the Vice Chancellor of the University on the same day i.e. 30.06.2009, but to no avail.

Aggrieved of the acts of omission and commission on the part of the respondent-University, the petitioner has filed this petition seeking a direction of her counselling and consequently, admission in B.Sc. Agriculture (Hons.) course.

The respondents were put to notice. Reply has been filed by them. It is admitted that the counselling was notified for 29.06.2009 and 30.6.2009. Respondents have, however, attempted to explain that as a matter of fact, counseling was for 29.06.2009 and in case, large number of candidates appeared for counselling, then counselling would be continued
for the next day i.e 30.6.2009. This averment made in the reply is totally contrary to the prospectus. In Column No.1 of the Schedule for Entrance Test/Counselling/Interviews, two days for counselling have been notified i.e. 29.6.2009 and 30.6.2009. It is no where provided in the prospectus that the counselling will take place only on 29.6.2009 and will spill over to 30.6.2009 in case, all the candidates could not be interviewed on 29.6.2009.

From the prospectus, it appears that two dates were notified for counselling. Thus, it was open to the candidates to appear for counselling on any of the two dates mentioned above.

Apart from the aforesaid stand taken by the respondents, a copy of the letter dated 1.7.2009 has been attached as Annexure R-1, with the reply. This letter is addressed to the Dean, Colleges of Agriculture, P.A.U., Ludhiana, wherein it is communicated that the candidates
mentioned therein +/ appeared for counselling on 30.6.2009. Based upon the aforesaid letter, it is contended on behalf of the respondents that second counselling is scheduled to be held on 31.08.2009 for the candidates, who have marked their presence on 29.6.2009. In this manner, the right of the petitioner to participate in the counselling has been acknowledged. However, the respondents have ordered counselling of the petitioner later than those candidates who have been admitted and some of them who have lessor merit than the petitioner.

In the present case, the petitioner and similarly placed candidates have been deprived of their right of counselling on 30.06.2009 because of the stipulation of the Prospectus. Even when two dates were notified in the Prospectus for the counselling, the respondents have in
gross contravention of the stipulation contained in the Prospectus, conducted the counselling on one day only.

In this view of the matter, the petitioner cannot be denied the right of her consideration for allotment of the discipline of her choice on the basis of her merit achieved in the Entrance Test.

For the reasons recorded above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in the second counselling for admission in the B.Sc. Agriculture (Hons.) four years, on the basis of merit achieved in the Entrance Test and the counselling, accordingly.

(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE

KULDIP CHAND BHARGAV Vs RAJ KUMAR MAHEY REGISTRAR PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.830 of 2009

Date of decision: 11.8.2009

Kuldip Chand Bhargav ......Petitioner(s)
Versus
Raj Kumar Mahey, Registrar, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana ....Respondent(s)

CORAM:-
HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

Present:
Mr. P.S. Khurana, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. HNS Gill, Advocate for the respondent.

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral)
It is not in dispute that the respondent has complied with the order dated 25.11.2008 passed by this Court in CWP No.17987 of 2005.

The respondent has also handed over a cheque for an amount of Rs.2,84,955/- drawn in the name of the petitioner, to his counsel in the Court. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent states that the review application filed by the respondent-University is still pending and the compliance has been made without prejudice to the rights of the respondent in the review application.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Since the compliance of the order dated 25.11.2008 has been made by the respondent, I am not inclined to proceed further in this contempt petition.

Rule discharged.

Needless to say that the parties will be bound by the decision in the review application.

(RAKESH KUMAR GARG)
JUDGE

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira,
c/o Vigilant Citizens’ Forum,
Gill Road Chapter, 3344, Chet Singh Nagar,
Ludhiana-141003. Appellant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 336 /2009

Present:
Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira, appellant, in person.
Shri Inderpal Singh, APIO, on behalf of respondent.

ORDER

1. Shri Kuldeep Singh Khaira, appellant, filed an application with the PIO of Punjab Agricultural University on 20.01.2009. After getting no response, he filed first appeal with the first appellate authority on 25.03.2009. Again after getting no response from the PIO and the first appellate authority, he filed a second appeal with the Commission on 25.05.2009 which was received in commission office on 28.05.2009 against diary No. 7809. Accordingly, notice of hearing was issued to both the parties for today.
2. On the perusal of the file, it transpires that the PIO has informed the
Contd..p/2AC No. 336 of 2009
appellant that the information desired by him is lengthy and different departments and branches have been requested to supply the same immediately and
reminder has also been issued to the concerned departments to supply the information on 12.02.2009. Again after getting the first appeal, the appellant was informed that the information will be supplied after getting it collected from the different departments of the Agricultural University. The first appellate authority has taken no action. In future it is directed that after the first appeal is filed with the first appellate authority he should take necessary action as per the Right to Information Act-2005.
3. The respondent states that some information has been supplied to the appellant on 13.07.2009.
4. The appellant states that no doubt he has received the information but it is incomplete. He has sent his response/ observations of the information received by him to the Commission which was received in commission office on 27.07.2009. However, one copy is handed over to the respondent today in the court in our presence. Appellant further states that the respondent has got deposited Rs.90/- (Rupees Ninety only) from him towards the cost of information/ documents. However, information has been delayed for more than three months.

PIO may be directed to refund his Rs,90/-. It is directed that as per the observations made by the appellant, the information be supplied immediately keeping in view the application of the appellant dated 20.01.2009.
5. Case is adjourned and fixed for further hearing on 17-09-2009 at 10.00 AM.
6. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


Sd/-
Surinder Singh
State Information Commissioner

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Darbara Singh Kahlon
Dated:03-08-2009 State Information Commissioner

Dr Dulcha Singh Brar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar,
Director Students’ Welfare,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Respondent

CC - 1680 /2009

Present:
Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar, Complainant, in person.
Shri Inderpal Singh, Superintendent and Shri Paramjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. In this case, Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar filed three applications with the PIO of the office of Registrar, Punjab Agricultural University Ludhiana, one on 11.05.2009 and two on 14.5.2009 with separate fee of Rs.10/- with each application. He sent reminders to the PIO on 15.06.2009, 23.06.2009 and 17.06.2009. The Respondent supplied some information to the Complainant on 22.06.2009. Not satisfied with the information supplied to him, the Complainant filed a complaint with the Punjab State Information Commission on 25.06.2009, which was received in the Commission on 26.06.2009 against Diary No. 9850. Accordingly, Notice of Hearing was issued to both the parties for today.

2. Heard both the parties.

3. The information supplied to the Complainant on 22.06.2009 is discussed in detail today in the court. The Complainant states that he has received some information but he has to submit some observations regarding Para 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21. The Respondent states that information relating to Para 11 and 13 has been supplied to the Complainant on 17.07.2009 and due receipt has been taken from him. He submits one copy to the Commission, which is taken on record. He further states that the letter written by one Member namely Dr. J. S. Kular, which was submitted to the Vice Chancellor and further transferred to the Registrar, has been taken back by him and thus is not available in the public domain of the Public Authority. Accordingly, the PIO is directed to file an affidavit on the next date of hearing to the effect that the letter written by Dr. J. S. Kular to the Vice Chancellor has been taken back by him and is not available in the record. He is also directed to bring original record regarding Para 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 from 19.09.2008 on the next date of hearing.
4. The Complainant states that there is difference in two scripts of CD, one which has been supplied to him and the other which he himself has prepared from the CD, supplied to him. Both the scripts are taken on record for comparison.

5. It is directed that the Complainant will hand over a list of letters, required by him, to Shri Inderpal Singh , Superintendent within a week, in respect of Shri Manjit Singh, Coordinator Cultural Activities regarding his mis-conduct, punishment of Censure, Warning, Stoppage of Salary, Absence from duty etc. during his tenure as Coordinator, Cultural Activities.

6. The Complainant states that the PIO has charged cost of documents from him but the information has been supplied to him after a period of 30 days. He requests that the cost of documents may be got refunded from the Public Authority. As the cost of documents is a meager amount, therefore, there is no need to refund the same to the Complainant. However, the Public Authority is directed to be careful in future as the information is to be supplied free of cost after a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of application for information.

7. Shri Jaswant Singh, Assistant Registrar-cum-PIO, office of Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana is directed to be present in person on the next date of hearing alongwith affidavit and the original record, as narrated above. It is also directed that the official, who has prepared the CD, will attend the proceedings on the next date of hearing for giving his statement under Section 18(3)(a)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005.

8. The case is fixed for further hearing on 17.09.2009 at 10.00 A.M. in Court No.1.

9. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Surinder Singh
State Information Commissioner


Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh Darbara Singh Kahlon
Dated: 29. 07. 2009 State Information Commissioner

Shri RS Arora versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

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

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. ________________ Respondent

CC No. 841 of 2009

Present:-
Shri R.S. Arora complainant in person.
Shri Sawaran Singh, Sr. Assistant for the respondent-department.

ORDER

Shri Sawaran Singh, Senior Assistant appearing on behalf of the respondent-department stated that the complaint of Shri Arora- complainant was transmitted to the Veterinary Wing of the university which subsequently became a separate university. Since Shri Arora retired from the respondent-department, he is entitled to get the information from that department. Shri Sawaran Singh is instructed to get the file from the Veternary University and supply the requisite information to Shri Arora within three weeks from today.

2. Case stands adjourned to 14.9.2009.

( R. K. Gupta)
Dated: 24.7.2009. State Information Commissioner

KARAMJIT SINGH Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.W.P. No.9137 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION: JULY 02, 2009

Karamjit Singh ....PETITIONER
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others ....RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HON BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr.Naresh Prabhakar, Advocate, for the petitioner.
..
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J.
The petitioner, who is working as Draftsman in the respondentUniversity, has filed the instant petition for quashing the advertisement dated 19.5.2009 issued by the respondent-University, whereby the applications have been invited for appointment on the post of Architect on contractual basis.

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner, who has been admitted as member of Council of Architect, is fully eligible to be promoted on the post of Architect. Therefore, if the aforesaid appointment is made on contractual basis, the promotional avenue of the petitioner will be adversely affected.

Concededly, the line of promotion for the post of Architect is Junior Draftsman, Draftsman, then Senior Draftsman, then Architectural Assistant, thereafter Assistant Architect and then Architect. At present, the petitioner is working as Draftsman, therefore, immediately he cannot be promoted to the post of Architect. Thus, he has no locus standi to challenge the action of the respondents for appointing the Architect on contractual basis.

No merits. Dismissed.

(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL)
JUDGE

Shri Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Satish Kumar, #2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite Guru Nanak Engineering College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. __________ Complainant

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana._______________ Respondent

CC No. 1136 of 2009

Present:-
Shri Satish Kumar complainant in person.
Shri Inder Paul Singh, APIO alongwith Shri Ajay Kumar, Junior Assistant on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

Admittedly, the complainant has moved number of applications and it was not clear which application is to be dealt with. Accordingly he was shown his original application dated 18.12.2008. It is seen that in this case, information was provided by the respondent-department vide their letter dated 19.2.2009. On the receipt of the said information, Shri Satish Kumar, complainant had raised certain queries which were replied by the respondent-department vide their letter dated 13.4.2009. As regards Information about investment, a letter has been brought by Shri Inder Paul Singh copies of which were got prepared and handed over to the complainant. I held that all points stand replied and no more information is left to be supplied.

2. In view of the above discussion, case stands disposed of.

(R.K. Gupta)
State Information Commissioner.
Dated: 26.6.2009

Shri RS Arora versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

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

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. ________________ Respondent

CC No. 841 of 2009

Present:-
None on behalf of the complainant.
Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO for the respondent-department.

ORDER

Reply on one point at. Sr. No.3 has been supplied but no reply has come forward about the second point. The plea of Shri Inder Pal Singh, APIO that the information has to be collected from various department is not tenable. Case stands adjourned to 24.7.2009 by which date the information must be collected and supplied to the complainant with a copy to the Commission for its perusal.

2. Case stands adjourned to 24.7.2009.



( R. K. Gupta)
June 22, 2009. State Information Commissioner

Shri Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Satish Kumar #2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite Guru Nanak Engineer College, Gill Road, Ludhiana. ____ Complainant

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. _____Respondent

CC No. 940 of 2008

Present:-
None on behalf of the complainant..
Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

While earlier enquiry was conducted, an embezzlement of Rs.2,36,939.70 was detected and FIR was lodged for the same. Later on Vigilance Bureau took up the investigation and they found embezzlement to the tune of Rs.14,67,319.28. Shri Inderpal Singh, APIO was not able to explain as to why interim FIR was lodged before completing the inquiry. However, in view of the fact that Vigilance Bureau has filed a case in the Court for embezzlement of Rs.14,00,000/- and the enquiry stands completed, the case is accordingly disposed of.


( R. K. Gupta)
May 22, 2009. State Information Commissioner.

Shri R.S. Arora versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

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

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. ___________ Respondent

CC No. 840 of 2009

Present:-
None on behalf of the complainant.
Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO for the respondent-department.

ORDER

Out of three points, he has scrutinized the files relating to Sr. No.1 and 2 and given a certificate to the respondent-department. He also wanted to see the personal file of one Shri Sat Pal Sharma, Accounts Officer without assigning any reason to see the file of third party. Shri Sat Pal Sharma was requested to give his consent to show the file to the complainant, but he did not agree to do so. The department has taken the decision not to show the file to the complainant. I have no reason to disagree with this action of the department.

2. Matter stands disposed of.

( R. K. Gupta)
May 15, 2009. State Information Commissioner

IQBAL SINGH Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHER CWP 8069 of 2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

( OandM )

DATE OF DECISION : 14.05.2009

Iqbal Singh .... PETITIONER
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. T.P.S. Chawla, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
The petitioner has filed application (CM No. 8195 of 2009) seeking permission to withdraw the writ petition. For the reasons, stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition and the application is allowed.

Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE

GURNAM KAUR AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER R.F A 2077 of 2001

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

(O and M)

Gurnam Kaur and others ..... Appellants
vs
State of Punjab and another ..... Respondents

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

Present:
Mr. Vinod Kr. Kataria, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.

Rajesh Bindal J.
The landowners are in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that State of Punjab vide notification dated 21.11.1984 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), acquired land within the revenue estates of Village Jodhpur Romana, Tehsil and District Bathinda, for setting up Regional Research Project of Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”) announced his award on 20.4.1995. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference, the learned court below vide award dated 6.12.1994, assessed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 50,000/- per acre. Thereafter, the appellants filed application under Section 28-A of the Act which was dismissed vide order dated 29.8.2000. It is this order which is under challenge in the present appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the claim made in the present appeal is squarely covered by judgment of this court in RFA No. 1476 of 1995 Prithipal Singh vs Punjab State decided on 23.3.2005, whereby the compensation payable to the landowners, whose land was acquired vide same
notification was enhanced to Rs. 72,000/- per acre.

Learned Assistant Advocate General does not dispute this factual position.

For the reasons recorded in Prithipal Singh's case (supra), the present appeal is allowed in the same terms.

( Rajesh Bindal)
Judge

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Satish Kumar #2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite Guru Nanak Engineer College, Gill Road, Ludhiana. ____ Complainant

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. _____Respondent

CC No. 940 of 2008

Present:-
Shri Satish Kumar complainant in person.
Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

Shri Satish Kumar complainant has stated that he has submitted four complaints/appeals in the Commission and he does not know that which appeal/complaint made by him has been dealt in the instant case. He requested that he may be shown the file so that he can link up the appeal/complaint. He was shown the file and he stated that he has not brought the relevant papers relating to this particular reference. In this regard, according to him he sent a letter dated 2.4.2009 addressed to the Deputy Registrar of the Commission, but the same has not been received in the Bench

2. To enable the complainant to present his case, this case is adjourned to 22.5.2009. It will be appropriate that though the original application of the complainant dated 2.5.2008 was received in the Commission on 8.5.2008 but the same was received by the bench on 20.3.2009, registry of the Commission check up where this file remained pending for so many months.

3. It is further seen that point raised in the present case was also dealt in the case No.CC-2028 of 2007, in which final order was passed by the bench headed by Shri P.K. Verma, State Information Commissioner on 11.4.2008. Case file of CC No.2028/2007 should also be linked up with the present file i.e. CC No.940/2008.


( R. K. Gupta)
April 17, 2009. State Information Commissioner.

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, 1st Floor Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Satish Kumar s/o Shri Jagan Nath, #2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opposite Guru Nanak Engineer College, Gill Road, Ludhiana. ____ Complainant

Vs.

The Public Information Officer,
o/o Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. _____Respondent

CC No. 3144 of 2008

Present:-
Shri Satish Kumar complainant in person.
Shri Inder Pal Singh, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the respondent-department.

ORDER

In the present case, the complainant has asked for the information on file points mentioned at page 8/c of the case file. As admitted by him in his affidavit at Sr. No.1 is a part of reference dealt with in CC-2028/2007, while request at Sr. No.2,3 and 5 were part of CC No.1507/2008 which was disposed of by the bench headed by Shri P.K. Verma, State Information Commissioner on 19.9.2008 and point at Sr. No.4 is a fresh one as admitted by the complainant, which relates to Shri N.Sohi and Mr. Gurdeep Singh.

2. As far as CC-2028/2007 is concerned, the same was disposed of by Shri P.K. Verma, State Information Commissioner; however, the same has been linked up with CC-940/2008. As far as CC-1507/2008 is concerned, the same was also disposed of by the bench headed by Shri P.K. Verma, State Information Commissioner vide his order dated 19.9.2008. It was explained to the complainant that Right to Information Act, 2005 does not have any provision for appeal/review of any order passed by the same bench or any other bench.

3. In view of the above, the request of the complainant Shri Satish Kumar is declined. As about information on point at Sr. No.4, information relates to third party and privacy of private individual cannot be invaded under the law of Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, the same is declined and matter stands disposed of.

( R. K. Gupta)
April 17, 2009. State Information Commissioner.

DR V B KULSHRESHTHA Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 9560 of 2008

DATE OF DECISION : 16.04.2009

Dr. V.B. Kulshreshtha .... PETITIONER
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. Sanjeev Pandit, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate, for respondents No.1 to 3.
Mr. S.S. Gill, DAG, Punjab, for respondent No.4.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J.
In the present petition, the dispute is regarding the counting of service rendered by the petitioner as Research Associate for the period from 2.3.1978 to 18.7.1980, for the purpose of granting him the pensionary benefits. His appointment as Research Associate was temporary at the fixed salary of Rs. 900/- per month. Thereafter, he was appointed to the regular post of Assistant Breeder. From the said post, he was promoted to the post of Maize Breeder (Bajra).

Concededly, on 31.10.2006, the petitioner has retired from the post of Maize Breeder (Bajra) on attaining the age of superannuation. Prior to the year 1991, the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme was applicable to the regular employees of the respondent University. Thereafter, the Pension Scheme was introduced and options of the employees were obtained. The employees covered under the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme were eligible to opt for Pension Scheme. Since the post of Research Assistant was purely temporary at fixed salary of Rs. 900/- per month, therefore, it was not covered under the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme. No CPF contribution was made in respect of the petitioner during his service period as Research Assistant. In view of these facts, after his retirement, in response to a letter dated 11.12.2006 (Annexure P-5), written by the Controller, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana to the Director, Kandi Research Centre, Ballowal Saunkhri (Nawanshahar) to obtain the consent of the petitioner for counting his service with effect from 18.7.1980 after
excluding the period from 2.3.1978 to 18.7.1980 of fixed pay service, the petitioner himself gave an undertaking (Annexure R-1) in writing to exclude the period of his service as Research Assistant towards his pensionary benefits. Thereafter, on the basis of the said undertaking, the pensionary benefits were released to the petitioner.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the said undertaking was obtained from the petitioner under duress and he was entitled for counting the period of said service as Research Assistant towards the qualifying service for the purpose of grant of pension.

After hearing counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that a disputed question of fact has been raised regarding the obtaining of undertaking in writing from the petition, which in my opinion cannot be gone into by this Court in the writ jurisdiction. Thus, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to entertain this petition in exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court and the same is, hereby,
dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy before the Civil Court.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE

NIRMALENDU CHOWDHURY Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND ANOTH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 8969 of 2004 ( OandM )

DATE OF DECISION : 30.03.2009

Nirmalendu Chowdhury .... PETITIONER
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and another ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. Arun Nehra, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Senior Advocate, with
Mr. G.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the respondents.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
The petitioner, who has retired as Professor of Helminthology from the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, has filed this petition for issuing direction to the respondents to quash the orders dated 8.7.2002, 29.11.2002, 22.1.2003 and 7.7.2003, whereby his request for shifting to the pension scheme has been declined.

Undisputedly, the pension scheme was introduced in the respondents University in the month of November, 1991. Thereafter, options were sought from the employees thrice. Undisputedly, the petitioner till his retirement did not opt for the pensionary scheme.

After hearing counsel for the parties, when this court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned rejection of the claim of the petitioner, counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer that the respondents be directed to release the Contributory Provident Fund of the petitioner, which has not been released so far. Counsel for the respondents states that the Contributory Provident Fund of the petitioner will be released within two
months.

In view of the aforesaid statements of counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the Contributory Provident Fund of the petitioner within two months, with statutory interest, subject to the completion of all the formalities in this regard by the petitioner.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE

DR DULCHA SINGH BRAR Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 4602 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION : 24.03.2009

Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar .... PETITIONER
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others .... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
After arguing for some time, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file fresh one after obtaining copy of the order, whereby the respondent University has constituted a fresh one member committee.

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE

KANTA GUPTA Vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

Date of decision : March 04, 2009

(1) R.F.A. No. 302 of 2003
Bhim Sain Chhabra ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(2) R.F.A. No. 303 of 2003
Manjit Singh Bedi ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(3) R.F.A. No. 304 of 2003
Karamjit Kaur ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(4) R.F.A. No. 305 of 2003
Budh Parkash and another ... Appellants
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(5) R.F.A. No. 306 of 2003
Kanta Gupta ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(6) R.F.A. No. 307 of 2003
Shanti Devi ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(7) R.F.A. No. 308 of 2003
Hukam Chand ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(8) R.F.A. No. 309 of 2003
Parkash Chand ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(9) R.F.A. No. 310 of 2003
Ravinder Kumar Sehgal ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(10) R.F.A. No. 311 of 2003
Amarjit Kaur ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(11) R.F.A. No. 312 of 2003
Sukhdarshan Singh Khera ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(12) R.F.A. No. 313 of 2003
Ajit Singh Bhatia ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(13) R.F.A. No. 314 of 2003
Kailash Gupta ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(14) R.F.A. No. 315 of 2003
Kusam Gupta ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(15) R.F.A. No. 316 of 2003
Yog Raj Gupta ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(16) R.F.A. No. 317 of 2003
Gurjit Kaur ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(17) R.F.A. No. 318 of 2003
Harjinder Kaur Chawla and another ... Appellants
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(18) R.F.A. No. 319 of 2003
Asha Bansal ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(19) R.F.A. No. 320 of 2003
Sukhdev Singh ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(20) R.F.A. No. 321 of 2003
Amar Partap Singh ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(21) R.F.A. No. 322 of 2003
Romeshwar Dass ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(22) R.F.A. No. 323 of 2003
Krishna Dulari and others ... Appellants
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(23) R.F.A. No. 324 of 2003
Santosh Kumari ... Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

(24) R.F.A. No. 1679 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Romeshwar Dass and others .. Respondents

(25) R.F.A. No. 1680 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Kanta Gupta and others .. Respondents

(26) R.F.A. No. 1681 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Ajit Singh Bhatia and others .. Respondents

(27) R.F.A. No. 1682 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Karamjit Kaur and others .. Respondents

(28) R.F.A. No. 1683 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Yograj Gupta and others .. Respondents

(29) R.F.A. No. 1684 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Budh Parkash and others .. Respondents

(30) R.F.A. No. 1685 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Asha Bansal and others .. Respondents

(31) R.F.A. No. 1686 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Bhim Sain Chhabra and others .. Respondents

(32) R.F.A. No. 1687 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Sukhdarshan Singh Khehra and others ... Respondents

(33) R.F.A. No. 1688 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Gurjit Kaur and others .. Respondents

(34) R.F.A. No. 1689 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Harjinder Kaur Chawla and others .. Respondents

(35) R.F.A. No. 1690 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Sukhdev Singh and others .. Respondents

(36) R.F.A. No. 1691 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Parkash Chand and others .. Respondents

(37) R.F.A. No. 1692 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Kailash Gupta and others .. Respondents

(38) R.F.A. No. 1693 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Kusam Gupta and others .. Respondents

(39) R.F.A. No. 1694 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Saroj Modgil and others .. Respondents

(40) R.F.A. No. 1695 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Manjit Singh Bedi and others .. Respondents

(41) R.F.A. No. 1696 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Amar Partap Singh and others .. Respondents

(42) R.F.A. No. 1697 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Hukam Chand and others .. Respondents

(43) R.F.A. No. 1698 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Smt. Santosh Kumari and others .. Respondents

(44) R.F.A. No. 1699 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Smt. Shanti Devi and others .. Respondents

(45) R.F.A. No. 1700 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Smt. Amarjeet Kaur and others .. Respondents

(46) R.F.A. No. 1701 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Ravinder Kumar Sehgal and others .. Respondents

(47) R.F.A. No. 1702 of 2003
Land Acquisition Collector, Patiala ... Appellant
v.
Krishna Dulari and others .. Respondents

Present:
Mr. J. R. Mittal, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Rajiv Mittal and Mr. Kashmir Singh, Advocates for the land owners.

Rajesh Bindal J.
This order shall dispose of a bunch of 47 appeals, as the same arise out of a common acquisition.

R.F.A. Nos. 302 to 324 of 2003 have been filed by the land owners seeking enhancement of the compensation.

In R.F.A. Nos. 1679 to 1702 of 2003, the State has prayed for reduction of the compensation awarded by the Court below.

The facts have been extracted from R.F.A. No. 302 of 2003.

Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 3.96 acres situated in village Karheri was acquired vide notification dated 6.7.1993 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for development of residential Urban Estate, which was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act on 15.12.1993. The Collector gave award of Rs. 300/- per square yard, i.e., Rs. 14,52,000/- per acre for Chahi and Gair Mumkin kind of land. Aggrieved against the same, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, determined the fair value of the land @ Rs. 400/- per square yard for the land comprised in khasra No. 152 and @ Rs. 350/- per square yard for the land falling in khasra Nos. 150 and 151.

Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that the land in question, which was a small plot of 3.96 acres was surrounded by already developed area. There was Urban Estate already developed in the neighbourhood.

Punjabi University complex was just opposite the acquired land, which is situated
on the main road leading from Rajpura to Patiala. The land in question was purchased by Mukhbant Singh from Punjab Agriculture University in an open auction. Thereafter, it was bifurcated into small plots after leaving roads etc. and
was acquired subsequently. It was a developed piece of land. Sale deeds Ex. P.2 to Ex. P6, which were showing the average value from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 676.69 per square yard as the consideration money, have not been considered at all. The land pertaining thereto was located in the same village Karheri, where the acquired land was located. Reliance was also placed upon Ex. P.14, whereby 500 square yards of plot was sold vide allotment letter dated 11.8.1993 at an average price of Rs. 665/- per square yard. The submission is that it was located quite close to the acquired land and the valuation thereof was fixed much prior to the acquisition of the land in question as the allotment was made on an application filed by the applicant on 7.7.1993. If the aforesaid evidence is considered in the light of the fact that the land owned by the owners in the present set of appeals is also in the form of small plots purchased by them, the value thereof deserves to be enhanced.

No one has appeared for the respondents in the appeals filed by the land owners or the appeals filed by the State.

Heard learned counsel for the land owners and perused the record.

Location of the acquired land is evident from site plan (Ex. P18) on record. It shows that the same is located on the road leading from Rajpura to Patiala, opposite Punjabi University Complex. It also shows that towards Patiala, adjoining the acquired land is Urban Estate Complex and opposite that also, on the right side of Rajpura Patiala Road adjoining Punjabi University Complex is Urban Estate complex. The location of the land, as has been depicted in the site plan (Ex. P.18) is not in dispute. As far as valuation of the land is concerned, there is no site plan on record to depict the location of sale deeds (Ex. P.2 to Ex. P.6), sought to be relied upon by learned counsel for the land owners. All what is stated is that these are forming part of the land pertaining to village Karheri, to which the acquired land also belongs, is also not found to be meritorious for the reason that in none of the site plans, even village Karheri could be pointed out.

Another fact, which cannot be lost sight of is that the area of village Karheri must be a large area and as to at what place and with what advantages or disadvantages, the land pertaining to sale deeds Ex. P.2 to Ex. P.6 was sold is not borne out from the record. In the absence thereof, it is not possible for this Court to consider the comparability of the acquired land vis-a-vis the land dealt with in sale deeds Ex. P.2 to Ex. P.6.

As far as allotment letter Ex. P.14 is concerned, admittedly, the application for allotment of plot was filed on 7.7.1993, as is evident from the document itself.

The notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case was issued on 6.7.1993. For a plot of 500 square yards, the value was mentioned at Rs. 665/- per square yard. This part of the developed Urban Estate is located adjoining to the Punjabi University Complex. Sale instance of such a developed place cannot possibly be compared with the land in question, which was carved out in plots by a
private person without other amenities being available here. As against this, the
State had produced on record sale deeds Ex. R.1 to Ex. R.4 showing sale of plots in Urban Estate, Phase-II, which depicted the value at Rs. 665/- per squared yard.

Another document, which had come on record is Ex. P.16, letter dated 23.9.1994
from the Deputy Commissioner, who opined that value of the land is Rs. 350/- per square yard for Chahi land and Rs. 400/- per square yard for Gair Mumkin kind of land. Considering the aforesaid material, the learned court below determined the market value of the land forming part of khasra No. 152, which is abutting the main road leading from Rajpura to Patiala at Rs. 400/- per square yard and for the land behind that forming part of Khasra Nos. 150 and 151 at Rs. 350/- per square yard. The aforesaid assessment of value of land, in my opinion, cannot be faulted with. The front portion of the land in question certainly had a commercial potential being on main road leading from Rajpura to Patiala and also opposite the Punjabi University Complex. For that reason, the value thereof has been assessed at a higher price, as compared to the value of the land which was located behind that.

The portion, which is located behind that cannot possibly be assessed at the same rate, as it has its own locational disadvantages.

For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned award. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.

(Rajesh Bindal)
Judge

Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Ashok Kumar,
S/o Sh. Khub Chand,
11322, Habowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001.
___________Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana.
__________ Respondent
CC No. 2632 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Ashok Kumar, complainant in person.
ii) Sri Inderpal Singh, Supdt-cum-APIO, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
In compliance with the Court’s orders dated 9-1-2009, the respondent has supplied copies of measurement books which are available in the office. The respondent has informed the complainant that the remaining measurement books, copies of which are required by him, are not available in the records of the office.
No further action is required to be taken in this case, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
January 30, 2009 Punjab

Sital Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-33-34, Sector -17-C, CHANDIGARH
Sh. Sital Singh,
S/o Sh. Sadhu Singh,
V.P.O Uppal, Tehsil & Distt-Ludhiana.

…………………………….Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer
O/o Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana.

……………………………..Respondent

CC No. 2269 of 2008

Present:
(i) Sh. Sital Singh, the Complainant
(ii) Sh. Inder pal Singh, Suptd. On behalf of the Respondent

ORDER

Heard

2. Respondent states that the required information has already been sent to the Complainant. Another copy of the information has been handed over to the Complainant today in the Commission. No further action is required.

3. Disposed of. Copies of the order be sent to the both parties.

Sd/-
(Kulbir Singh)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 20th January, 2009

Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Ashok Kumar,
S/o Sh. Khub Chand,
11322, Habowal Kalan,
Ludhiana-141001.
___________Complainant
Vs.
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana.
__________ Respondent
CC No. 2632 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Ashok Kumar, complainant in person.
ii) Sri Inderpal Singh, Supdt-cum-APIO, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The respondent has given certain reasons as to why photostat copies of the pages of the measurements books required by him cannot be/need not be given to him vide their letter dated 1-9-2008. These reasons have found to be untenable and the respondent has been directed to give the photostat copies of the relevant pages of the measurements books required by the complainant. Since the complainant has mentioned in his application for information that he would personally collect the information, 11.00 AM on 23.01.09 has been fixed in consultation with the respondent, as the time, when the complainant will visit the office of the APIO, present here, and collect the information. Since a period of more than 30 days has passed since the receipt of the application for information by the respondent, no further fees will be payable by the complainant for the information.

Adjourned to 10.00 AM on 30.01.2009 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
January 9, 2009 Punjab

Gurvinder Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Gurvinder Singh,
S/o Sh. Gurdev Singh,
VPO Mehma Sarja,
Distt. Bathinda-151201,
Punjab.
…………………Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o, Punjab Agriculture University,
Forestry and Formal Crops Department,
Ludhiana, Punjab.
………………Respondent

CC No. 2560 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Inder Pal Singh, Supdt.-cum-APIO, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The respondent states in his written reply that the application for information of the complainant has not been received in his office but he has now submitted the required information. This may be sent to the complainant alongwith these orders.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
December 12, 2008 Punjab

Good crop year: Punjabs coffers to swell by 2800 cr

November 26 Punjabs coffers will swell by a whopping Rs 2,800 crore, a growth of 40 per cent from last year, owing to a good crop. The government collects 2 per cent market fee, 2 per cent rural development fund (RDF), 4 per cent purchase tax (VAT) and 3 per cent infrastructure cess (hiked from 2 to 3 per cent this September) from crops. The good minimum support price (MSP) of wheat, paddy and cotton and bumper wheat and paddy crops have not only brought higher revenues, but also reinforced agriculture as the main driver of Punjabs economy. In fact, while other states are struggling with depleting value-added tax (VAT) collections, the revenue from crops has resulted in Punjabs VAT collections going up by over 40 per cent against the corresponding period last year, catapulting it to the third position as far as growth in VAT is concerned.

A total of Rs 550 crore is likely to accrue as market fee collected by the market committees and the state will gross an equal amount as rural development fund, which is under the Chief Minister. Purchase tax collected on crops will add another over Rs 1,100 crore to the VAT kitty while Rs 500 to 600 crore will make its way to the Punjab Infrastructure Development Board (PIDB) as infrastructure cess.

However, despite a good MSP, the market fee from cotton has declined this year from Rs 109.7 crore to Rs 80.47 crore, owing to lesser area under cotton this year. But it has been more than offset by the 105 lakh metric tonnes of wheat arrivals this financial year against last years 80.16 lakh metric tonnes and over 150 lakh metric tonnes of paddy arrivals against last years 141 lakh metric tonnes.Interestingly, the high production of basmati varieties, more than double than last year, has not only brought huge benefits to the Punjab farmers as its prices are touching Rs 3,500 to Rs 3,600 this year, a jump of 50 per cent over last year, but also brought higher revenues for the cash-strapped state.
It is not just Punjab that has benefited from the good crop year, but the Centres granaries are also overflowing. Punjabs high contribution to the Central pool and buffer stocks will help the country not only feed its millions, but also save on the foreign reserves that go into importing foodgrains, Punjab agriculture department director B.S. Sidhu says.
Most importantly, the good returns will help bring agriculture back on the agenda of governments think-tank on boosting Punjabs frail economy, feel agriculturists.

JAGDISH RAI KAPOOR AND OTHERS Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND OTHER Civil Writ Petition 11395 of 2008 (O and M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 30th October, 2008

Jagdish Rai Kapoor and others … Petitioners
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others … Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr. Ranjivan Singh, Advocate for the applicants-petitioners.
Mr. Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate for respondent No.1 and 2.
Mr. Satish Bhanot, Senior DAG Punjab for respondent No.3 and 4.

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
CM No. 17963 of 2008 CM is allowed. Uncertified copy of the order passed in CWP No. 15554 of 2007 is taken on record.

CWP No. 11395 of 2008
CM No. 17964 of 2008 has been preferred with a prayer that
CWP No. 11395 of 2008 be disposed off in the same terms as in CWP No. 15554 of 2007, which has been decided by a Division Bench of this Court.

Notice in the application was issued. Mr. Deepak Agnihotri, Standing Counsel for Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana has caused appearance for respondent No.1 and 2. It is not disputed that the case of the petitioner is covered by the ratio of judgment rendered in CWP No. 15554 of 2007 titled as Gian Chand and others v. State of Punjab and others, decided by a Division Bench of this Court on July 21, 2008.

In view of the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, present writ petition is allowed in the same terms as in CWP No.
15554 of 2007.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE

Sh HK Tewari versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. H.K. Tewari,
HJ- 116, Housing Board Colony,
B.R.S. Nagar, Ludhiana. ___________Complainant
Vs.
Public Information Officer ,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1443 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. H.K. Tewari, complainant In person.
ii) Sri Ramesh Chander, APIO,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
After the case was last heard on 19-9-2008, the complainant has sent a list of deficiencies to the respondent who has prepared a point wise reply, which was handed over to the complainant in the Court today. He may go through the same and in case he is still not satisfied on any point, he may communicate his doubt to the respondent, who will clarify the same within 7 days.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
October 17, 2008 Punjab

Sh HK Tewari versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. H.K. Tewari,
HJ- 116, Housing Board Colony,
B.R.S. Nagar, Ludhiana. ___________Complainant
Vs.
Public Information Officer ,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1443 of 2008

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sri M.D. Pandey, Sr. Assistant,on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The respondent has sent a point wise reply to the deficiencies pointed out by the complainant in compliance with the Court’s orders dated 22-8-2008.
The complainant has requested for an adjournment. The same is allowed. The case is adjourned to 10 AM on 17-10-2008. In the meanwhile, in case there is any point on which any further clarification or information is required by the complainant, he may communicate the same to the respondent who will deal with the same before the next date of hearing.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
September 19, 2008 Punjab

Sh Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Satish Kumar,
S/o Sti Jagan Nath,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College.
Gill Road, Ludhiana ----complainant.
Vs.
The Public Information Officer,
o/o Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana.
CC-1507 of 2008


Present:
i) Sri Satish Kumar, complainant in person

ORDER

Both the applications for information of the complainant, dated 16-5-2008 and 3-5-2008 were discussed with him, in his presence. It is evident that the information asked for by the complainant in both these applications is either repetitive , vague and non-specific or concerns third parties. As such, no action is required to be taken on this complaint, which is disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
September 19, 2008 Punjab

INDERJIT SINGH Vs PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY LUDHIANA AND ANOTH CWP 16076 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : September 10, 2008

Inderjit Singh ............Petitioner
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and another ...........Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.M KUMAR
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH

Present:
Mr. Kamaldip Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

M.M KUMAR, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner requests for withdrawal of the petition with liberty to avail any other remedy available in accordance with law.

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

( M.M KUMAR )
JUDGE

( JORA SINGH )
JUDGE

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
# 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.184 /2008

Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar, Complainant, in person.
Shri Ramesh Chander, Supdt-cum-APIO, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Shri Ramesh Chander, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the Respondent states that information as per the observations/comments made by Shri Vidya Sagar, Appellant, has been sent to the State Information Commission, Punjab, vide Memo No.PIO/RTI/2008/16667, dated 16.7.2008, relating to AC Nos.183/2008, 184/2008, 185/2008 and 186/2008 which has been received in the Commission office on 21.7.2008. He further states that the proceedings of the inspection of the record made by Shri Vidya Sagar in the office of PIO, Office of Centre for Communication, Languages and Culture, PAU, Ludhiana, has been signed by all the officers/officials alongwith Shri Vidya Sagar. The information running into 186 documents, has been supplied to the Appellant and receipt has been signed by Shri Vidya Sagar on the proceedings. The other documents, i.e.

AC No.184/2008

photocopies of all the documents pertaining to the personal files of the office of Registrar as desired by Shri Vidya Sagar (apprx. 1200 pages), complete enquiry report submitted by Mr. V.R.Sharma (apprx. 392 pages) will be supplied by 25.9.2006 at 11.00 AM.

2. He further states that after the inspection, the information asked by the Appellant was ready for supply on 25th September, 2006.

3. The APIO further states that inspection of relevant record as requested by Shri Vidya Sagar, vide Memo No.ADC/PIO/5873-74, dated 25.9.2006 will be held on 5.10.2006 at 10.30 AM. But the same was again personally inspected by Shri Vidya Sagar, Appellant in the office of Addl. Director of Communication-cum-PIO, Centre for Communication, Languages and Culture on 5.10.2006 as well as on 17.10.2006 in the presence of the officials from the O/o Registrar, Comptroller and Head, Civil Engineering PAU, Ludhiana and certified copies of 1658 documents of his personal files from the offices of Registrar as well as Comptroller, PAU were handed over to the Appellant and in token of receipt of 3856 sheets, Shri Vidya Sagar has signed under protest on 17.10.2006.

4. During today’s arguments, the appellant states that the information supplied to him is not as per his demand, although the information was supplied to him after thorough inspection made by the Appellant and the charges of Rs.422/-(Four hundred twenty two only) were deposited vide Cheque dated AC No.184/2008 8.9.2006 and charges of Rs.7712/- (Seven thousand seven hundred twelve only) were deposited vide Cheque No.048314, dated 17.10.2006 by the Appellant. There is thus a clear dispute regarding the supply of information by the Respondent to the Appellant. According to the Respondent, the information demanded has been completely supplied whereas according to the Appellant it is not as per his demand. But in this case I am not inclined to go into the correctness of the stands taken by the parties for the reason that in this appeal preferred by Shri Vidya Sagar under Section 19 of RTI Act, 2005, he has made baseless and reckless allegation against me. The allegations inter alia are that
“ cheat Surinder Singh has been purchased by the Respondent University. Surinder Singh should be removed and put behind the bars as he is BORN CRIMINAL. H.E. is requested to take action against the LIAR ”

5. The allegations levelled by the Appellant are both contemptuous and contemptible. I am sending the papers of this case to the Hon’ble Chief Information Commissioner for considering the initiation of suitable contempt proceedings against the Appellant. Apart from this, I am also of the considered view that the Appellant is not entitled to a hearing of this appeal on merits until he purges himself of the contempt committed by him and until such time as the
matter regarding the initiation of contempt proceeding and action pursuant thereto is finally disposed of/taken.
AC No.184/2008

6. In view of the foregoing, I hereby order that the instant appeal be adjourned sine-die. The file may be put up before me only after the final decision regarding the contempt proceedings is taken.

7. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties and to the Deputy Registrar, Punjab State Information Commission, Sector:17, Chandigarh for putting up the papers before the Chief Information Commissioner for appropriate orders.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 24. 07. 2008 State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
# 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.183 /2008

Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar, Complainant, in person.
Shri Ramesh Chander, Supdt-cum-APIO, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Shri Ramesh Chander, Superintendent-cum-APIO on behalf of the Respondent states that information as per the observations/comments made by Shri Vidya Sagar, Appellant, has been sent to the State Information Commission, Punjab, vide Memo No.PIO/RTI/2008/16667, dated 16.7.2008, relating to AC Nos.183/2008, 184/2008, 185/2008 and 186/2008 which has been received in the Commission office on 21.7.2008. He further states that the proceedings of the inspection of the record made by Shri Vidya Sagar in the office of PIO, Office of Centre for Communication, Languages and Culture, PAU, Ludhiana, has been signed by all the officers/officials alongwith Shri Vidya Sagar. The information running into 186 documents, has been supplied to the Appellant and receipt has been signed by Shri Vidya Sagar on the proceedings. The other documents, i.e.
AC No.183 /2008

photocopies of all the documents pertaining to the personal files of the office of Registrar as desired by Shri Vidya Sagar (apprx. 1200 pages), complete enquiry report submitted by Mr. V.R.Sharma (apprx. 392 pages) will be supplied by 25.9.2006 at 11.00 AM.

2. He further states that after the inspection, the information asked by the Appellant was ready for supply on 25th September, 2006.

3. The APIO further states that inspection of relevant record as requested by Shri Vidya Sagar, vide Memo No.ADC/PIO/5873-74, dated 25.9.2006 will be held on 5.10.2006 at 10.30 AM. But the same was again personally inspected by Shri Vidya Sagar, Appellant in the office of Addl. Director of Communication-cum-PIO, Centre for Communication, Languages and Culture on 5.10.2006 as well as on 17.10.2006 in the presence of the officials from the O/o Registrar, Comptroller and Head, Civil Engineering PAU, Ludhiana and certified copies of 1658 documents of his personal files from the offices of Registrar as well as Comptroller, PAU were handed over to the Appellant and in token of receipt of 3856 sheets, Shri Vidya Sagar has signed under protest on 17.10.2006.

4. During today’s arguments, the appellant states that the information supplied to him is not as per his demand, although the information was supplied to him after thorough inspection made by the Appellant and the charges of Rs.422/-(Four hundred twenty two only) were deposited vide Cheque dated AC No.183 /2008 8.9.2006 and charges of Rs.7712/-(Seven thousand seven hundred twelve only) were deposited vide Cheque No.048314, dated 17.10.2006 by the Appellant. There is thus a clear dispute regarding the supply of information by the Respondent to the Appellant. According to the Respondent, the information demanded has been completely supplied whereas according to the Appellant it is not as per his demand. But in this case I am not inclined to go into the correctness of the stands taken by the parties for the reason that in this appeal preferred by Shri Vidya Sagar under Section 19 of RTI Act, 2005, he has made baseless and reckless allegation against me. The allegations inter alia are that “ the corrupt Surinder Singh, Information Denying Commissioner should be booked under Section 166 of IPC immediately by DGP Crime, Punjab Police or U.T. Police at the discretion of his Excellency Governor of Punjab. “

5. The allegations levelled by the Appellant are both contemptuous and contemptible. I am sending the papers of this case to the Hon’ble Chief Information Commissioner for considering the initiation of suitable contempt proceedings against the Appellant. Apart from this, I am also of the considered view that the Appellant is not entitled to a hearing of this appeal on merits until he purges himself of the contempt committed by him and until such time as the
matter regarding the initiation of contempt proceeding and action pursuant thereto is finally disposed of/taken.
AC No.183 /2008

6. In view of the foregoing, I hereby order that the instant appeal be adjourned sine-die. The file may be put up before me only after the final decision regarding the contempt proceedings is taken.

7. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties and to the Deputy Registrar, Punjab State Information Commission, Sector:17, Chandigarh for putting up the papers before the Chief Information Commissioner for appropriate orders.

Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 24. 07. 2008 State Information Commissioner

MOHINDER LAL CHOPRA Vs CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AND OTHRS CWP 8783 of 2004

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

Date of Decision: 17.7. 2008

Mohinder Lal Chopra ...... Petitioner
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal and Ors. .......Respondents

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari

Present:
Ms. Alka Chatrath Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. I.S.Sidhu Advocate for respondents No. 3 and 4.
Mr. AS Jattana Advocate for respondent No.5.

Ajay Tewari J.
The petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.4.2002 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') whereby his Original Application praying for an appropriate order directing the respondents to count his previous service for the purpose of retiral benefits and for fixation of pay has been rejected.

The petitioner joined as a Clerk in the Department of
Rehabilitation Government of Punjab on 29.8.1955 which was taken over by the Central Government on 28.1.1957. On 25.4.1961 the petitioner was retrenched and admittedly no retrenchment compensation was paid to him.

On 8.1.1963 he was appointed in the department of National Cadet Corps (N.C.C.) on the basis that he was a former retrenched employee. On 20.5.1966 the petitioner was appointed as a Clerk in the Central Government
Regional Settlement Commissioner Jalandhar under the Rehabilitation Department. By order dated 23.2.1970 the petitioner was declared surplus and was transferred along with his post to the Central (Surplus Staff) Cell in the Ministry of Home Affairs. Subsequently by order dated 17.8.1970 the period of expiry of notice of termination of the services of the petitioner was extended up to 31.8.1970 and by another letter dated 26.8.1970 the petitioner was informed that the office had no objection if he got his name registered with the Employment Exchange. Consequent to that the petitioner got his name registered with the Employment Exchange and applied to various departments for job including the Punjab Agricultural University ( hereinafter referred to as 'the P.A.U.') as well as the Department of posts and Telegraph.

Initially the petitioner got appointment as a Clerk in the P.A.U. where he joined on 7.2.1971. While serving there he was selected for appointment in the Posts and Telegraph Department vide letter dated 22.8.1972 and he joined on 15.9.1972 after getting relieved from the P.A.U. Ludhiana. He subsequently retired from the Posts and Telegraph Department on 31.5.1993 while working as Senior Auditor.

His claim that his previous service under the State of Punjab/Government of India be counted for purpose of pension and pay fixation having been rejected he approached the Tribunal by way of OA No. 572-PB-98 which was rejected on 24.4.2002 holding that he was not appointed in P.A.U. through Surplus Cell and that before applying for appointment in the Posts and Telegraph Department he did not move through proper channel.

Reliance was placed by the Tribunal on a judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India and others V. K.N. Gupta and another CWP No. 5199-CAT-C of 2000 decided on 17.4.2001.

It has been urged by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had applied for a job in the Posts and Telegraph Department in 1970 before he had joined the P.A.U. and therefore there was no substance in the charge that he did not apply for a job in the Posts and Telegraph Department through the proper channels of the P.A.U. The counsel for the respondents have defended the order of the Tribunal.

We find that the Tribunal has misdirected itself in holding that the petitioner did not apply for a job in the Posts and Telegraph Department through the proper channels of the P.A.U. because as mentioned above that
application had been made in response to the No Objection issued by the Rehabilitation Department for registration of the name of the petitioner with an Employment Exchange much before he joined the P.A.U. The contention that he joined the Posts and Telegraph Department as an open candidate does not seem tenable because at that time the petitioner was 37 years old whereas the age limit for Government service was 25 years and the petitioner could not have been appointed as an open candidate. The reliance of the Tribunal on the judgment in the case of K.N.Gupta (supra) is also misplaced because that was a case where the employee had resigned from the office of Accountant General Punjab to join as a Head Assistant in the service of the Punjab State Tubewell Corporation. As mentioned above the present is not a case of resignation but a case where the petitioner was sought to be retrenched on the ground of having been declared surplus.

Thus the judgment in the case of K.N Gupta (supra) is not applicable.

The Rules having bearing on the present controversy are the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules and the decisions of the Government of India thereunder. Chapter III of the said Rules defines service qualifying for pension and Rule 14 relates to the conditions subject to which the service qualifies. By letter No. 3(2)/Pen. (A)/79 dated 31.31982 the Government of India Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms laid down as follows:-

Counting of temporary service under the State/Central
Governments.-

1. The Government of India have been considering in consultation with the State Governments the question of sharing on a reciprocal basis the proportionate pensionary liability in respect of those temporary employees who had rendered temporary service under the Central Government/State Governments prior to securing posts under the various State Governments/Central Government on their own volition in response to advertisements or circulars including those by the State/Union Public Service Commissions and who are eventually confirmed in their new posts. It has since been decided in consultation with the State Governments
that proportionate pensionary liability in respect of temporary service rendered under the Central Government and State Governments to the extent such service would have qualified for grant of pension under the rules of the respective Government will be shared by the Governments concerned on a service share basis so that the Government servants are allowed the benefit of counting their qualifying service both under the Central Government and the State Governments for grant of pension by the Government from where they eventually retire. The gratuity if any received by the Government employee for temporary service under the Central or State Governments will however have to be refunded by him to the Government concerned.

2. The Government servants claiming the benefit of combined service in terms of the above decision are likely to fall into one of the following categories:-

(1) Those who having been retrenched from the service of Central/State Governments secured on their own employment under State/Central Governments either with or without interruption between the date of retrenchment and date of new appointment;

(2) Those who while holding temporary posts under Central/State Governments apply for posts under State/Central Governments through proper channel with proper permission of the administrative authority concerned;

(3) Those who while holding temporary posts under Central/State Governments apply for posts under State/Central Governments direct without the permission of the administrative authority concerned and resign their previous posts to join the new appointments under State/Central Governments.

The benefit may be allowed to the Government servants in Categories (1) and (2) above. Where an employee in Category (2) is required for administrative reasons for
satisfying a technical requirement to tender resignation from the temporary post held by him before joining the new appointment a certificate to the effect that such resignation had been tendered for administrative reasons and/or to satisfy a technical requirement to join with proper permission the new posts may be issued by the authority accepting the resignation.

A record of this certificate may also be made in his Service Book under proper attestation to enable him to get this benefit at the time of retirement. Government servants in Category (3) will obviously not be entitled to count their previous service for pension.

A perusal of this letter reveals that the case of the petitioner would be covered by Clause (1) of para 2 while the judgment in the case of K. N. Gupta (supra) would fall squarely under clause ( 3 ). In this view of the matter the claim of the petitioner for counting his service under the Government of India and the State of Punjab detailed above is justified.

The counsel for the petitioner has not pressed the claim for fixation of pay and consequently the same is declined.

Keeping in view the above this writ petition is partly allowed and the respondents are directed to count the previous service of the petitioner under the Central Government and State of Punjab for the purpose of retiral benefits. In case the benefits so admissible are not released to the petitioner and the arrears thereof paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order the respondents would be liable to pay interest thereon at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of retirement of the petitioner.

(AJAY TEWARI)
JUDGE

(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE

Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Vidya Sagar,
Lomsh Bhawan
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana 141001
----------------Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer, o/o
Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana.
------------------Respondent
AC No. 399 and 400 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Vidya Sagar, complainant in person
ii) Sri Ramesh Chander, Supdt-cum-APIO on behalf of the
respondent.
ORDER
Heard.
The appellant was asked to show to the Court copies of the applications for information with regard to which he made the present complaint but he states that he has not brought the same with him. Accordingly, this case would be required to be adjourned so that the appellant can show to the Court his applications for information with reference to which he claims that he has not got the required information, to enable the Court to proceed further in the matter.

However, the respondent states that the applications for information involved in the present case have already been considered and similar complaints have been dealt with by the Commission in AC 183 and AC 186 of 2008. The files concerning these two cases were called from the Registry and seen. The fact is that the information alleged by the appellant as having not been received by him in AC-400 of 2007 is identical to the information which he has alleged that he has not received in AC-186 of 2008, already being heard by the Hon'ble SIC, S.Surinder Singh, in which the next date of hearing is 24-7-2008. Similarly, the information alleged by the appellant as having not been received by him in AC-399 of 2007 is identical to the information which he has alleged that he has not received in AC-183 of 2008, already being heard by the Hon'ble SIC, S.Surinder Singh, in which also the next date of hearing is

24-7-2008. An identical matter,already under consideration of the Commission, cannot simultaneously be considered by another SIC and therefore both of these cases are transferred to the Hon’ble SIC, Sri Surinder Singh for consideration and disposal along with AC-183 and 186 of 2008.
The appellant has submitted the following papers to the Court :-.
1. Two books titled RTI Act, 2005 - A primer.
2. Two copies of Affidavit from the complainant dated 10-4-2008
3. Two copies of pages 44, 45, 46, 47 of the booklet RTI, 2005 mentioned at
sr. no. 1.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
4th July, 2008

Tarun Goyal versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh.Tarun Goyal,
19208, Street No. 7
Guru Tegh Bahadur Nagar,Bibiwala Road,
Bhatinda ----------------------Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
Registrar,
Punjabi University,
Patiala -----------------------Respondent

AC No. 166 of 2008


Present:
i) None on behalf of the appellant.
ii) Sh. Vikrant Sharma, Advocate, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
Learned Counsel for respondent has brought the information on the six items listed out by the Court in its orders dated 29-5-2008, but desires that he should be allowed some time to further refine the information which will be sent to the appellant. The respondent is directed to send the information in compliance with the Court’s orders dated 29-5-2008 to the complainant before the next date of hearing.
Adjourned to 10 AM on 22-08-2008 for confirmation of compliance.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
4th July, 2008

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
# 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 185/2008

Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar,Appellant, in person.
Shri Ramesh Chander, APIO and Shri Saudagar Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER


1. The Respondent makes a written submission, running into 19 sheets including one page of covering letter, vide Memo. No. PIO/RTI/2008/10646-47, dated 3.6.2008, one copy of which is handed over to the Appellant in the court in my presence today.

2. The Appellant states that the information, handed over today, has not been authenticated. It is directed that the information will be authenticated by the PIO/APIO or any competent authority. It is also directed that the Appellant will go through this information and will submit his observations/comments, if any, to the PIO within 15 days with a copy to the Commission.

3. The case is fixed for further hearing on 24.7.2008.

4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 12.06.2008. State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
# 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 186/2008

Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar,Appellant, in person.
Shri Ramesh Chander, APIO and Shri Saudagar Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER
1. The Respondent makes a written submission, running into 14 sheets including one page of covering letter, vide Memo. No. PIO/RTI/2008/10648-49, dated 3.6.2008, one copy of which is handed over to the Appellant in the court in my presence today.
2. The Appellant states that the information, handed over today, has not been authenticated. It is directed that the information will be authenticated by the PIO/APIO or any competent authority. It is also directed that the Appellant will go through this information and will submit his observations/comments, if any, to the PIO within 15 days with a copy to the Commission.
3. The case is fixed for further hearing on 24.7.2008.
4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 12.06.2008. State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
# 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 183/2008


Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar,Appellant, in person.
Shri Ramesh Chander, APIO and Shri Saudagar Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. The Respondent makes a written submission, running into 14 sheets including one page of covering letter, vide Memo. No. PIO/RTI/2008/10650-51, dated 3.6.2008, one copy of which is handed over to the Appellant in the court in my presence today.

2. The Appellant states that the information, handed over today, has not been authenticated. It is directed that the information will be authenticated by the PIO/APIO or any competent authority. It is also directed that the Appellant will go through this information and will submit his observations/comments, if any, to the PIO within 15 days with a copy to the Commission.

3. The case is fixed for further hearing on 24.7.2008.
4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 12.06.2008. State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
# 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 184/2008

Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar,Appellant, in person.
Shri Ramesh Chander, APIO and Shri Saudagar Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER


1. The Respondent makes a written submission, running into 17 sheets including one page of covering letter, vide Memo. No. PIO/RTI/2008/10644-45, dated 3.6.2008, one copy of which is handed over to the Appellant in the court in my presence today.
2. The Appellant states that the information, handed over today, has not been authenticated. It is directed that the information will be authenticated by the PIO/APIO or any competent authority. It is also directed that the Appellant will go through this information and will submit his observations/comments, if any, to the PIO within 15 days with a copy to the Commission.
3. The case is fixed for further hearing on 24.7.2008.
4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 12.06.2008. State Information Commissioner

A census to keep tab on farmers suicides in Punjab

Chandigarh, May 30 Acknowledging the need of having census on farm suicides, Punjab has finally thought of conducting a survey in the state. The state government has asked the economics and sociology departments of Punjab Agriculture University (PAU) to initiate the study to ascertain the exact number of suicides committed by farmers.

Talking to the FE, chief secretary of Punjab, Ramesh Inder Singh said, “ Intitally the survey will be conducted in Sangrur and Bathinda on pilot basis. If the study gets successful then it will extended to the other districts as well. Then our course of action will depend on the findings of the survey. We can also think of sending the study to the central government and state can also pitch in to support the aggrieved families”.

Sharing more information on the subject, Sukhpal Singh, a teacher at of the department of economics and a member of the team, which will carry out the survey stated that initially, a door-to-door survey will be carried out in the 576 villages of Sangrur of the total 12,000 villages of the state.

“Sangrur and Bathinda being a cotton belt, are considered the worst affected areas. Many farmers had committed suicides in the belt due to failure of the cotton crop. The aim of the study is to ascertain the reasons behind the suicides. The study will help us to estimate the exact number of distressed families,” Singh said.

He further said, “We will commence our work from the second week of June and it is expected the assessment in these two districts will see completion in four months. Farmers’ suicides that have occurred after April 1, 2005, will be taken into account and suicides of farm labourers have not been included in this census. However the census will help the government frame policy in the favour of farmers.”

Sukhpal added that as per the available data procured from various deputy commissioners and police departments since 2002, around 141 farmers have committed suicides.

National president of Bharitiya Kisan Union, Bhupinder Singh Mann said the main reason behind the suicides is inability of repaying the heavy loan. “According to the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) data, farm households in India have an average outstanding loan of Rs 1,258, but in Punjab, the average outstanding loan is Rs 41,576 (December 2003). The cost of production has gone high and the central government has failed to duly compensate the farmers. However
consisting census is the first step but a lot need to be done to improve the living standard of farmers, he said.

BHOLA SINGH Vs DARA SINGH AND ORS CRev.No.3190 of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision:- 29.5.2008

Bhola Singh .....Petitioner(s) through
Mr.R.V.S.Chugh Advocate.
vs.
Dara Singh and others .....Respondent(s)

1)Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2) To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3)Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

SURYA KANT J. (ORAL)
This revision petition is directed against the order dated 22.2.2008 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Division) Mansa whereby ad interim injunction has been declined to the petitioner as well as against the order dated 5.5.2008 passed by the learned Additional
District Judge Mansa upholding the above-mentioned order.

The dispute pertains to possessory rights over a piece of land owned by the Gram Panchayat. Whereas the petitioner has sought injunction on the ground that previously his father (Harnek Singh) was in possession of the suit land as Gair Marusi tenant and now he is in possession thereof the Gram Panchayat has refuted the said stand and has come up with a resolution in terms whereof the subject land has already been transferred to Punjab Agricultural University Ludhiana by way of a gift deed for opening of Krishi Vigyan Kendra.

Both the Courts have concurrently held that the petitioner has failed to make out a prima facie case in his favour. Otherwise also the subject land is sought to be utilized by the Gram Panchayat for a public purpose of great importance therefore no case to grant ad-interim
injunction to the petitioner is made out.

Dismissed.

( SURYA KANT )
JUDGE

PAU under govt pressur

May 27 Is Punjab Agricultural University holding the state-level symposium on Contribution of Kuka Movement in India under pressure from the state government?The speculation seems to be true, for PAUs basic belief on agricultural practices is in direct contradiction to that of the Namdhari sect, followers of which are called the Kukas.
Before this symposium, PAU has never supported, let alone organised, a seminar on something that is not in line with its thoughts. The Centre for Communication and International Linkages (CCIL) is organising this symposium on June 2, which will be inaugurated by Vice-Chancellor Dr M S Kang.

Sample this! While the Namdharis practise and promote organic farming, PAU has been denouncing this agricultural practice, claiming that organic farming cannot feed millions. Similarly, while the Namdharis are against Bt cotton, PAU has strongly promoted it in the state.Under the regime of former V-C Dr K S Aulakh, PAU had been the official spokesperson for private companies selling the Bt cotton seed. PAU had lobbied hard with the state government for the approval of Bt cotton, claiming it to be a must for cotton growers of Punjab.

PAU Additional Director of Communication Dr Jagtar Singh Dhiman said: The state government has sent us a letter to hold this seminar to commemorate the 150 years of Kuka Movement, and hence we are doing it. We are told that the letters have been sent to all educational institutes of the state.

Dr Dhiman agreed on the contradiction and said: We are just concentrating on the contribution of this sect in Indias Independence struggle. But during the question hour session, posers related to agriculture can also come up.



Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)
REGISTERED

Shri Vidya Sagar,
Lomesh Bhawan,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registar,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.433/2007

RESERVED ON 14.2.2008
AND
PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 22.5.2008


ORDER

1. Arguments in this case were heard on 14.2.2008 and the judgement was reserved.
2. The Appellant has preferred the instant Appeal with the grievance that the information, sought by him, has not been delivered to him. The stand of the Respondent is that he has given specific reply to the Appellant regarding the information sought by him. A perusal of the copy of the reply, sent by the Respondent to the Appellant, reveals that the information sought by the Appellant is merely a repetition of what he has already been supplied in earlier cases i.e. AC-4/2007 and AC-152/2007. I have looked into the various cases filed by the Appellant before the Commission. In all these cases he has been asking AC No.433/2007 for the information repetitively on the same points and what-ever information is delivered to him, he expresses his dis-satisfaction therewith. He also, sometimes, refuses to accept the information given to him and every time starts leveling reckless allegations against the Respondent as well as the Commission, including defamatory allegations against the Chief Information Commissioner and
other State Information Commissioners. I strongly deprecate the conduct and attitude of the Appellant. Even otherwise on merits, the Appellant has no case.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 22.5.2008 State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)
REGISTERED
Shri Vidya Sagar,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.420/2007

RESERVED ON 28.2.2008
AND
PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 22.5.2008

ORDER

1. The judgement in this case was reserved on 28.2.2008.
2 On 28.2.2008, there was no appearance on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Suresh Kumar Saini, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Sarabjit Singh, Senior Assistant had appeared on behalf of the Respondent.

3, In the instant case, the Appellant had filed the Appeal with the grievance that the information, prayed for by him, has not been supplied to him by the Respondent. The case of the Respondent is that the information, as had been demanded by the Appellant, was supplied to him vide communication dated 24.12.2007. A copy of this letter along with comments, on the information demanded, have been placed on the record of the instant case. On 14.2.2008 the Respondent produced before the Commission a copy of the information that had been supplied to the Appellant and he was also willing to provide another AC No.420/2007 copy of the duly authenticated information to the Appellant . I had, therefore, directed that one copy of the information, duly authenticated, be handed over to the Appellant and it was also observed that the Appellant may go through the information and submit his response, if any, by the next date of hearing. The Respondent, however, reported that the Appellant had refused to accept the information, when it was offered for delivery on that very day. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 28.2.2008 for further proceedings. As already indicated here-in-above, the Appellant did not appear on 28.2.2008.

4. In these circumstances, I accept the stand of the Respondent that the Appellant refused to take delivery of the information, as per my directions given vide order dated 14.2.2008. I also believe that the stand of the Respondent regarding delivering the information vide its communication dated 24.12.2007 is correct.

5. In view of the foregoing, no further proceedings in this case are needed. The Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

6. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 22.5.2008 State Information Commissioner

Sh Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34 , Ist Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh.Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College, Gill Road,
Ludhiana.
________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/oThe Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana
__________ Respondent
CC No. 568 of 2008

Present:
Sh.Satish Kumar, complainant in person.
Sh.Ramesh Chander, APIO, and Shri Sahib Singh, Supdt., on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER
Heard.
The complainant states that there is now no problem about the information which he has asked for in his application dated 2-1-2008, since the department of Vigilance has put up the challan in the concerned court in respect of the embezzlement of Rs. 14 lakhs in the month of March, 2008. However, he wants the Court to rule on the incorrect information given by the respondent in November, 2007, that the case of embezzlement of Rs. 14 lakhs is pending in a Court , when it was not pending in a Court at that time but was under investigation by the police and Vigilance departments.

The respondent states that there has never been any intention on their part to misrepresent any fact or to conceal any information from the complainant and any inaccuracy which has occurred was purely unintentional. This submission of the respondent is taken on record and the case is disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
22nd May, 2008


Former PAU faculty member to get full pension

Ludhiana, May 09 Crashing Punjab Agricultural University’s review petition that was put against its retiree Dr Balwant Singh, Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered the university to reinstate his pension to the full.
Dr Balwant Singh’s pension was reduced to one-third in 2004, on the orders of the then Vice Chancellor Dr KS Aulakh, who had maintained that the latter was making statements in press against the interest of the university.

In September 2002, PAU has served a show cause notice to Dr Balwant Singh, charging him of making statements in the media, levelling allegations on Dr KS Aulakh and the Board of Management members, for mismanagement of funds.

As first penalty, Dr Balwant Singh’s pension was reduced to one-third in February 2002. Dr Balwant took the matter to the court. On three occasions earlier, the High Court has directed PAU to review Dr Balwant Singh’s pension case. But now, the former faculty member has been provided permanent respite. This is because the court has rejected all pleas put forward by PAU to file further appeals, informed Advocate Sharwan Sehgal, Dr Balwant Singh’s legal advisor.

“In July 2004, the court had ordered PAU to hear my case again. But with the Board of Management rejecting it, I again went to court,” informed Dr Balwant. He added that again in 2007, the university had put a review petition against the court’s decision, ordering it to reinstate his pension.

Balwant Singh had retired as the Extension Specialist (Youth Programme) of PAU on June 30, 1997. But later, his pension was reduced, on the ground that he had allegedly maligned the image of PAU, with his statements in media. Dr Balwant Singh had filed a petition against Dr Aulakh’s appointment as the Pro Vice-Chancellor of PAU.

Dr Balwant further said, “I had given statements to the press regarding financial mismanagement in PAU, which later was proved by Vigilance in its enquiries.”

PAU takes first step towards generating funds: tells state govt to pay up

Ludhiana, May 7 Punjab Government s directive to PAU that if the varsity needs funds, it has to raise them on its own, has put the government in a tight spot. Taking the suggestion very seriously, PAU has asked the state government to pay for the 25 acres that it had acquired from the varsity in Bathinda to establish a cricket stadium.
"The land at Bathinda is very expensive. Each acre that the government took from PAU is worth at least Rs 1 crore in the market. The state government should pay the cash-strapped university at least this much," says Dr S S Johl, who heads the high-powered committee set up by the university to look into the financial mess in the varsity.

Says Avtar Singh Dhindsa, a member of the PAU management board, "One thing is for sure that the financial state of PAU has to be looked into as an emergency. Secondly, we are collecting data and looking at opportunities like the 25 acres in Bathinda so that we know how much we can generate. But then, the most important thing is that PAU has to first formalise a blueprint of its expenditures and

liabilities.”

Punjab Government had asked PAU to part with 25 acres in Bathinda to set up a cricket stadium. The government had promised pieces of land in lieu of the 25 acres. The government had even sent a CD containing shots of 100 land pieces across the state for the PAU to choose. The university, however, has not zeroed in on any land claiming that all the choices are unfit for the its use.

Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR: 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)
Shri Vidya Sagar,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.152/2006

Present:
None is present on behalf of the Complainant.

Shri Ramesh Chander, Superintendent-cum-APIO, Shri Sarabjit Singh, Superintendent, Shri Saudagar Singh, Senior Assistant and Shri Jatinder Rai, Clerk, on behalf of the Respondent.
ORDER

1. The Respondent makes a written submission, which is taken on record. The Respondent states that the disciplinary proceedings have since been initiated against the erring officials and the outcome of the proceedings will be intimated to the Appellant as and when it is completed. He further states that a judgement given by the Central Information Commission in Appeal No. CIC/WB/2006/00102 dated 16.10.2006 will be considered while taking disciplinary action against the erring officials.
2. It is directed that a complete inquiry report including action taken report be sent to the Commission as well as the Appellant as and when it is completed.
3. The Respondent pleads that since the information in the instant case has been supplied to the Appellant, the case may be closed.
4. Accordingly, the case is disposed of.
5. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 06.05.2008 State Information Commissioner

N T SINGH Vs CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL and ORS CWP 15269 of 2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 5.5.2008

Dr. N.T. Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and others ...Respondents

Coram:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL

Present:
Shri C.M. Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri R.K. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.
Shri Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate, for respondent No.5.

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

HEMANT GUPTA, J.
The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as `the Tribunal) on 15.2.2002, whereby an application filed by the petitioner under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (for short `the Act), claiming counting of his past service rendered in the Department of Agriculture in the State of Pepsu (subsequently merged with the State of Punjab) for the period 19.7.1955 to 19.12.1962, was dismissed.

The petitioner joined the Department of Agriculture in the State of Pepsu as an Agricultural Inspector on 1.11.1956. The petitioner became a member of the Research Staff of Soil Section of Department of Agriculture. The petitioners services were transferred to the Punjab Agricultural University with effect from 20.12.1962, in terms of Sections 22 and 25 of the Punjab Agricultural University Act, 1961.

The petitioner went on deputation to Indian Council for Agricultural
Research (for short `the ICAR) on 6.12.1983 and was absorbed against a regular post on 6.12.1988. On the said date, his lien with the Punjab Agricultural University was terminated. It is the case of the petitioner that the period from 20.12.1962 to 5.12.1988, has been taken into consideration by the ICAR for the purpose of pensionary benefits, but the services rendered by the petitioner from 19.7.1955 to 20.12.1962 have not been taken into consideration for grant of pensionary benefits. Thus, he invoked the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to claim the said benefit.

The learned Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that the dispute relates to the service of the petitioner rendered with the Punjab Agricultural University and Government of Punjab and as both the organisations do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and therefore, the Tribunal is not in a position to consider the claim of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that since the petitioner is claiming pensionary benefits from the ICAR by taking into consideration his past service rendered by him in the State of
Punjab, therefore, the application is maintainable before the Tribunal
itself as the pensionary benefits are to be paid by ICAR alone by taking into consideration his past service.

The said argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents in any meaningful manner. However, Shri Deepak Agnihotri, learned counsel representing the Punjab Agricultural University, has pointed out that the services rendered by the petitioner in the Department of Agriculture in the erstwhile State of Pepsu and subsequently in the State of Punjab, was temporary in nature and cannot be counted towards the pensionary benefits. It is also pointed out that as a matter of fact, no benefit was transferred to the Punjab Agricultural University, when the services of the petitioner were placed at the disposal of the University in the year 1962. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner for counting of his past service is not tenable.

A perusal of the reply filed by the Punjab Agricultural University shows that the services rendered by the petitioner for the period 19.7.1955 to 19.12.1962 were said to be temporary and that no financial reimbursement has been made by the Government of Punjab to the Punjab Agricultural University. In para No. 20 of its written statement, the Punjab Agricultural University has pointed out to the following effect:-

20. That in reply to the contents of para 20, it is stated that the petitioner was transferred from Punjab Government side to PAU under Sections 22 and 25 of the Punjab Agricultural University Act, 1961 on
20.12.1962. The petitioner, prior to service rendered in the Agricultural department, PEPSU from 19.7.1955 to 19.12.1962 i.e 7 years 5 months was eligible for being counted in qualifying service for determination of pensionary benefits in PAU, if the petitioner would
have been retired from PAU (respondent No.5) on attaining the age of superannuation while working in PAU, the petitioner proceeded on deputation w.e.f. 6.12.1983 with the ICAR. The ICAR gave approval for absorption in ICAR w.e.f. 6.12.1988. Accordingly, the University terminated his lien from University w.e.f. 6.12.1988. Had the petitioner not proceeded on deputation with the ICAR, he would have been
accorded the benefit of his service rendered in Department of Agriculture in the PAU for the purpose of pensionary benefits, after obtaining the affidavit to the effect that no case of pensionary benefits has been submitted by him to the Director of Agriculture, Punjab and no benefit has been received by the petitioner. But as the petitioner permanently absorbed in the ICAR and has not retired on superannuation from PAU, no liability is to be shouldered by the PAU
on account of service rendered by him on Punjab Government side.

As a matter of fact, on 27.9.1995 (Annexure R.2/7), ICAR, communicated to the Punjab Agricultural University to remit the pensionary liability in respect of the services of the petitioner with the
State of Punjab, for the period 19.7.1955 to 19.12.1962, as has been
done in respect of some of the other colleague Scientists of the petitioner.

In reply to the said communication, the Punjab Agricultural University
communicated vide letter dated 3.6.1996 (Annexure R.2/10) that had the petitioner not proceeded on deputation with ICAR, he would have been granted the benefit of the services for the purposes of pension by the Punjab Agricultural University as per the Pension Rules.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the opinion that the past service rendered by the petitioner with the State of Pepsu (subsequently merged with the State of Punjab) for the period 19.7.1955 to 19.12.1962, is required to be counted for the purposes of
pension, firstly by the Punjab Agricultural University and subsequently
by the ICAR. In Para No. 20 of the written statement filed by the Punjab Agricultural University, the stand taken by the University is that had the petitioner retired from the University, his past service would have been counted towards the pensionary benefits. If for the past service, the Punjab Agricultural University has not sent the contribution by the Punjab government, it is for the University to insist upon the said contribution for onward transmission to the ICAR, but the petitioner having worked with the State of Punjab, cannot be deprived of the benefit of counting the said service for his pensionary benefits.

In view of the above, we allow the present writ petition, set aside the order passed by the Tribunal and direct the State of Punjab to send its contribution in respect of the pensionary benefits for the period 19.7.1955 to 19.12.1962 to the Punjab Agricultural University. In turn the Punjab Agricultural University will transmit the said amount to the
ICAR for computation of the retiral benefits to the petitioner in accordance with law. The necessary compliance be made by the State of Punjab within three months from today. The Punjab Agricultural University on receipt of the amount, shall transmit the amount within
one week thereafter to the ICAR. The ICAR shall disburse the pensionary benefits by recalculating the same within two months thereafter. It is made clear that if the aforesaid directions are not complied with within the period stipulated, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 9% from the date of his retirement till the payment from the respondent(s), who defaults in complying with the order passed by this Court.

(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE

(MOHINDER PAL)
JUDGE

Shri Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Ashok Kumar, J.E.(Retd.),
11322, Pavittar Nagar,
Habowal Kalan, Ludhiana. Complainant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Estate Officer,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Respondent

CC No. 216/2008

Present:
Shri Ashok Kumar, Complainant, in person.
Shri Gurdip Singh Makkar, Senior Assistant on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. The Respondent states that the requisite information in the instant case has been supplied to the Complainant and he further pleads that since the information has been supplied, the case may be closed. The Complainant confirms that he has received the information and is satisfied.
2. Accordingly, the case is disposed of.
3. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated : 29.04.2008 State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. G.N.E. College, Gill Road,
Ludhiana.
____________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. ___________ Respondent

CC No. 2028 of 2007

Present:
i) Sh. Satish Kumar, complainant in person.
ii)Sh. Ramesh Chander, APIO, on behalf of the PIO.

ORDER
Heard.
The information provided by the respondent to the complainant in compliance with the Court’s orders dated 22-2-2008 has been checked and it has been found as follows:-

1. The complainant has been informed that there was an embezzlement of Rs. 14,72,402.32. It was established by the Inquiry Officer and the information provided to him that no embezzlement has occurred must therefore be deemed to be modified to the above extent.

2. The list of names of officials whose punishments were reviewed has been provided to the complainant but he states that there are some legal implications of a review having taken place more than six months after the date of punishment. He therefore wants the names of those officials whose punishments were reviewed after six months from the date of punishment to be mentioned separately. The respondent should prepare this separate list and send it to the complainant within seven days from today.
3. The complainant has been informed that the FIR which had been lodged by the respondent for the embezzlement of the amount of Rs. 2,36,939.78 was against three officials but the police at their own level registered an FIR only against Sh. Baldev Raj Beri, the then cashier. The embezzlement of the amount of Rs. 14,72,402.32 was established at a subsequent date and therefore could not be taken into consideration at the time the FIR had been lodged. The respondent has however informed the complainant that the State Vigilance Department has also made an inquiry in this case and a challan for the higher amount against Sh. Baldev Raj Beri and others has been submitted in the concerned court of law.

4. The complainant has been informed that out of the three punishments against Sh.Avinash Kumar Sharma, Asstt Estate Officer, the punishment that he should have not be involved in any work concerned with financial dealing for a period of three years was reviewed and withdrawn vide the orders of the Vice Chancellor issued on 29-11-2007, a copy of which has also been provided to the complainant.

5. A complete reply, in which it has been stated that in the memo of the respondent dated 6-12-2007, it has been inadvertently written that a decision will be communicated to him in due course of time, has been sent by the respondent to the complainant vide their letter dated 27-2-2008.

In addition to the above points, the complainant has pointed out that the enclosure consisting of six pages on the subject of point no. 5 of his application dated 3-12-2007, concerning the observations of the VC in the case of Sh. B S Sohi sent by the respondent on 1-4-2008, has not been received by him. The respondent has made a commitment that these six pages will again be sent to the complainant within seven days from today.

The complainant did not remain in the Court during the whole of the hearing and left the Court before it had been completed after making a request for adjournment, without assigning any reason whatsoever. The request of the complainant, however, cannot be accepted because the respondent has fully complied with the orders dated 22-2-2008 of the Court and no further action is required to be taken in this case, except for the two items of information


mentioned in point no. 2 of these orders and the information concerning the case of Sh. B.S. Sohi, which will be sent by the respondent within seven days from today.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 11 th April , 2008

GURPREET SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CWP 3916 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No. 3916 of 2006

Date of Decision: 10.4.2008

(1) CWP No. 3916 of 2006.

Gurpreet Singh Gill ....Petitioner Versus
State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

Present: Shri Rajiv Atma Ram Senior Advocate with Shri Akshay Bhan Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Rupinder Khosla Additional AG Punjab.

Shri H.S. Sethi Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 and 5. (2) CWP No. 3921 of 2006.

Baljot Singh Rathore and another ....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

Present: Shri Gurminder Singh Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Rupinder Khosla Addl. AG Punjab.

Shri H.S. Sethi Advocate for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

HEMANT GUPTA J.

This order shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition No. 3916 of 2006 filed by Gurpreet Singh Gill son of Shri Rajinder Singh and Civil Writ 3916 of 2006 (2) Petition No. 3921 of 2006 filed by Shri Baljot Singh Rathore son of Shri Inder Singh and Shri Surjit Singh son of Shri Suba Singh.

The challenge in both the writ petitions is to the assignment of deemed date of appointment to the private respondents i.e. Gursharan Singh Sandhu and Surinder Kumar Kalia as 21.4.1990 and the deemed date of
confirmation i.e. 6.5.1992.

22 posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police were advertised in the year 1989 to be filled up by direct recruitment in terms of the Punjab Police Service Rules 1959 (hereinafter referred to as `the Rules').

In pursuance of such advertisement 26 names were recommended by the Punjab Public Service Commission for appointment as DSP. The name of Baljot Singh Rathore petitioner No. 1 in CWP No. 3921 of 2006 is at serial No. 26 of the said list. He is a candidate from the freedom fighters category whereas the names of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are at serial Nos. 15 and 18 respectively as general category candidates. 12 candidates are required to be appointed out of the 22 advertised posts amongst general category candidates in pursuance of the advertisement of the year 1989.

Name of petitioner No.2- Shri Surjit Singh appears at serial No. 5 and his name was recommended as a reserved category candidate (Majbi Sikh) whereas the petitioner in CWP No. 3916 of 2006 i.e. Gurpreet Singh Gill at Sr. No. 7 was recommended for appointment as a sports category candidate by the Punjab Public Service Commission on 26.11.1990. 7 candidates were recommended pursuant to a subsequent advertisement
issued in the year 1990.

Three candidates were of general category whereas the remaining candidates were of reserved categories.

Since 12 general category candidates were required to be appointed in pursuance of the advertisement in the year 1989 the letter of appointment was issued to such candidates on 6.4.1990. However two candidates namely Barjinder Kumar Uppal and Ravi Kumar did not join as DSP. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were next in merit as a general category candidate available for appointment for DSP but they were not given appointment. Though Shri Ranbir Singh Khatra whose name appears at Serial No. 21 was given appointment on account of non joining of another candidate of ex-serviceman category. The said respondents were given appointment as Deputy Jail Superintendents in August 1990 on the basis of their seniority in the merit list so prepared by the Public Service Commission.

Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 filed a writ petition before this Court bearing CWP No. 11107 of 1990 on 17.8.1990 pointing out that their names have been recommended at serial Nos. 1 and 2 in the order of merit for appointment to the post of DSP (Jails) Grade II- District Probational Officer in August 1990. The said respondents claimed in the writ petition
that due to non joining of the two general category candidates the said
candidates are required to be reallocated and appointed to the post of DSP.

In the said writ petition an order was passed by this Court on 18.8.1990 that
any appointment to be made by the respondents against two posts in
pursuance of fresh advertisement shall be subject to final decision of the
writ petition. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court on 9.7.2001 wherein it was held to the following effect:-

“However when a candidate higher in order of merit does not join the vacancy should be offered to the candidate next in order of merit. It is only when the State prescribes a minimum standard and the candidate fails to come up that standard the action of the authority in not offering the post to the next candidate can be held to be legally valid. In the present case it has not been shown that the State had prescribed a standard which the two petitioners have failed to attain. In such a situation the action of the respondents in not making the offer of
appointment to the posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police to the petitioners appears to be arbitrary and unfair. I accordingly allow this writ petition and direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for appointment to the posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police. Needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this judgment. The petitioners are also held entitled to their costs which are assessed at Rs.2000--.”

Against the aforesaid order LPA No. 1194 of 1991 was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court on 8.10.1991. In the Special Leave Petition No. 1390 of 1992 against the same order an interim order was passed on 10.2.1992 “that in the meantime the dictate of the order of the High Court be obeyed and result be communicated to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that in case the respondents on consideration are found suitable they be given employment subject to the result of SLP.”

Subsequently the SLP was dismissed on 20.4.1992. However on 27.3.1992 respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were offered appointment but the said respondents joined duties on 1.9.1992 after respondent No. 4 was relieved as Assistant Professor in the Punjab Agricultural University whereas respondent No. 5 was relieved as Veterinary Doctor.

Later respondent Nos. 4 and 5 submitted a representation for giving deemed date of appointment i.e. the date which has been given to other candidates appointed in pursuance of advertisement in the year 1989.

The said representation was rejected on 13.6.1995 for the reason that this
Court has not passed any order regarding their appointment with retrospective effect. The said respondents challenged the aforesaid order in CWP No. 11862 of 1996. The petitioners in the aforesaid case claimed
deemed date of appointment i.e. 21.4.1990 and also claimed a writ in the
nature of prohibition directing the respondents not to determine the seniority of the petitioners from the date of their actual appointment as DSP.
The said writ petition was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court on 21.1.1997 with the following operative order:-

“After hearing learned counsel for the partied and going through the records of the case we find absolutely no justifiable reason forthcoming that may debar the petitioners from getting their deemed date of
appointment as DSP. It is in fact on account of fault of the respondents so evidenced in the judgment rendered by this Court which has assumed finality that the petitioners were not appointed as DSP in the very first
instance. Having succeeded in their writ petition asking for appointment to the post of DSP in pursuance of the advertisement in which they applied there is no occasion whatsoever for the respondents not to have given them deemed date of appointment. As has been mentioned above Parminder Singh equally situate has been given deemed date of appointment. Even though therefore there be no orders passed in the case of the petitioners with regard to deemed date of appointment in law if they deserve the same it has to be granted to them. For the reasons recorded above this writ petition is allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents to give deemed date of appointment to the petitioners on the post of DSP as April 21 1990. Parties are however left to bear their own costs.”

Parminder Singh whose name appears in the aforesaid order was a candidate who was offered appointment but was not permitted to join the duties. He filed CWP No. 14728 of 1990. The official respondents considered his claim and said Parminder Singh was appointed in the year
1991 with deemed date of appointment on 21.4.1990. As a consequence to the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court an order (Annexure P.6) has been passed by the State Government on 12.8.1997 giving 21.4.1990 as deemed date of appointment to respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Annexure P.7 in CWP No. 3921 of 2006 is the order dated 19.1.1998 giving 6.5.1992 as the date of confirmation to respondent Nos. 4 and 5. It is the said orders which are subject matter of challenge in the present writ petitions.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that granting of deemed date of appointment and deemed date of confirmation to respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is absolutely illegal unwarranted and in contravention of the Rules as well. It is argued that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were working against other posts till 31.8.1992 and thus cannot be granted deemed date of appointment or deemed date of confirmation as DSP.
It is further argued that the said respondents having failed to join as Deputy Superintendent of Police Jails (Grade-II)-District Probation Officer in pursuance of the letter of appointment issued in 1990 the said respondents cannot claim for upgraded appointment as DSP.

It is further argued that the prayer of the petitioner for not determining the seniority from the date of their actual date of appointment as DSP in CWP No. 11862 of 1996 has not been granted.

The said respondents have not been granted any consequential benefits in the judgments dated 9.7.1991 and 21.1.1997. Therefore the decision of the State Government to determine the seniority from their deemed date of appointment and by giving deemed date of confirmation is wholly illegal arbitrary. It is also argued that the previous judgment granting deemed date of appointment to the said respondents is a nullity as the necessary parties were not impleaded in any of the two writ petitions
filed by the said respondents.

It is argued that petitioner No.1 has joined as DSP on 6.4.1990 therefore failure to join petitioner No.1 in the earlier writ petition filed by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 violates the principles of natural justice as an order adverse to him has been passed without hearing him.

Reliance is placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in LPA
No. 865 of 2002 (M.L. Kauskhik v. State of Haryana and another decided
on 13.10.2004) and Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar and others v. State of
Maharashtra and another AIR 1967 Supreme Court page 1 to contend that the previous judgment in the absence of the petitioner which affects the right of the petitioner can be challenged by way of the present writ petition.

Shri Rajiv Atma Ram has also argued that the said respondents had not drawn any salary on the post of DSP from 21.4.1990 from which date they have been given deemed date of appointment nor discharged the same duties as the DSP prior to their actual appointment and thus they could not be granted deemed date of appointment and deemed date of confirmation. It is also argued that since the said respondents were
holding substantially other posts on the deemed date of appointment and
deemed date of confirmation therefore they cannot be granted deemed date of appointment as there cannot be two substantive appointments in respect of one person.

It has further been argued that the respondents cannot be confirmed from a date earlier than their completion of the probationary period in terms of letter of appointment and in terms of the Rules.

On behalf of the State Government reliance is placed upon Rule 10 of the Rules pointing out that the seniority of the direct recruits is as per the order of merit communicated by the Punjab Public Service Commission and in compliance of the earlier orders passed by this Court.

It is the case of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 that they were reflected as senior to the petitioners in all the gradation lists from the year 1994 except Baljot Singh Rathore who ranked senior on account of appointment against a reserved category i.e. the freedom fighters category. Still further an order was passed by the State Government on 6.1.1995 Annexure P.3 in CWP No. 3916 of 2006 determining the seniority of
directly recruited DSPs in the years 1985 1987 1990 and 1991. Though
petitioner No.1 Baljot Singh Rathore in CWP No. 3921 of 2006 is reflected
senior to the private respondents being a dependent of freedom fighter but the other petitioners are reflected as junior to the said respondents. The said seniority list was circulated to all the candidates including the petitioners herein.

Therefore the writ petitions suffer from gross delay and laches. It has been argued that the petitioners have not submitted any objections against the placement of the said respondents after the finalisation of the
seniority of the direct recruits in the year 1995. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length.

Before we advert to the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the
parties it will be advantageous to reproduced the relevant extracts of the
Rules:-

“8. Probation of members of Service (a) Members of the Service shall be on probation for two years which shall include the period of training in the Police Training School Phillaur and in the districts and in the case of
members recruited by promotion the Government may by a special order in each case permit periods of officiating appointment to the Service to count towards the period of probation.

xxx xxx xxx
“10. Seniority of members of Service.-

The Seniority of
members of the Service shall be determined by the date of confirmation in the service. Provided that if two or more members are
confirmed on the same date;

(i) a member who is appointed to the Service by
promotion shall be senior to the member appointed
otherwise;
(ii) in the case of members who were appointed
by direct appointment the seniority shall be
determined in accordance with their position in the
competitive examination;
(iii) in the case of members who were appointed
to the service by promotion the seniority shall be
determined in accordance with the date of their
entry in promotion list `G'.”

A perusal of the facts would show that petitioner No.1 in CWP No. 3921 of 2006 and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were the candidates recommended by the Punjab Public Service Commission on the basis of advertisement published in the year 1989 for 22 direct recruit vacancies of DSP.

The petitioner No. 2 in 3921 of 2006 and petitioner in CWP No. 3916 of 2006 were the candidates recommended for appointment as a Scheduled
Castes and Sports category candidates respectively in pursuance of the
advertisement published in the year 1990. It may be noticed that though it appears that there was requisition for filling up of five direct recruit posts of DSP but seven posts of DSP were advertised by the Punjab Public Service Commission after taking into consideration two posts which fell vacant on account of non joining of two candidates namely Ravi Kumar and Barjinder Kumar Uppal in pursuance of earlier selection.

The appointment against said two posts were made subject to the decision of the writ petition vide order dated 18.8.1990 filed by respondent Nos. 4 and 5. The name of Shri Baljot Singh Rathore appears lower in order of merit than respondent Nos. 4 and 5 herein. His name was recommended as a dependent of the freedom fighter. The seniority of Shri Rathore and Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is required to be determined keeping in view Rule 10
(ii) of the Rules which contemplates that the seniority shall be determined
in accordance with their position in the competitive examination. The other
petitioners are in fact the recommendees in pursuance of the subsequent
advertisement.

The argument that the respondents cannot be treated to be part of the competitive examination in pursuance of advertisement issued in the year 1989 is wholly untenable. The said respondents participated only in the
appointment process initiated in the year 1989. Their writ petition seeking
appointment against the available vacancy was allowed by this Court.

Therefore the appointment of the said respondents cannot be treated of any other batch except that of direct recruits appointed in pursuance of the advertisement issued in the year 1989.

The argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that the previous judgments passed by this Court are nullity on account of
non-impleadment of necessary and proper parties such as the petitioners is not tenable. As a matter of fact when the respondents invoked the jurisdiction of this Court the names of petitioner No. 2 in CWP No. 3921 of 2006 and petitioner in CWP No. 3916 of 2006 were not even recommended by the Punjab Public Service Commission.

Therefore they cannot make any grievance in respect of their non-impleadment in the writ petition by the said respondents. Petitioner Baljot Singh Rathore though appointed on 6.4.1990 but in fact has joined against the post reserved for the dependent of the freedom fighters. He was shown senior to the petitioner only for the reason of his appointment as a dependent of freedom fighter. Otherwise he ranks lower in merit as per the recommendations of the Punjab Public Service Commission (Annexure R.2).

Therefore the said petitioner cannot make any grievance in respect of appointment of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 who have been appointed as a general category candidates. The said petitioner is entitled to his seniority in terms of the Rules which may be applicable in respect of seniority of dependents of freedom fighters. Even otherwise the claim of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 was assertion of their right for appointment against the vacant post of DSP.

In the first writ petition filed in August 1990 there was no claim against any person. The challenge was to the action of the State Government in not recommending their names for appointment to the post of DSP although they were next available candidates on merit. In these circumstances the petitioners cannot claim to be a necessary party in a writ petition when the dispute of seniority was beyond imagination or contemplation.

Therefore the argument in respect of non impleading of the petitioners in the first writ petition is without any merit.

As far as the filing of the second writ petition by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and non impleading the petitioners is concerned it may be noticed that the challenge was made by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to the communication dated 13.6.1995 rejecting the representation of the said
respondents for granting deemed date of appointment.

Prior thereto vide order dated 6.1.1995 the seniority of the direct recruit DSPs has been determined by the State Government wherein the petitioners except Baljot Singh Rathore are reflected as junior to the said respondents. At that stage respondent Nos. 4 and 5 had no dispute with any other candidate who is lower in merit in pursuance of advertisement issued in the year 1989.

Such candidate alone could be said to be a necessary party. The petitioners except Baljit Singh Rathore are the recommendees in pursuance of subsequent selection and had no direct interest in the assignment of deemed date of appointment and confirmation to the said respondents.

It is further noticed that an order was passed by this Court on 18.8.1990 that appointment to the two posts shall be subject to the decision of the said writ petition. The said two posts are the posts advertised in the year 1989 against which respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have been adjusted.

Therefore for the said reason as well it cannot be said that any of the recommendees in pursuance of the advertisement of the year 1990 was required to be impleaded as parties. As mentioned earlier Shri Baljot Singh Rathore is lower in merit than respondent Nos. 4 and 5 but has been appointed as dependent of freedom fighter. His seniority position is distinct.

Even otherwise we do not find that there is any error in the judgments passed by this Court in year 1991 and 1997. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were in merit of general category candidates. Two posts of DSP have fallen vacant. They were required to be offered appointment but not granted appointment for the reason that another selection process has been initiated.

The appointment of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is against the vacancies which were advertised in the year 1989 and in respect of such vacancies the candidates of the subsequent selection cannot be permitted to make any grievance. The petitioners cannot be permitted to raise any grievance in respect of appointments made against the vacancies advertised earlier to the vacancies in which they were recommended for appointment. The
judgments referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioners that on
account of non impleading of the necessary parties there is a violation of
the principles of natural justice and the previous judgments are not binding is not a proposition which is required to be examined in great detail.

However in the facts of the present case we are of the opinion that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were not required to implead the petitioners herein in any of the writ petitions for the reasons discussed above. The dispute of seniority now raised was earlier not in respect of any dispute of the claim of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 vis-a-vis the present petitioners but on the basis of assertion of their positive right of appointment in respect of the vacancies advertised.

Therefore the argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is without any merit. The argument that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were holding substantive post in the other departments and could not be granted deemed date of appointment on confirmation is again misconceived. Deemed date of appointment is to be give n in terms of Rule 10 of the Rules contemplating seniority on the basis of recommendations of the Punjab Public Service Commission.

Since the said respondents were working on the other posts they shall not be entitled to any salary or other benefits but they cannot be denied the benefit of seniority as they had right to be appointed along with other candidates selected in pursuance of the same selection process.

They were not given appointment by the State Government and for such act of the State Government the consequences cannot fall on respondent Nos. 4 and 5. The said respondents have a right of appointment along with other candidates after the candidates higher in merit did not join.

The argument that the said respondents have been given deemed date of confirmation even before their actual appointment and from a date much before their actual completion of probation period is again misconceived. Deemed date of appointment and deemed date of confirmation is to be given so as to provide parity to a similarly situated candidates who had been selected in pursuance of the same selection process.

Admittedly the respondents have completed their training and probation period. Once they have completed the probation period and training they are entitled to the same seniority position as has been given to the other candidates who were selected and appointed in the same selection process.

Though learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently argued that the writ petition suffers from delay and laches but we do not find any substance in the said argument. Though the gradation list reflects the said respondents as senior to the petitioners except Baljot Singh Rathore since 1994 but the fact remains that the tentative seniority list of the DSP was circulated for the first time in the year 2004 and has been finalised vide order dated 7-8.7.2005. In the said order the seniority has been given to respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on the basis of merit prepared and
communicated by the Punjab Public Service Commission.

Therefore the argument that writ petition suffers from delay and laches is misconceived as the right to sue accrued to the petitioner in the year 2005 only.In view of the above we do not find any merit in the present
writ petitions. Hence both the writ petitions are hereby dismissed.

(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE

(MOHINDER PAL)
JUDGE

April 10 2008

In CWP No. 3916 of 2006.

(Gurpreet Singh Gill v. State of Punjab and others)
AND

In CWP No. 3921 of 2006.
(Baljot Singh Rathore and another v. State of Punjab and others) -.-

On 10.4.2008 we have pronounced the order in CWP No. 12206 of 2005 (Gurpreet Singh Bhullar Versus State of Punjab and others)

wherein we have set aside the orders of confirmation of the Deputy
Superintendents of Police after commencement of the Punjab Police Service Rules 1959. However the said aspect inadvertently could not find mention in the order passed in the present writ petitions.

Since the omission is inadvertent and apparent on the face of record we order that the last paragraph of the order dated 10.4.2008 passed in the present writ petitions be substituted with the following:-

“In view of the above we do not find any merit in the present writ petitions. Hence both the writ petitions are hereby dismissed. However the seniority of the parties to the writ petitions shall be determined keeping in view the date of confirmation to be determined in terms of our
directions contained in the order passed in CWP No. 12206 of 2005 (Gurpreet Singh Bhullar v. State of Punjab and others).”

Let necessary correction be made in the order.
(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE

(MOHINDER PAL)
JUDGE

10.4.2008

PAU to host national meet on cotton research

Ludhiana, April 07 Punjab Agricultural University is organizing an annual group meeting of All India Coordinated Cotton Improvement Project (AICCIP) from April 9 to11.
About 400 cotton scientists from national institutes, state agricultural universities and the private sector will participate in the meeting. The prominent guests include Dr P.L. Gautam, Deputy Director General (Crop Sciences) of Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Dr K.C. Jain, Assistant Director General, ICAR, Dr B.M. Khadi, Director, Central Institute for Cotton Research (CICR), Nagpur and Dr N. Gopalakrishanan, Project Coordinator (Cotton), Coimbatore. Dr Gautam will be the chief guest while PAU Vice-Chancellor Dr Manjit Singh Kang will preside over the inaugural session on April 9.

PAU Director Research Dr P.S. Minhas will deliberate on cotton scenario in Punjab. Dr Gopalakrishanan will present highlights of AICCIP. Dr Khadi and Dr Jain will deliver special addresses on cotton.

Dr B.L. Bhardwaj, Head, Department of Plant Breeding, Genetics and Biotechnology said that the progress of cotton research conducted during 2007 in various research centres of the country will be discussed. According to Dr Manjit Singh Gill, Incharge, Cotton Section, this is the first national level meeting on cotton to be held at PAU.

Deliberations will also be made for future research priorities on cotton and the technical programme of work. This will cover various aspects of cotton research (breeding, agronomy, pathology, entomology, physiology) and development (transfer of technology, seed production etc.) for 2008 will be finalized.

In addition, promising varieties/hybrids of cotton for different agro-climate zones of the country will be identified by the Varietal Identification Committee. The scientists will take up emerging problems like cotton leaf curl virus and mealy bug, for developing their management strategy.

Shri Ashok Kumar J.E versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Ashok Kumar, J.E.(Retd.),
11322, Pavittar Nagar,
Habowal Kalan, Ludhiana. Complainant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Estate Officer,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Respondent

CC No. 216/2008

Present:
Shri Ashok Kumar, Complainant, in person.
Shri Gurdip Singh Makkar, Senior Assistant and Shri Harvinder Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Heard both the parties.
2. The Respondent hands over information running into 9 pages to the Complainant in the court today in my presence. The Complainant has agreed to deposit the necessary charges for the information supplied to him.
3. It is directed that the Complainant will go through the information supplied to him today and will submit his observation/comments, if any, to the PIO by 5.4.2008 and the PIO will bring out his response on the observations/comments to be submitted by the Complainant within a period of 15 days.
4 The case is fixed for further hearing on 29.4.2008.
5. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 20 .03. 2008 State Information Commissioner

PAU releases 2 new varieties of BT cotton

March 3 Punjab Agricultural University released two new varieties of BT cotton, RCH 308 and RCH 314, both of which have been produced by a company, Rassi Seeds. With this, the total number of approved BT cotton varieties goes to six.
Stating this, Dr N S Malhi, Director, Extension, PAU, said besides these, the university has released seven improved varieties after a meeting of the State Variety Approval Committee held on March 1. These include Pusa-1121 of rice, Punjab Basmati-2, LH-2076 of cotton, Punjab Sweet Corn-1, CoH-119 of sugarcane, PSH-569 of sunflower and mash-114 of kharif mash.
As per PAU scientists, RCH 308 is a bollworm-resistant hybrid with broad-lobed leaves and green plant body. It matures in 165-175 days and gives an average yield of 8.0 quintal per acre. RCH 314 gives an average seed cotton yield of 8.2 quintal per acre and matures in 165-175 days.

Meanwhile, Kheti Virasat Mission (KVM), an NGO, has not welcomed these varieties. It is quiet unfortunate that Indian public sector agriculture research centres are falling prey to the market agenda of multi-national seed corporations, like Monsanto, said Umender Dutt, KVM convener.

He added that KVM cautioned PAU, State Agriculture Department and farmers about the hazards of BT cotton, and even the Department of Animal Husbandry of Andhra Pradesh has issued a circular, warnings farmers against grazing sheep on BT cotton fields.


Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Ashok Kumar,
# 11322, Pavittar Nagar,
Habowal Kalan,
Ludhaiana. _________ Complainant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhaia.
________ Respondent
CC No.15 of 2008

Present:
i) Sh. Ashok Kumar, complainant in person.
ii) Sh. Gurdip Singh, Srt. Asstt, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The complainant has been informed that he can only be given a copy of the documents if the same exists in the records of the respondent. Since the committee referred to in his application for information has not yet submitted any report, a copy thereof cannot be given to him in response to his application under the RTI Act.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
29th February, 2008

Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.152/2006

Present:
None is present on behalf of the Complainant.
Shri Suresh Kumar Saini, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Sarabjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. The APIO states that process for taking disciplinary action against the erring officials has been initiated. He requests that a period of at least two months be granted to complete this process.
2. The request of the APIO is accepted and the case is fixed for further hearing on 6.5.2008.
3. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 28.2.2008 State Information Commissioner

Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.420/2007

Present: None is present on behalf of the Complainant.

Shri Suresh Kumar Saini, Superintendent-cum-APIO and Shri Sarabjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Heard the APIO and the judgement is reserved.
2. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 28.2.2008 State Information Commissioner

Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. G.N.E. College,
Gill Road, Ludhiana. ______ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. ______ Respondent


CC No.2219 of 2007

Present:
i). Sh. Satish Kumar, complainant in person.
ii)Sh. Suresh Kumar Saini, Supdt.,on behalf of the respondent
ORDER

Heard.
The complainant states that his communication addressed to the Commission on the basis of which notice has been issued in this case concerns a matter which has already been dealt with in CC-2028 /07 vide the Court’s orders dated 22-2-2008.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
Dated: 28th February, 2008

French students visit to PAU concludes

Ludhiana, February 20 A Group of 14 students pursuing graduation at Rouen, France, were on a two-week visit to PAU. On the concluding day of their visit today, the students met the Vice-Chancellor Dr Manjit Singh Kang.The students were elated to see the progress of agriculture in Punjab, and were all praise for Punjabis for their warmth and hard work. Dr Daljit Singh Dhillon, Head, Department of Extension Education, led the group.

He said that the purpose was to apprise the French students about Punjab agriculture, especially the pre-dominance and effects of the rice-wheat cropping system. Dr Dhillon added that the students visited the Centre for Communication and International Linkages, Museum of Rural Life of Punjab, Farmers Service Centre, Plant Disease Clinic, Farmers Training Complex at Kairon Kisan Ghar, Dr MS Randhawa Library, Dr Uppal Museum of Water and Power Resources of Northern India, Department of Economics and Sociology, and the field areas of wheat and oilseeds.

Dr Kang, appreciated the enthusiasm of the visiting students to learn about agriculture. He elaborated that Indians and the French share similarity in the family value system. He added that the globe is becoming a village where one can learn from each other for the betterment of humanity.In the evening, the group visited the Vice-Chancellors residence. His wife Dr Neeta Kang, who knows French well, interacted with the students. Dr Dhillon said that the students also had a lively interaction with the Dean, Post Graduate Studies, Dr Tejwant Singh and Dean, College of Agriculture, Dr MS Aulakh, faculty members, and members of Punjab Kisan Club. The students also discussed auxiliary agricultural ventures such as bee-keeping and mushroom growing with the farmers and entrepreneurs visiting PAU.
The Director of Extension Education, Dr NS Malhi, spoke about the research and extension linkages, and the transfer of technology.


Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
Lomesh Bhawan,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant

Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registar,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.433/2007

Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar, Appellant, in person.
Shri Narinder Pal Singh, PIO and Shri Sarabjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Heard both the parties.
2. The judgement is reserved.
3. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 14.02.2008 State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

Shri Vidya Sagar,
Lomesh Bhawan,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registar,
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.420/2007

Present: Shri Vidya Sagar, Appellant, in person.

Shri Narinder Pal Singh, PIO and Shri Sarabjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDER
1. The Respondent submits a copy of the information to the Commission. It is directed that one copy of the information duly authenticated be handed over to the Appellant after the proceedings in the instant case and the Appellant will go over the information and will submit his response on the next date of hearing. The Respondent reports that the Appellant has refused to accept the information.
2. The case is fixed for further hearing on 28.2.2008.
3. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Surinder Singh
Dated: 14.02.2008 State Information Commissioner

PAUTA lambasts leaders over pension

In a letter written to MP Sharanjit Singh Dhillon and chief parliamentary secretary Harish Rai Dhanda, the Punjab Agricultural University Teachers’ Association (PAUTA) today said the issue of pension could be resolved immediately if leaders showed willingness.

The members appreciated both Dhillon and Dhanda for giving a hearing to pensioners’ grievances during their rally on January 14.

They said both leaders blamed university for creating “mess and mismanagement of funds” but it does not mean that government should sleep over the matter and allow the university to deteriorate to the point of no-return.

The letter said PAU authorities as well as various employees’ association/ unions had been asking the government to provide budgetary support to the depleting funds of pension for the past six years, which had been repeatedly denied by the state government.

The letter said: “As you commented that holding rallies and raising anti-government slogans would not help solve the problem. Well Sir, what option do we exercise when all negotiations become futile The rally was the fallout of failed efforts to persuade people at the helm of affairs (including the chief minister) to support and bail out the university from the current crisis. The government at one point agreed for financial grant but later backed out. The rally was a compulsion imposed on pensioners and was held to express their resentment and disbelief on non-payment of pension. It was rightly supported by all serving employees of the university.

“The question is whether the government will realise its responsibility and provide funds immediately or whether it will allow further deterioration and lingering on of the prevailing situation, thus inviting litigation by pensioners and ultimately legal selling off of PAU assets to pay the pension. Here lies our suspicion and mistrust. We feel that the lethargic approach of the government is deliberate so as to push the PAU into a financial mess where it has no option but to toe the government line of commercialisation of PAU lands. Honourable representatives, you should play a positive and leading role to dispel the fear of current uncertainties.”

PAUTA members Dr M.S. Mahal and Mukesh Siag further added that the major excuse that government was starved of funds too ran contrary to government liberal perusal of new development projects and doling out subsidies. “PAU seems to be no longer a priority of the government, which is quite in contrast to this government’s claim of being pro-farmer,” they said.

Sh Vijay Kumar Bahree versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 32-34, 1st Floor, Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.
Sh. Vijay Kumar Bahree,
S/o Sh. Tek Chand Bahree,
36-Chandan Nagar, Jalandhar. _________________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. ________________ Respondent


CC No. 2285 of 2007
Present: i) Sh. Vijay Kumar Bahree, complainant in person.
ii) None on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.
The application for information of the complainant in this case seeks a large amount of information, a substantial portion of which relates to the 1970s.The information available with the respondent has been given to the complainant and the respondent has made a commitment in his communication that efforts are still being made to locate the remaining information, which is about 30 years old, and will be supplied to the complainant as and when it becomes available. The complainant has also undertaken to visit the office of the respondent and to take whatever information has been located.
Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
17th January, 2008

Sh Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Satish Kumar,
2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. G.N.E. College, Gill Road,
Ludhiana. ____________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. ___________ Respondent

CC No. 2028 of 2007

resent:
i) Sh. Satish Kumar, complainant in person.
ii) S. Narinderpal Singh, Associate Professor (Journalism)-cum-PIO.

ORDER

Heard.
The complainant states that he does not want his complaint to be heard by this Court. The matter is, therefore, referred to CIC for assigning this case to some other Bench.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner
17th January, 2008

Sh Vivek Jasra versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Vivek Jasra,
B-36, 244/1, Vikas Nagar,
Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana. __________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Technical University,
Jalandhar. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1730 of 2007

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

ORDER
Heard.

The respondent has informed the complainant that the result of his second semester stands “RLA” and that he should contact his College for “further action”. The complainant states that he has not understood as to what the respondent means by stating that his result stands “RLA”. He contacted his College but the College authorities could not give any clarification regarding his result. However, the College has clearly written to the respondent vide its letters dated 4-6-2007 and 25-6-2007 that Vivek Jasra appeared in all the papers of BCA, 2nd semester, vide University Roll No. 548231114.

Under these circumstances, it is not clear on what basis the University has written to the College that his Roll No. is 54823114.

The respondent has written to the Commission to say that he is unable to attend today’s hearing because of some urgent preoccupation. This case is accordingly adjourned to 10 AM on 6-12-2007, with the direction to the respondent to be present in the Court on that date with the required information/clarification desired by the complainant.

Sd/--
(P.K.Verma)
Dated: 22nd November, 2007 State Information Commissioner

Fest fever grips students at PAU

Ludhiana, November 6 The third day of the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Inter-College Youth Festival began on dismal note with an almost zero attendance. However, as the sun started setting on the horizon, the open-air theatre situated right next to the M S Randhawa Library was choc-a-block. As the girls and boys sat on the two sides of the theatre, the teasing comments and compliments promised a happening and eventful evening.

The evening session of the fest opened with theatrics. The students of College of Agriculture staged Hun hor nahin, a play written by Dr Sarabjeet Aulakh that highlighted a rape victims fight with her fears.Following this, the students staged Yeh natak nahin, a play written by Manish Saxena, depicting the break down of the administrative system and rampant corruption. Sans an elaborate stage and costumes, which was the high point of the agriculture students, the engineering students presented plays that relied mainly on actors, costumes and a minimal use of props.

As the students of College of Home Science begun their play Eh kudi zindagi udeekdi hai, written by Pali Bhupinder, the cat calls from the audience got louder, drowning the dialogues of the actors. At this, the protagonist of the play, Kamya, raised her voice and made herself heard much to the delight of her college faculty and students. Amandeep Bansals mimicry on college elections was a major hit among the audience.

While the evening session on Monday comprised of light vocal music, today the scene was a bit different. Western solo performances, western group songs and Indian group songs dominated most part of the evening.

There were two entries for light vocal music and one each for other events. Namita Sharma was the judge of the event, who enthralled the audience with her folk song, Mirza. Another judge, Akhtar Ali Mattoi, rendered his famous sufi kalam and got applause from the audience. The director of Punjab Youth Services, Hirdaypal Kaur, who was also a PAU alumnus, was the chief guest on the occasion. She said that music is divine and it purifies the mind and soul.
Gurbani shabad gayan competition was also held in the morning in which students from all the PAU colleges participated.



Sh Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SCO No. 84-85, 2nd Floor (Court No-1), Sector 17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Sh. Satish Kumar,
# 2836, Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College, Gill Road,
Ludhiana. ______ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Respondent

CC No. 1366 of 2007

Present:
1) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Narinder Singh, PIO-cum-Associate Professor, Communication Deptt, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.

The information required by the complainant has been given to him by the respondent.

The complainant is not present.

Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner

Dated 31 August, 2007

Sh Dial Singh versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Dial Singh,
14/155, PAU Campus,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. __________ Complainant

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. ____________ Respondent

CC No. 1287 of 2007


Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii) Sh. Kulbhushan Sood, APIO-cum-Supdt., and Sh. Sarabjit Singh, Sr. Assistant, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.

A suitable and sufficient response has been given to the complainant by the respondent with regard to his application for information.

The complainant is not present.

Disposed of.
(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner

Dated 30 August, 2007

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.
(www.infocommpunjab.com)

,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana. Appellant.
Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No. 152/2007

ORDER

Present:
None is present on behalf of the Appellant.
Shri Kulbhushan Sood, APIO and Shri Sarabjit Singh,

Senior Assistant o/o Registrar, P.A.U., Ludhiana on behalf of the Respondent.

1.On the last date of hearing, that is, on 10th July, 2007 we had directed:-
a) That the documents containing information as sought
by the Appellant be sent to him by registered post.
.
b) An affidavit stating that no more information as sought by the Appellant was available with the Respondent. The affidavit was to be filed by the PIO within a period of 10 days.

2. Accordingly, the Respondent states that documents as directed by the Commission were forwarded to the Appellant by registered post on 13th July, 2007. The Respondent also submitted an affidavit on 19th July, 2007 that no more information as requisitioned information was available. The Respondent also states that an inquiry was still in progress regarding loss of certain records pertaining to the Appellant. Since the Appellant is not present and the concluding remarks of the inquiry “Not yet available”, the case will come up once again on 11th October, 2007.

3. Next date of hearing is fixed for 11-10-2007.

AC No. 152/2007:

4. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Surinder Singh
State Information Commissioner

Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Lt. Gen. P.K. Grover
Dated: 23.08.2007 State Information Commissioner

SUMER SINGH Versus PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP9537 of 2007



Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. No. 84-85, SECTOR :17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Vidya Sagar,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana. Appellant
Vs
Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Respondent

AC No.152 /2006

ORDER

Present:
None is present on behalf of the Appellant.

Shri Narinder Pal Singh, PIO, Shri Kulbhushan Sood, APIO and Shri Sarabjit Singh, Senior Assistant, on behalf of the Respondent.

On the last date of hearing on 29.3.2007, we had directed that the Complainant would go through the documents supplied to him so far including 113 pages handed over to him in our presence today and submit his comments/observations and highlight the deficiencies , if any, within a period of one month to the Respondent with a copy to the Commission. It is observed that no response from the Appellant has been received by the Commission.

2. A post card dated 5.7.2007 sent by the Appellant, informing that he has received injuries in an accident on 22.6.2007, has been received. He states that he has been advised bed rest for a period of 6 weeks and has requested that any further information, if provided by the Respondent, be sent to him free of cost. He also states that his request be considered in the light of his affidavit dated 12.6.2007 for today’s proceedings.

AC-152/2006

3. The Appellant is not present. The Respondent makes a written submission to the Commission alongwith photo copies of certain documents. We direct the Respondent that a copy of this submission be sent to the Appellant by registered post. We also direct that an affidavit, stating that no more information pertaining to the information sought by the Appellant is available with the Respondent, be filed by the PIO within a period of 10 days. The Respondent also submits that an Inquiry is in progress regarding the loss of certain record pertaining to Shri Vidya Sagar, the Appellant.

4. We observe that no affidavit dated 12.6.2007 stated by the Appellant in his communication to the Commission pertaining to this case has been received.

5. To come up on 23.8.2007. 6. Copies of the orders be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Surinder Singh
State Information Commissioner


Sd/-
Place: Chandigarh. Lt. Gen. P.K. Grover
Dated: 10.7.2007 State Information Commissioner

BALWANT SINGH Versus PANJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP 14841 of 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Date of decision 23 .4.2007

Balwant Singh .. Petitioner
Versus
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and others .. Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

PRESENT:
Mr.Sharwan Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner
Ms. Bindu Goel, Advocate
Mr.Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate

M.M.Kumar, J.
The instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 27.9.2004 ( Annexure P.30) passed by respondent no.3 inflicting the punishment of reducing 1/3rd pension of the petitioner and also quashing appellate order dated 23.5.2005 ( Annexure P.32) passed by respondent no.2 rejecting the appeal of the petitioner.

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner joined Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana on 2.6.1965 and retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.6.1997 as Extension Specialist (Youth Programme).

After his retirement Pension Payment order no. 859 dated 19.11.1998 ( Annexure P.1) was issued to him. On 12.9.2002(Annexure P.2) the petitioner was issued charge sheet under clause 2.4 of Statute regarding Pension and Provident Fund Part A (Pension Scheme) and Pension Rules 11.3 to 11.5 (Chapter II General Provision relating to grant of pension) of Punjab Agricultural University asking him to explain why 1/3rd pension be not reduced. The petitioner was not supplied documents inspite of the request dated 26.9.2002 and 3.10.2002 ( Annexure P.3). The petitioner,while denying all the charges, submitted his reply dated 3.10.2002 ( Annexure P.5) under protest. Vide letter dated 11.10.2002 ( Annexure P.6) an Enquiry Officer was appointed to hold enquiry into the charges levelled against the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Enquiry Officer, Dr. Darshan Singh on 25.10.2002 ( Annexure P.7). He objected to the appointment of Dr. Darshan Singh as an Enquiry Officer because the petitioner had expressed the apprehension that he would do Dr. Aulakh's bidding as the petitioner in his complaint to the Chief Minister had alleged that Dr. Darshan Singh had been bestowed undue favours by Dr. K.S.Aulakh, Vice Chancellor. The objection raised by the petitioner was rejected vide letter dated 25.10.2002 (Annexure P.12). On 6.11.2002, the petitioner again represented to the Vice Chancellor that the enquiry conducted by Dr. Darshan Singh would be nothing but a farce because Dr. Darshan Singh was not an impartial person and he nursed illwill against the petitioner. On 21.11.2002 (Annexure P.14), the petitioner received a show cause notice asking him as to why his 1/3rd pension should not be reduced as the Enquiry Officer had held him guilty of the charges levelled against him. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice on 19.12.2002 ( Annexure P.16). The Vice Chancellor, without considering the reply of the petitioner, reduced the pension by 1/3rd . However, vide letter dated 31.12.2002 the petitioner was informed that the order dated 23.12.2002 reducing his pension had been withdrawn. Petitioner received another letter dated 31.12.2002 wherein it was alleged that orders for reduction of his 1/3rd pension were withdrawn till the receipt of his reply to the show cause notice and its consideration. Ultimately on 14.2.2003 ( Annexure P.23), the petitioner received a letter informing that the Vice
Chancellor had reduced his pension by 1/3rd. Aggrieved against the order dated 14.2.2003, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 10.3.2003 before respondent no. 2 ( Annexure P.24). The appeal was rejected on 28.3.2003 (Annexure P.25). The orders dated 10.3.2003 and 28.3.2003 were challenged by the petitioner in the High Court by way of CWP No. 8163 of 2003. A Division Bench of this Court on 5.7.2004 quashed the orders dated 10.3.2003( Annexure P.23) and 28.3.2003 (Annexure P.25) and remanded the case back to the respondents to take a fresh decision in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Respondent no.3 vide order dated 27.9.2004 (Annexure P.30) again reduced 1/3rd pension of the petitioner. He again filed an appeal on 24.11.2004 ( Annexure P.31) which was rejected on 23.5.2005 ( Annexure P.32).

In the written statement it is asserted that respondent no.3 under Rule 11.3 (II.3) of Chapter II of the General Provisions relating to grant of Pension of the Statutes regarding Pension and Provident Funds and Pension Rules is endowed with the power to reduce the pension of the delinquent official , in the case of grave misconduct committed. Therefore it is claimed that the impugned order is perfectly valid and in accordance with the Rules.

Rule II.3 of the Rules is clear and says that if an employee of the University is found guilty of grave misconduct then in that eventuality his pension can be withheld/withdrawn or reduced. The petitioner has been found guilty of grave misconduct as he indulged in such activities.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the averments made in the petition, we are of the view that the petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannation on 30.6.1997 and a show cause notice was issued to him on 12.9.2002 i.e. after a gap of five years and punishment has been inflicted on 27.9.2004 ( Annexure P.30) i.e. after a gap of more than seven years.

The question before this Court is as to whether the disciplinary proceedings have been held against the petitioner in accordance with the procedure established by law and the rules. The Enquiry Officer in his report has observed that the petitioner has failed to appear before him despite opportunity granted. On the account of his absence from the inquiry, it has been implied that he did not wish to say anything in his defence against the list of charges and statement of allegations convey to him by the Vice Chancellor. The Enquiry Officer has concluded as under:-

Dr. Balwant Singh, ex-Extension Specialist (YP) retired from the University service w.e.f. 30.6.1997 on attaining the age of superannuation. He is getting pension since 1.7.1997 vide PPO No. 859. Future good conduct is an implied condition for every grant of pension in the University. Dr. Balwant Singh through various press releases has criticised the working of the University, challenged the decisions of Board of Management, Academic council and made allegations against honourable members of Board of Management, University authorities and other renowned scientists attached with the University (copies of the press releases corresponding to the various charges enclosed F/2 to F/7). It is concluded that these press releases issued by Dr. Balwant Singh are not based on facts but had been issued by him with malafide intention to criticise the
working of the University, Executive Authority and with
intention to challenge the decisions of the competent
authorities/ bodies of the University and to tarnish the
University image. This is not a healthy practice but amounts to grave misconduct on the part of Dr. Balwant Singh, ex- Extension Specialist (YP). In case Dr. Balwant Singh had any grievance against any of the decisions taken by the authorities/ bodies of the University, he had different forums/ channels to air out such grievances and getting redressal. He, instead of adopting democratic process/ means available, approached the Press frequently at his will and criticised the working of the University/ challenging the duly approved decisions of the authorities or various statutory bodies of the University has been proved with evidences/ facts available and having done it with malafide intention, it amounts to grave misconduct on his part. Hence, Dr. Balwant Singh has made himself liable fo0r disciplinary action.

It is appropriate to mention that mere absence of the petitioner from the inquiry proceedings would not result into assumption that the petitioner has admitted all the allegations. Even then the Enquiry Officer was required to proceed with the inquiry ex parte and by calling upon the Presenting Officer to produce documents and witnesses. After recording his satisfaction on the basis of the evidence produced, the Enquiry Officer could have recorded the finding which have been presumed to exist against the petitioner. Moreover, copy of the inquiry report has not been supplied to the petitioner before issuing the show cause notice by the Punishing Authority concluding therein that the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer were in order and the Punishing Authority had expressed its agreement with those findings. It is now well settled that where the Punishing Authority is itself not an inquiring authority then a copy of the inquiry report is required to be furnished to the delinquent officer first so as to persuade the Punishing Authority to reject the findings. This is now considered as part of principles of natural justice. For the aforementioned proposition we place reliance on a judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Managing Director, ECIL v. B. Karunakar, (1993) 4 SCC 727 and 1994 (Supply.) 2 SCC 291.

For the reasons aforementioned, this petition succeeds and accordingly the impugned order dated 27.9.2004 (P-30) is quashed. The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits. The petitioner is restored his full pension. The arrears from the date of imposition of cut in
pension shall be calculated and the same be paid to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

(M.M.Kumar)
Judge

(Rajesh Bindal)
Judge

Dr Daisy Walia versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. NO. 84-85, SECTOR-17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. Daisy Walia,
# 2-A, Gurudwara Moti Bagh Colony,
Patiala . ….Complainant.
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Registrar,
Punjabi University,
Patiala ….Respondent.

CC No. 291 of 2007

Present:
Shri S.K. Ahluwalia on behalf of his wife Smt. Daisy Walia, Complainant.
Shri Vikrant Sharma, Advocate on behalf of PIO 'cum- Registrar, Punjabi University, Patiala.

ORDER:

The Complainant has demanded information on 10 items relating to inter alia the consideration made by the Punjabi University, Patiala of a candidate
Dr. Madhukar Anand for the post of Professor in Dance.

2. The Respondent has not supplied the information as demanded against items no. 1 to 5, 8 and 9. The reasons for denial of information against these items are contained in the reply dated 31/01/07 and the letter dated 04/04/07 sent by the Respondent to the Complainant. Copies of these two documents have also been placed on the record of this case.

3. Arguments of both sides have been heard. The order is reserved.

Place: Chandigarh. Rajan Kashyap
Dated: 11-4-2007 Chief Information Commissioner.


Er. Surinder Singh
State Information Commissioner.


Lt. Gen.P.K. Grover
State Information Commissioner

PUNJAB AGIRCULTURAL UNIV and ORS Versus KULDIP CHAND BHARGAV and ANR

Civil Revision No.1472 of 2006.

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

Date of decision:20.3.2007.

Punjab Agricultural University and another. ...Petitioners.
Versus
Kuldip Chand Bhargav and another. ...Respondents.

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. N. Aggarwal.

Present:
Mr.O.P. Gupta Advocate for the petitioners.
None for the respondents.

Judgment.
S. N. Aggarwal, J.
As per office report, contesting respondent was served through
his son. None is present on his behalf. He is proceeded against ex parte.

Respondent No.1 filed a civil suit against the petitioners for a
declaration that he was entitled to the selection grade for the post of S.D.E ( Public Health). The said suit was resisted by the petitioners.

Issues were framed.

Respondent No.1 filed an application for summoning of an
official from the petitioners with the following record:-

i) File containing orders (none) of the former Vice Chancellor, Sh. G.S.Kalkat regarding grant of Senior/Selection Grade to Sh.K.C.Bhargav.

ii) File containing the recommendations of the Estate Officer-cum-Chief Engineer, PAU, Ludhiana on the case for the grant of Senior Scale of Selection Grade to K.C.Bhargav alongwith the legal advice obtained from the legal advisor of PAU.

Iii) Personal file of Kuldeep Chand Bhargav SDE (PH) containing correspondence regarding selection grade.

It was opposed by the petitioners but the learned trial Court vide impugned order dated 3.1.2006 rejected the objections filed by the petitioners.

Hence, the present petition.

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners was that
the record summoned by respondent No.1 was confidential record and, therefore, could not be summoned by the trial Court as it was violative of provisions of Sections 123, 124 and 126 of the Indian Evidence Act. Sections 123, 124 and 126 of the Indian Evidence Act read as under:-

123. Evidence as to affairs of State.-No one shall be permitted to give any evidence derived from unpublished official records relating to any affairs of State, except with the permission of the officer at the head of the department concerned, who shall give or withhold such permission as he thinks fit.

124. Official communications.-No public officer shall be
compelled to disclose communications to him in official confidence, when he considers that the public interest would
suffer by the disclosure.

126. Professional communications.-No barrister, attorney,
pleader or vakil shall at any time be permitted,unless with his
client's express consent, to disclose any communication made
to him in the course and for the purpose of his employment as such barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil, by or on behalf of his
client,or to state the contents or condition of any document with
which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional employment,or to disclose any
advice given by him to his client in the course and for the purpose of such employment:

Provided that nothing in this section shall protect from
disclosure-

(1) Any such communication made in furtherance of any (illegal) purpose;
(2 Any fact observed by any barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil, in the course of his employment as such, showing that any crime or fraud has been committed since the commencement of his employment.

It is material whether the attention of such barrister (pleader),
attorney or vakil was or was not directed to such fact by or no
behalf of his client.

Explanation.-The obligation stated in this section continues
after the employment has ceased.

The learned trial Court vide impugned order has summoned the
record from the office of the petitioners which contains previous orders passed on the file by the previous Vice Chancellor or the legal advice obtained from the legal advisor or the correspondence which was exchanged between the officers of the petitioner-University. Obviously, this record is covered by Sections 123, 124 and 126 of the Indian Evidence Act and, therefore, it is protected piece of evidence. Reliance can be placed on the judgment of Delhi High Court reported as H.L.Rodhey and others v.Delhi Administration and others, AIR 1969 Delhi 246 in which it was held that where the Government employee challenges his reversion from the officiating post, non disclosure of such documents was necessary for proper functioning of public service.

Therefore, the impugned order dated 3.1.2006 suffers from legal infirmity and is accordingly set aside. This petition is accepted.

( S. N. Aggarwal )
Judge

Sh Satish Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

State Information Commission, Punjab,
SCO No. 32-34,(1st Floor), Sector 17 C , Chandigarh.

Sh. Satish Kumar,
# 2836 Guru Nanak Colony,
Opp. GNE College, Gill Road,
Ludhiana. ………….Complainant

Vs

The Public Information Officer,
O/o The Additional Director Communication,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana. ………….Respondent

CC No.710 of 2006

Present:
i) None on behalf of the complainant.
ii)S. Narinder Pal Singh, Asst. Professor, on behalf of the respondent.

ORDER

Heard.

The respondent has given the required information to the complainant.

Disposed of.

(Kulbir Singh) (P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner, State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. NO. 84-85, SECTOR-17-C, CHANDIGARH.


Shri Vidya Sagar,
101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
lLudhiana. Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer, Respondent.
O/o
Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana.

AC-152/2006
order


Present: Shri Vidya Sagar, complainant and Shri Narinder Pal Singh, A.P.I.O. & Shri Sarbjit Singh, Sr. Assistant on behalf of respondent.



1. The appellant pleads that the case may be transferred to Full Bench. Therefore, case is put up to worthy C.I.C for putting up the case before the Full Bench.

Sd/-
(Er. Surinder Singh)
State Information Commissioner
30.1.2007
C.I.C.

Sh Vidya Sagar Ludhiana versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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



Sh. Vidya Sagar, Ludhiana.
……………………...........Appellant
Vs.

PIO O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana.

...….…………….......Respondent

AC No. 04 of 2006

ORDER
Present Sh. Vidya Sagar, Appellant in person and Sh. Narinder Pal Singh, Assistant Public Information Officer on behalf of the Public Information Officer, Punjab Agricultural University.
This is one of the oldest cases before the Commission. The appeal was filed on 26.11.2005 and a number of hearings have been held thereafter. On the last date of hearing that is 24.08.06, it was directed that the Appellant would be allowed access to the entire record in the University on
8th September, 2006 at 11.00 A.M. It was also directed that the Appellant would be free to identify the documents required by him and that the Respondent would deliver these documents on the spot.
The Appellant states that he is still not satisfied with the information supplied to him. He stated that he had demanded information on 89 points, but information was supplied only on two points out of 89.
The Respondent on the other hand states that the number of points on which information was demanded was 34. He supplies a list of these 34 points and avers that a substantial part of the information has already been supplied to the Appellant. The Respondent also submits an affidavit by Sh. A.C.Rana, Controller,

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana to the effect that documents listed at no. 4, 6, 9, 10, 12, 18, 19, 20 & 28 are not available in the office record.
We direct the Respondent to supply the remaining part of the information to the Appellant by the next date of hearing.
To come up for further proceedings on 07.11.2006 at 12.15 PM. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.

(Rajan Kashyap)
Chief Information Commissioner

Chandigarh
Dated: 24.10.2006
(Surinder Singh)
Information Commissioner

Dr HK Tewari versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Dr. H.K.Tewari,
HJ-116, H/B Colony,
B.R.S. Nagar, Ludhiana ' 12.
………………………Complainant


Vs.

The Additional Director of Communication CCL&C
-cum-Public Information Officer,
Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana.

………….……………Respondent

CC No. 71 of 2006

ORDER

Present Dr. Narinder Pal Singh & Sh. Sham Lal, Senior Assistant, Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana on behalf of the Respondent. None is present on behalf of the Complainant.

The Respondent states before us that in compliance with the order of the Commission, the University permitted the Complainant to inspect the record in their office on three different dates vis 11.07.06, 17.08.06 & 23.08.06. Copies of 149 different documents were supplied to the Complainant after inspection of the record. According to the Respondent, the Complainant seems to be satisfied with the information supplied to him.

Since the Complainant is not present before us today despite his knowledge of the date of hearing, it is presumed that he would be satisfied by whatever information he has obtained and that compliance with the order dated 03.07.06 has been made.

The matter is disposed of accordingly. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.



(Rajan Kashyap)
Chief Information Commissioner

Chandigarh
Dated: 12.09.2006
(Surinder Singh)
Information Commissioner

Sh Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana


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

Sh. Vidya Sagar,
S/o Sh. Kasturi Lal,
Lomsh Bhawan, 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana.

------------------------------------------Appellant
Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana.

----------------------------------------- Respondent
AC No. 04 of 2006

ORDER
Present Sh. Vidya Sagar, Appellant in person.
Sh. Narinder Pal Singh, Assistant Public Information Officer on behalf of the Public Information Officer, Punjab Agricultural University.

This matter has been urged before us over the last so many months. This order is to be read alongwith the earlier orders of the Commission dated 22.12.2005, 24.04.2006, 15.06.2006. In the detailed order of 24.04.06, it was directed that whatever information was demanded by the Appellant in his initial request should be immediately delivered. It was also observed that certain additional information sought by the Appellant would be treated as a fresh request for information. In respect of that the Punjab Agricultural University had assured that this would also be supplied.

The Respondent states before us here today that whatever information was available with the Respondent could be collected by the Appellant on any day. The Respondent states further that he had sent some additional information and had also advised the Appellant in writing to visit the office of the Respondent on any convenient date. The Respondent states before us that despite this offer, the Appellant did not visit Punjab Agricultural University’s office. The Punjab Agricultural University is even now prepared to deliver whatever information the Appellant wants. In respect of the request for additional information, Punjab Agricultural University reiterates that it is fully prepared to consider any such request as per law. This matter does not deserve sto be discussed in the instant case. The Appellant is free to demand and obtain any additional information that he wishes.

In respect of the first plea, the Appellant states before us that the communication claimed to have been sent by Punjab Agricultural University was never actually received. The Respondent on the other had presents before us copies of receipts indicating that these documents were sent by speed post and under postal certificate.

We feel that no useful purpose would be served in an unending correspondence between the Respondent and the Appellant. The most practical course would be that the Respondent is permitted to have access to the record in the University. For this he may visit Punjab Agricultural University on any convenient date. With the mutual concurrence of both the parties, 8th September, 2006 (at 11.00 A.M) is fixed for the Appellant’s visit to the Punjab Agricultural University office. He will identify the documents required by him and these will be delivered to him on the spot after payment of prescribed fee.

It is reiterated that this order applies only to the original request for information on 34 points. In case any additional information is demanded, this would be considered as a fresh application to be decided on merits by the Public Information Officer.

The Appellant submits before us an affidavit complaining of denial of information. A copy of this affidavit is given to the Respondent. The Respondent also submits an affidavit sworn by the Comptroller, Punjab Agricultural University in regard to the service record of the Appellant.

To come up for confirmation of compliance on 24.10.2006. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.



(Rajan Kashyap)
Chandigarh Chief Information Commissioner
Dated: 24.08.2006


(Surinder Singh)
Information Commissioner

Shri Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Shri Ashok Kumar

Vs.

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

Complaint Case No. CC-169-2006:

Present:
Mr. Ashok Kumar, complainant, in person.
Mr. Narinder Pal Singh, APIO, for the respondent-University.

Order:

Heard.


Assistant Public Information officer has given a copy of the Memorandum No.ADC.PIO/2006/4488-90 dated 18-7-2006, addressed to the complainant which states that the documents which remain to be given to the complainant cannot be given because they are exempted under Section 8(3) of The Right to Information Act, 2005. It has been pointed out to the Assistant Public Information Officer that he has not interpreted this particular sub-section correctly since, in fact, he is obliged to supply information in accordance with this sub-section and not the opposite.

The complainant has been given an opportunity to personally search for the documents which remain to be given to him from the records of respondent-University. However, he has expressed his helplessness and unwillingness in the matter since he states that he has no idea where the records have been kept and he will not be able to give any assistance in searching them out. Therefore, the Asstt., Public Information Officer has been directed to make sincere efforts to locate the remaining documents and to bring with him copies of those papers which could be located and a certificate to the effect that the rest are not traceable/available, on the next date of hearing.Put up before Mr.P.K.Verma, State Information Commissioner, on August 03, 2006 at 10 A.M., for further consideration.


(Mrs. Rupan Deol Bajaj)
State Information Commissioner

(P.K. Verma)
State Information Commissioner
July 19, 2006.

Sh Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Sh. Vidya Sagar,
S/o Sh. Kasturi Lal,
Lomsh Bhawan, 101-D,
Kitchlu Nagar,
Ludhiana.

--------------------------------------------Appellant

Vs.

The Public Information Officer
O/o The Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana.

------------------------------------------ Respondent

AC No. 4 of 2006

ORDER
Present Sh. Vidya Sagar, Appellant in person and none is present on behalf of the respondent Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.

Vide the Commission’s order dated 24.4.2006, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana was directed to give the information sought by the complainant. The complainant states before us today the he has still not been supplied the information in terms of the Commission’s order dated 24.4.2006. In order to settle this matter, it is necessary for the respondent to be present. Notice be issued to the respondent to be present on the next date of hearing.

To come up for confirmation of compliance on 24th August, 2006. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


(Rajan Kashyap)
Chandigarh Chief Information Commissioner
Dated: 15.06.2006

(R.K.Gupta)
Information Commissioner


(Surinder Singh)
Information Commissioner

PAU to examine PAU 201 variety

Ludhiana (PTI): Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) would examine the adaptive results of PAU 201 rice variety in order to ascertain the reasons behind its non-performance in some areas of the state.

"We will check the adaptive results of the rice variety why it has not been performing in Amritsar and Tarn Taran as pointed out by farmers," PAU, Director Research, Paramjit Singh Minhas said.

During a state level joint meeting of PAU Kisan Committee and Fruit and Vegetable Producers Committee, a farmer pointed out that PAU 201 variety did not perform well in some areas of Amritsar and Taran Taran districts.

PAU released this variety two years ago for cultivation.

According to him, it is a semi dwarf stiff variety, having erect leaves and consumes less water and gives a yield of 30 quintals per acre.

The university would also investigate the toxic affect, if any, of weedicide and herbicide on chillies and kinnow, following the demand from farmers during the meeting.

Minhas further disclosed that processing technology would be worked out for garlic and other vegetable crops. He said that guara varieties from Rajasthan and Haryana states would be collected for evaluation under adaptive trials.

PAU staff protest non payment of salaries

The teaching and non- teaching employees of PAU today staged a demonstration against the non-payment of salaries for the months of March and April. They said, it was for the first time that the salaries of the employees of the PAU had been delayed for two months.

The demonstration was jointly organised by the Punjab Agricultural University Teachers’ Association, the Punjab Agricultural University Employees Union and the Punjab Agricultural University Class IV Workers’ Union. The speakers at the demonstration criticised the Punjab Government for delaying the grants to the university which led to the delay in the payment of the salaries.

The speakers said, this was too obvious that the government was not in a position to meet the financial requirements of the PAU, how it could run the Guru Angad Dev University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences. They observed that the government appeared to be quite indifferent towards the plight of the employees working in the university.

The employees said, the delay in the payment of salaries had led to severe hardships to them. Most of the employees have to pay the fee of their children as in these two months the educational expenses of the children are incurred. They demanded that it should be made mandatory that the employees were paid salaries on the first day of every month so that they do not suffer the delay.

Financial concerns come in way of decision on retiring age of teachers

The state government is reluctant to implement a decision regarding increase in the retiring age of teachers and scientists working in the state agricultural universities from 60 years to 62 years as it would involve heavy financial liability.

The state-run agricultural universities are already facing financial crunch because of low allocation of funds by the states.

The Indian Council of Agricultural Research has asked all state agricultural universities to enhance the age of retirement of teachers to 62 years from 60 years. This order has become effective from October 31, 2003.

According to a letter of the ICAR (dated November 5, 2003), addressed to the Chief Secretaries of the states ‘‘every teacher/scientist in the state agricultural universities/central agricultural university, Imphal, who is governed by the UGC pay scales and service matters, will now retire from service on the afternoon of last day of the month when he/she attains the age of 62 years. However, teachers, whose date of birth is the first of the month, will retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the preceding month on attaining the age of 62 years. The above decision for enhancement of age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years is applicable to those teachers/scientists who are still in service and also those who are due to retire on October 31, 2003. It will not be applicable to teachers/scientists who have already retired and those who are on extension, re-employment.’’

Enquiries revealed that Punjab Agricultural University authorities had written to the state government seeking the decision of the state government on the latest communication of the ICAR enhancing the age of retirement to 62 years.

The PAU authorities have written to the state government pointing out that the state government vide its notification of 21-4-99 while revising the pay scales of teachers of Punjab Agricultural University with effect from January 1, 1996 as per condition mentioned in its letter of March 3, 1999 of the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, did not agree to increase the age of superannuation of teaching personnel from 60 to 62 years. The notification of the state government revising the pay scales of teaching personnel was put up at the Board of Management of Punjab Agricultural University meeting(held on 14-5-99) which approved the revised pay scales keeping the age of superannuation at 60 years as contained in the notification.

While responding to a communication of PAU, the state government had asked it to assess the financial liability arising out of this decision.

Enquiries further reveal that 86 per cent of the total budget of the university is spent on the salary component of the teaching and non-teaching staff. The entire funding is done by the state government and the ICAR does not make any contribution to the same. The ICAR provides grants for development works and teaching facilities only.

Enquiries also show that none of the state agricultural universities, including Haryana and Himachal, have implemented the ICAR decision so far. The state governments are reluctant to implement the directive of the ICAR in view of the financial constraints.

As many as 32 teachers of PAU will retire by June 2004 and nine are due to retire in the month of January. There are 1254 teachers in the PAU at present.

Dr HK Tewari versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.C.O. NO. 84-85, SECTOR-17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. H.K. Tewari,
HJ-116, H/B Colony,
B.R.s. Nagar, Ludhiana. ….Complainant.

Vs.

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana. ….Respondent.


CC No. 867 of 2006

ORDER

Present:
None is present on behalf of Complainant.
Shri Sham Lal on behalf of PIO, - P.A.U. Ludhiana.

The respondent states that the information has been supplied on2-4-2007 by hand to the complainant who acknowledged the receipt of the information. Today complainant is not present, it is presumed that he is satisfied with the information supplied by the respondent..

2. The case is disposed of accordingly.

3. Copies of the orders be sent to both the parties.

Sd/-
Chandigarh. Er. Surinder Singh

Dated 05-04-2007 State Information Commissioner.

Sd/-
Lt. Gen.P.K. Grover (Retd.)
State Information Commissioner

Dr HK Tiwari versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION PUNJAB
S.CO. NO. 84-85, SECTOR-17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Dr. H.K. Tiwari
HJ ' 116, H/B Colony,
B.R.S. Nagar, Ludhiana. ---Complainant.

Vs

Public Information Officer,
O/o The Registrar, Punjab Agricultural
University, Ludhiana. ……. Respondent.

CC No.867/2006

ORDER

Present:
Dr. H.K. Tiwari, complainant in person.
Shri Narinder Singh, APIO

The respondent states that the information demanded by the complainant is covered under Section 8(1)(i) which reads as under:-

“Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen---

(i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of Ministers, Secretaries and other officers:

Provided that the decisions of Council of Ministers, the reasons therefore, and the material on the basis of which the decisions were taken shall be made public after the decision has been taken, and the matter is complete, or over:

Provided further that those matters which come under the exemptions specified in this section shall not be disclosed.”

2. The respondent states that the item was submitted to the Board of Management in its 227th meeting held on 11.12.2006 for consideration and the Board of Management has deferred the item on the request of Dr. H.K. Tiwari on 5.12.2006. He further submits that the agenda item has been created by the University, and therefore it cannot be supplied to the complainant.

3. In view of the nature of agenda item and the Sections of the RTI Act narrated above, I do not see any harm in supplying the agenda item to the complainant, and therefore it is directed that the agenda item of the Board of management held on 11.12.2006 be supplied to the complainant.

4. Case is fixed for confirmation of compliance of orders for 5.4.2007.

5. Copies of the orders be sent to both the parties.

Chandigarh (Er. Surinder Singh )
Dated:5.3.2007 State Information Commissioner

Sh Ashok Kumar J E versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

State Information Commission, Punjab,
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17 C , Chandigarh.

Sh .Ashok Kumar, J.E.,
O/o SDE (Public Health)
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana.
………….Complainant

Vs

The Public Information Officer,
O/o .The Executive Engineer,(Civil)
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana.
………….Respondent

CC No. 595 of 2006

Present:
i)Sh. Ashok Kumar, complainant in person.
ii)Sh. Bhagwan Dass Kundal,Jr. Assistant, on behalf of the respondent.


ORDER

Heard.

The respondent has supplied some information to the complainant and the concerned Executive Engineer has made a written statement to the effect that the remaining documents are not available in his office since it has been weeded out. He has given a certificate that there was no practice of sending cheques with covering letters and the supply of copies of the covering letters is not possible. The copies of the above mentioned assertions of the respondent have been provided to the complainant.

No further action is required to be taken in this case, which stands disposed of.





(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner

Sh Avinash Kumar Sharma versus Punjab Agriculture University Ludhiana

State Information Commission, Punjab,
SCO No. 84-85, Sector 17 C , Chandigarh.

Sh .Avinash Kumar Sharma,
2-G, S.D.Kitchlu Nagar,
Civil Lines,
Ludhiana-141001
………….Complainant

Vs

The Public Information Officer,
O/o .The Additional Director of Communication,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana. ………….Respondent

CC No. 658 of 2006

Present:
i)None, on behalf of the complainant.
ii)Shri Ajay Kumar, Clerk, on behalf of the respondent. ..


ORDER

Heard.

The communication from the complainant dated 25-11-2006 in which he has pointed out deficiencies in the information provided by the respondent vide his letter dated 17-11-2006 has not been received by the respondent and a copy thereof has been made out and supplied to the respondent. The same may be examined by the respondent and the remaining information, if available, should be provided to the complainant within 15 days from today.

Disposed of.

(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner

Shri Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNJAB
S.C.O. NO. 84-85, SECTOR-17-C, CHANDIGARH.

Shri Vidya Sagar
S/o Shri. Kasturi, Lal
Lomsh Bhawan, 101-D, Kitchlu Nagar
Ludhiana.
…Appellant
V/s

Public Information Officer,
O/O Punjab Agriculture University
Ludhiana.
…Respondent.
AC No. 04/2006

ORDER:

Present:
Shri Vidya Sagar, Appellant in person
Dr. Narinder Pal Singh, Asstt. Public Information Officer, Shri O.P.Badyal, A.A.O., Shri Sham Lal, Sr. Asstt. and Shri Jatinder Rao, Clerk on behalf of the P.I.O., Respondent.

A complaint dated 26-11-2005 regarding non-disclosure of information received in the Commission office. The case was heard on 22-12-2005, 16-1-2006, 24-04-2006,15-6-2006, 24-8-2006, 24-10-2006 and 7-11-2006.

On 16-1-2006 the Commission ordered that since the matter is pending before the Appellate Authority who is empowered to hear appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act, 2005. No further action by the Commission is required on the complaint referred by the appellant ' Shri Vidya Sagar. However, the Complainant is entitled to prefer further appeal to the Commission in case he is not satisfied by the order made by the Appellate Authority.

The Appellant in his appeal impugns the order dated 14-2-2006 made by the Registrar, P.A.U., Ludhiana as an Appellant Authority under RTI Act 2005 and the case was fixed for hearing on 24-4-2006. The AC No.04/06 Registrar, P.A.U., Ludhiana had delivered some information to the appellant, and some was denied with the remarks that “can not be supplied to you as the same are required in the University”.

In the order dated 24-4-2006 the Commission wanted to know the action, if any, has been initiated against the person (s) responsible for loss of record and the Commission has ordered that the information available will be delivered to the Appellant and which is not available an affidavit to the effect that no such information is available in the University be submitted, the case was fixed for 15-6-2006. On 15-6-2006 the Respondent was not present and the case was adjourned for 24-8-2006 and ordered that the Respondent must be present on the next date of hearing.

On 24-8-2006 Asstt. Public Information Officer, Dr. Narinder Pal Singh stated before the Commission that whatever information is available with the Respondent will be supplied and the Appellant is advised to visit the o/o the Respondent on any convenient date. 8th Sept., 2006 was fixed, which was conveyed to both the parties to inspect the records in the University and the Appellant will identify the documents which are required by him and these will be delivered to him on the spot after payment of prescribed fee and it was also reiterated that the order dated 28-8-2006 applies only to the original request for information on 34 points. In case any additional information is demanded, this would be considered as a fresh application to be decided on merits by the Public Information Officer. The case was fixed for hearing on 24th Oct. 2006.

On 24th Oct. 2006 the Respondent Dr. Narinder Pal Singh stated that the information relating to 34 points as demanded by the Appellant had been delivered to the Appellant. Affidavit by the P.I.O. - Shri A.C. Rana, Comptroller, P.A.U. was submitted to the effect that documents listed at Sr. No. 4,6,9,10,12,18,19,20 and 28 are not available in the office. The Commission ordered to supply the remaining part of application to the Appellant by 7-11-2006, the next date of hearing.

The case was heard by the Commission on 7-11-2006 at 12.15 AC No. 04/2006:

P.M. and para-wise reply on all his queries were argued. The Respondent has submitted written reply to the 34 points, the information relating to each para were delivered to him in my presence and signatures were taken in lieu of receipt of the information. An affidavit was also submitted by the Respondent relating to the paras where the information is not available with the University.


The Parawise arguments are recorded on 7-11-2006 in the Commission as below:-
Para No.1. Information relating to Para No.1, the joining report of Shri Vidya Sagar in the office of Comptroller, P.A.U., Ludhiana was delivered to him in my present but the Appellant insists that the joining report submitted to the Senior Architect be delivered to him. Asstt. P.I.O. has stated that no such joining report is available in the office of Senior Architect or in the University. The Appellant insists for the original copy of the joining report to be shown to him as the copy delivered to him is not readable. Dr. Narinder Pal Singh, Asst.. P.I.O. has agreed to show to the Commission the original joining report to the Commission on the next date of hearing.

Para No.2: Information relating to Para No.2, copy of the affidavit relating to Para No.2 dated 23-8-2006 received by the Appellant in my presence.

Para No.3: Information relating to Para No. 3, authenticated copy of the GPF A/c No. 5000 was delivered to the Appellant in my presence.
Para No.4: Information relating to Para No.4, affidavit to this effect dated 6-11-2006 has been delivered to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No.5: Information relating to Para No.5, copy of enquiry report by Shri Tarlochan Singh Sandhu, Estate Officer-cum-Inquiry Officer, PAU, Ludhiana was delivered to the Appellant but Shri Vidya Sagagar stated that his statement taken during the enquiry be supplied. The Respondent stated that he simply intimated his statement verbally. No written AC No. 04/2006
statement was received during the enquiry report. Appellant has agreed to show the written statement submitted to the Inquiry Officer on the next date of hearing.

Para No. 6: Information relating to Para No. 6, the respondent has submitted affidavit that there is no such application available as per record. No enquiry was ordered by His Excellency Hon`ble Governor of Punjab-cum- Chancellor, P.A.U., Luhiana. The Respondent has been directed to supply a copy of the complaint dated 13-1-1982, if any, marked by His Excellency, Governor of Punjab/Vice Chancellor/ anybody else.

Para No. 7: Information relating to Para No. 7, the Appellant submits that his application dated 12-3-1992 addressed to Shri Surinder Nath the then Hon`ble Governor of Punjab regarding non-payment of salary for the period 1-8-1991 to 28-2-1992 be delivered to me. The Respondent has delivered the certified copy of the application to the appellant in my presence and the remaining information will be brought to the Commission office on the next date of hearing alongwith original record and the P.I.O. Shri P.P. Gill, ADC-cum-P.I.O., PAU, Ludhiana should attend the next hearing.

Para No.8: Information relating to Para No. 8, delivered to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No.9&10: Information relating to Para No. 9 & 10, Asstt. P.I.O. submitted that information is not available in the record, an affidavit to this effect dated 6-11-2006 was submitted.

Para No.11: Information relating to Para No.11, affidavit to the effect that no such Show Cause Notice/charge-sheet was served/issued to the Appellant 'Shri Vidya Sagar will be submitted by the P.I.O.

Para No.12: Information relating to Para No.12, an affidavit to the effect that the Peon Book was not available in the record will be submitted by the P.I.O.AC No. 04/2006:

Para No.13: Information relating to Para No. 13, the Respondent has submitted an affidavit to the effect that no enquiry was conducted and simply order dated 22-3-1994 was passed without enquiry.

Para No.14: Information relating to Para No. 14, as submitted by the Respondent, only five increments starting from 1994 to 1999 have been stopped by the University. Order for stoppage of 5 increments has been delivered to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No.15: Information relating to Para No. 15, documents delivered by the Respondent to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No.16: Information relating to Para No. 16, respondent will submit an affidavit that no such interest was given to the Appellant ' Shri Vidya Sagar from 13-2-1998 till the actual payment of arrear to him.

Para No.17& 18:Information relating to Para No. 17&18, respondent submitted that the subsistence allowance not paid to the Appellant due to non-furnishing of the Non-employment certificate by the Appellant. Department is ready to pay the subsistence allowance of suspension period if the Appellant submits his non-employment certificate to the P.A.U. authorities.

Para No. 19: Information relating to Para No. 19, the Appellant states that the joining report was submitted to the Comptroller, P.A.U., Ludhiana and to the Senior Architect, P.A.U., Ludhiana also. The copy was shown to me but it is strange to state that the Comptroller, P.A.U. Ludhiana has not forwarded the same to the concerned officer for marking his presence and taking further necessary action.

Para No.20 Information relating to Para No. 20, the Respondent states that no such order of Vice Chancellor, P.A.U., Ludhiana is available in the record for withholding the salary of the Appellant for the period from 3-7-1998 to 31-1-1999. The Respondent also states that Para No. 18, 19 and 20 have been incorporated in the affidavit dated 6-11-2006 submitted to the AC No. 04/2006:

Commission.

Para No. 21: Information relating to Para No. 21, the Respondent delivered the information to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No.22: Information relating to Para No. 22, the Respondent has delivered the copies of the Dak Register relating to CPF, Pension Branch and Pay Branch, in my presence. The Dak Register of two branches i.e. Accounts and Budget branch will be supplied by the Respondent to the Appellant before the next date of hearing.

Para No.23: Information relating to Para No. 23, the Respondent has delivered copy of Dak Register in my presence to the Appellant.

:Para No. 24&25: Information relating to Para No. 24&25, the Respondent delivered affidavit relating to the Para No.24&25 to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No. 26: Information relating to Para No. 26, the Respondent has delivered the copies of the Dak Register relating to CPF, Pension Branch and Pay Branch, in my presence. The Dak Register of two branches i.e. Accounts and Budget branch will be supplied by the Respondent to the Appellant before the next date of hearing.

Para No. 27: Information relating to Para No. 27,the Respondent delivered the information to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No. 28&29: Information relating to Para No. 28&29,the Respondent delivered the affidavit dated 6-11-2006 to the appellant in my presence.
Para No.30: Information relating to Para No. 30, the Respondent delivered copy of enquiry report to the Appellant in my presence and the Respondent also assured to supply the complete documents of the enquiry report to the Appellant before the next date of hearing.

Para No. 31: Information relating to Para No. 31, the Respondent has delivered the documents in 40 pages in my presence.

AC No. 04/2006:

Para No. 32: The information relating to Para No. 32, the Respondent has delivered the documents in 514 pages to the Appellant in my presence.

Para No. 33: Information relating to Para No. 33, the Respondent states that only 60 applications/affidavits are available in the University which have been delivered to the Appellant in my presence and the Appellant is satisfied with the information relating to Para No.33 . The Respondent further states that other copies are not available with the University and affidavit will be submitted on the next date of hearing.

Para No.34:.Information relating to Para No. 34, the respondent has delivered the information in 5 pages in my presence. to the Appellant in my presence. The appellant further submits that the orders of Shri J.B. Goyal, if available, in the record will be given to the Appellant otherwise affidavit to this effect will be supplied.

Para No.34(B): Information relating to Para No. 34(B) the Respondents states that the information relating to Sub Para (v) of 34 (B) will be delivered on the next date of hearing.

The Respondent further states that the Appellant has inspected
all the files lying in the office of the Registrar, P.A.U., and three files lying with the office of Comptroller, P.A.U. Ludhiana. After thorough inspection of the record by the appellant the documents in 3333 (instead of 3856 pages as mentioned in the affidavit) from the files maintained in the office of the Registrar (File No.1 Pages-675, File No.2, Pages-696, File No.3 Pages-304). Similarly, files of the Comptrollers (Total No. of pages-1658), and the documents had already been supplied to the applicant vide Memo. No. ADC-CUM- PIO/6304-07 dated 17.10.2006.

On the demand of the Appellant for the inspection of the record again, the following time, date and place has been fixed for inspection of Appellant`s personal file in the different branches of the office of:-

i) in the office of Registrar on 4-12-2006 at 10.00 A.M.
ii) in the office of Comptroller on 5-12-2006 at 10.00 A.M.
iii) in the office of Senior Architect on 6.12.2006 at 10.00 A.M.
iv) in the office of Executive Engineer (Civil) on 7-12-2006 at
10.00 A.M.

AC No. 04/2006:

Para No.34©: Information relalting to Para No. 34©, the Respondent states that the Appellant has already deposited the requisite fee with the P.A.U. University.

If any additional fee is to be charged the decision will be taken on the next date of hearing by the Commission after hearing both the parties.

Para No. 34(D): The information relating to Para No. 34(D), the Respondent has delivered the information to the Appellant in my presence.

The Respondent further assured that the information which has not been delivered today i.e. 7-11-2006 will be supplied by the next date of hearing otherwise an affidavit to the effect that no information is available in the record of the University. The Appellant is mostly satisfied with the information delivered to him by the Asst .P.I.O. of University. Today, total documents in 920 pages were delivered to the Appellant in my presence relating to the above paras.

On the next date of hearing the P.I.O. should present himself alongwith record which is to be delivered to the Appellant. This being the oldest case before the Commission, the Commission wants to decide the case on the next hearing. Vice Chancellor, P.A.U., Ludhiana should order an enquiry into the loss of the record and fix the responsibility for the delay of delivering the record to the Appellant by the official/officer.

The copies of the orders be sent to both the parties and also to the Vice Chancellor, P.A.U., Ludhiana.

Next date of hearing is fixed for 19-12-2006


CHANDIGARH (ER. SURINDER SINGH)
DATED 07-11-2006 STATE INFORMATION COMMISSER

Sh Ashok Kumar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Sh.Ashok Kumar ______________ Complainant

Vs.

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana ______________ Respondent


Complaint Case No. CC-169-2006

Present:
1.Sh. Ashok kumar, complainant, in person.
2.Sh. Narinder Pal Singh, APIO, PAU, Ludhiana, for the respondent.

ORDER

In compliance with the order of this Court passed on 19-7-2006, the APIO, PAU, has produced the necessary certificate issued by the EE(Civil) of the PAU stating that the documents/ letters demanded by Sh. Ashok Kumar in his letter dated 6.4.2006 at serial nos. 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,13,14,15,16 and 18 are not available in his office. A copy of the certificate was handed over to the complainant. However the APIO again made the offer that the complainant is at liberty to himself examine the entire records and to take copies of any records wanted by him.

No further action is required in this case, which stands disposed of.



(P.K.Verma)
State Information Commissioner

Dr HK Tewari versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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


Dr. H.K.Tewari,
HJ-116, H/B Colony,
B.R.S. Nagar, Ludhiana ' 12.

-----------------------------------------Complainant
Vs.

The Additional Director of Communication CCL&C,
-cum- Public Information Officer,
Punjab Agriculture University,
Ludhiana.

------------------------------------------ Respondent

CC No. 71 of 2006

ORDER

Present
Dr. H.K.Tewari, Complainant in person.
Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate alongwith Dr. Narinder Pal Singh, on behalf of the Respondent.

The Complainant states that the information demanded by him has not been supplied. The Respondent on the other hand submits that the information sought is voluminous and the application making request for the information is quite vague. The Respondent also states that notings on the office files are not required to be supplied under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

In so far as office notings are concerned, these are not exempt under section 8 of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Office notings are clearly included in the definition of the term ‘information’ under section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Respondent is, therefore, obliged to supply information including office notings.

We, therefore, direct that the Complainant be allowed to inspect the relevant record. He will identify the exact pages from the record that he needs. He can inspect the record on any day in the week starting from 10th July, 2006. He will make due payment of the prescribed fee for the information supplied to him.

To come up for confirmation of compliance on 12th September, 2006. Copies of the order be sent to both the parties.


(Rajan Kashyap)
Chandigarh Chief Information Commissioner


(R.K.Gupta)
Information Commissioner


(Surinder Singh)
Information Commissioner

Vidya Sagar versus Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) Ludhiana

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

Mr. Vidya Sagar,
S/o Sh. Kasturi Lal,
Lomsh Bhawan, 101-D,
Kitchlu Nagar, Ludhiana
------------------------------ Appellant

Vs

Public Information Officer,
Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana. -------------------------------Respondent

A.C. No.4 of 2006

ORDER

Present
Mr. Vidya Sagar, Appellant in person
Mr.Narinder Pal Singh, Associate Professor-cum- Assistant Public Information Officer, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhaiana. On behalf of Respondent.

The Appellant in this appeal impugns the order dated 14.02.2006 made by the Registrar PAU, Ludhiana as an Appellate Authority under the RTI Act, 2005. The operative portion of the order under appeal reads as under:-

“The record mentioned at serial No.1,3,4,6 to 10 and 29 are your own applications. The record at serial No. 5, 21, 30 & 32 has already been submitted in the Court. However, the photo-copies of the same are added here. Point No. 22, 23 and 26 pertaining the Dak Register, the original Dak Register cannot be supplied to you as the same are required in the University. Any entry from the same if needed by you can be supplied. The record mentioned at Sr. No. 2,12,16,20,24,25,27,28,33 and 34 are not available in the record of the University. However, if the same is traced out at any stage that will be supplied to you. The record as mentioned at Sr. No 11,13 to 15 has already been supplied to you. It is made clear to you, that despite of not meeting the requirement of the Information Act regarding deposit of requisite fee, the above information is supplied to you as a special case”.
It is thus seen that the information which has been denied is on three counts that is:-
(i) Applications are of the appellant himself, (ii) Record has been submitted in a Court,
(iii) The record is not available in the University.

On hearing the parties I direct that the appellant be supplied copies of the applications as demanded since the appellant states that he has not retained copies thereof. The copies of the record submitted by the respondent in court be also supplied to the appellant by obtaining copies from the Court concerned or from the University’s own record. In respect of service books, the appellant avers that these are in the custody of a Superintendent of PAU and alleges that the University is deliberately not showing this record to him.

I direct that the averment of the appellant be investigated by the Registrar personally from the concerned officer/ official in charge of the service books. It is directed that information relating to the service books be supplied to the appellant. It is however, made clear that the appellant shall be entitled to the information only on the payment of fees prescribed under the Rules.

Regarding the record which the University alleges is not traceable, I direct that the Registrar of the University would submit an affidavit on oath indicating precisely the record which is missing, when was the loss of the record detected, who was the custodian of the record and what steps have been taken by the University to trace the missing record, and what action if any has been initiated against the person/s responsible for the loss of record.

During the course of arguments it transpired that there is some ambiguity regarding the number of documents demanded by the appellant. I direct that in case some documents demanded by the appellant are not included in the original request for information, he shall submit a fresh request naturally with the requisite fee for the additional documents. On such request for additional documents having been made, the respondent shall consider and decide the same on merits. In respect of information which is under appeal, the respondent shall take action as indicated above.

To come up for confirmation of compliance of today’s orders on 15th June, 2006.

Chandigarh Chief Information Commissioner

Students strike enters third day at PAU

Ludhiana The standoff between students of agricultural engineering and Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) officials entered the third today on Friday, with neither party willing to give in to the other’s demands.
As many as 38 third year students of the university had been marked ‘failed’ recently after they allegedly ‘skipped’ an exam on Soil Water Engineering. Demanding that the exam be held again, the students had gone on a strike on Wednesday.

After students handed over a letter to PAU Vice Chancellor Dr Manjit Singh Kang today, a series of meetings were held among students, parents, dean and even the vice-chancellor. No consensus was, however, arrived at till the time of filing of the report.

A number of students had, meanwhile, gathered outside the Thapar Hall in the morning to stage a protest. They, however, dispersed as soon as Dean Dr P K Gupta convened a meeting with parents to sort out the matter.

I had called up a few parents on Wednesday asking them to meet us on the issue. While only one of them reported, seven others volunteered to join us, said the dean. Dr Gupta added: I made it clear to the parents that the rules of the university do not permit us to hold the exam again.

He said: The second year students will be back for examinations on Monday. I request students not to waste further time. The final examinations begin on May 18.

The students, meanwhile, remain assertive on their demands. A fail mark on our score sheets not only hampers placements but also affect scholarships for many students. The university should take a lenient view, said a student.

About Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana (PAU)

The Punjab Agricultural University was established in 1962 to serve the state of erstwhile Punjab. On trifurcation of Punjab in November 1966, Haryana Agricultural University was carved out of PAU by an Act of Parliament in February 1970. Later, in July 1970, Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidalya was established. In 2006 the College of Veterinary Science was upgraded to become Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Science University (GADVASU) at Ludhiana. The Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) is located in Ludhiana city (Punjab State) in north-west India at a distance of 316 km from New Delhi. It is well connected by road and rail with the national capital. Situated on the Ludhiana - Ferozepur Road, the University covers an area of 1510 acres on its main campus and 4615 acres at the regional research stations. Modeled on the pattern of land grant colleges in U.S.A., the PAU performs the integrated functions of teaching, research and extension in agriculture, agricultural engineering, home science and allied disciplines. The University has well equipped laboratories, library and lecture rooms and elaborate farm facilities. Hostel accommodation is available in the university hostels for single students. Married students, if accompanied by their family members, will have to find accommodation outside the campus.

The PAU has played a key role in increasing food grain production in the Punjab State several folds share its reputation and ushering in an era of Green Revolution in India. It has also made notable contributions in increasing livestock and poultry production. In recognition of its outstanding achievements in agricultural research, education and extension, it was adjudged the Best Agricultural University in India in 1995.

The Punjab Agricultural University now has four constituent colleges, viz. College of Agriculture, College of Agricultural Engineering, College of Home science and College of Basic Sciences & Humanities.

At present the University, through 28 departments in the four constituent colleges, offers 31 Master's and 30 Ph.D. programmes. The course curricula are constantly revised and restructured to keep pace with the latest developments in agriculture and allied fields.

PAU cash crunch could affect research

LUDHIANA: The ongoing cash crunch in Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) could affect research in the university as funds provided by state
Twitter Facebook Share
Email Print Save Comment
government are used for payment of salaries to employees and the university has to depend on funds under India Coordinated Research (ICR) schemes.

University's budget is over Rs 200 crore, but state government is able to provide 100 crore and that goes into disbursement of employees' salaries. Though the university is getting around Rs 40 crore under ICR schemes, the amount is not sufficient because the university could not continue advanced research on crops. Last year too, the university had to depend on the surplus Rs 5 crore from the state government. Punjab finance minister Manpreet Badal had then assured that the grant would be increased to Rs 10 crore, but till now, the university has not been allotted the money.

Three years back, Parliament had allotted Rs 100 crore to the university and several projects had been sanctioned, but till now, nothing has been done to expedite them. Authorities were to construct screen houses and growth chambers for advanced work on the crops, but construction is taking so long that scientists have to depend on existing labs. There are several ongoing projects on crops like wheat, rice and maze. Scientists are finding it difficult to monitor changes in growth pattern of crops caused by surroundings.

Dr HS Kingra, vice-president, PAUTA, said they are demanding central status for the university and the Centre should take its control in its hands.

11 December 2009

Is PAU paying a price for not having a bureaucrat on board?

The current situation on campus where Punjab Agricultural University and its officials are trying their level best to get around the state government and its bureaucrates, lack of one on campus is being now felt.

Notable here is that since its inception and up to 2002, the post of registrar at PAU was either held by an IAS or an PCS officer. However the general feeling on campus was that the university should have a right to appoint its own registrar and this practice was discontinued with Dr VK Sharma, Dean, College of Agricultural Engineering, taking over as the first registrar of the university from teaching cadre. Dr Sharma who has been the longest serving registrar of the university, retired in 2007 and thereafter Dr RK Mahey from College of Agriculture took over the baton.

The experiment that was proving correct all this while now seems to somewhat off rail. A senior faculty member of the university who did not want to be named pointed out, 'Dealing with the babus of the government is simply not possible for a scientist. The clerks, babus, bureaucrats are trained in the skill of keeping the public running around in circles. They never say no to any work but will never do anything.'

PAU at present is struggling to get a grant from the state government to pay revised pay scales. The employees of the university are observing a chain hunger strike that entered its eight day on Sunday. A group of five members namely Dr Amarjit Singh and Dr Paramjit Singh Brar from PAUTA, Daljit Singh, Nirmal Singh (Nimma) and Jaipal from the PAU Employees Union sat on hunger strike today.

Another member added, 'Bureaucracy can be tackled by beauracracy alone and we should rethink this policy on registrar. We could have an equivalent post for teachers but should leave the job of runing after the files for some one else to do.'

When contacted, Dr KS Sangha, general secretary, PAUTA, remarked, 'A section of teachers have expressed this opinion but this issue is very cumbersome and there is a need to buid a large consensus around this. PAUTA had to struggle hard to ensure that a teacher gets this post and giving it up now is simply not possible. PAUTA at present has not thought about this issue at all.'

Revised salaries elude PAU non-teaching staff as babus hand varsity another poser

'Overcautious bureaucracy' has once again blocked the financial aid to Punjab Agricultural University when it sent back PAU Registrar, Dr R K Mahey and Comptroller A C Rana empty-handed after a meeting with the Secretary, Finance, that was held in Chandigarh today.

While both Dr Mahey and Rana were not available for comment, it is learnt that while the state government has released a grant for enhanced salaries of PAU teachers, it has again asked a series of queries before releasing grant for non-teaching employees. This has meanwhile led to large-scale resentment among the non-teaching staff who have threatened to intensify their stir in case the government did not release their share of grant immediately.

The government, it is learnt, has released Rs 4.32 crore for teachers while a grant of Rs 8.30 crore, needed for the non-teaching staff, has been kept pending.

Lakhwinder Singh Sandhu, vice-president, PAU Non-teaching Employees Union, said, 'The MLA, Ludhiana West, Harish Rai Dhandha has intervened for us but the Secretary, Finance, has asked certain queries like disparity in pay scales as compared to Punjab government, university income and so on.'

When contacted, Dhanda informed, 'I have taken up the issue with the chief secretary and will know plead the PAU's case myself. It is not easy to deal with the bureaucracy and I have asked PAU non-teaching staff union to brief me about the nitty gritty of the matter and I will speak at the next meeting.' Dhanda added, 'The government officials keep sending back PAU officials with the same set of objections each time but demand a new answer. This is simply a delaying tactic.'

Meanwhile, a group of six members, Dr S.K Sohu and Dr T.S Riar from PAUTA, Tarsem Singh, Kuldip Singh TMO, Kesar Singh and Nishan Singh from the PAU Employees Union sat on a hunger strike today.

PAU reels under power crisis as generator set gathers dust

Ludhiana: While the power cuts imposed by the Punjab State Electricity Board play a big role in crippling research work at Punjab Agricultural University, but then the institute, in places, has only to blame itself for all the slowdown in the work. Sample this: Department of Soils, College of Agriculture, PAU, one of the largest and busiest departments on the campus, has a generator-set lying idle, waiting for installation for nearly two years now. The reason: red tapism. For as per the head of the Department of Soils, Dr A.S. Sidhu, 'This generator has been procured for setting up a state-of-the-art laboratory in the department. The work for this lab was on, however midway the contractor ran away and now the university Estate Office has floated tenders for a new contractor.'

When asked whether this genset which is lying idle could not be used to supply power to department along with the lab, Dr Sidhu added, 'This genset is just for the lab, in which we will have the entire machinery that our scientists use and it will also be centrally air-conditioned. This genset cannot serve the rest of the department for we will need extra wiring for other rooms and labs. From which head will be get this money. So we are waiting for this lab to come up and then the gen set will be used there.'

Dr Sidhu adds, 'I have taken up the issue with the Estate office and have asked them as to why this work on lab has been stalled. They have told me the reason and hopefully the work should begin soon.'

Dr V.K. Sehgal, estate officer-cum-chief engineer, PAU, when contacted on the issue, simply said, 'I will have to check up the status of this lab on Monday when the university opens after the weekend.'

Meanwhile, a senior faculty member, on condition of anonymity, informed, 'The soils department is one of the richest departments of PAU and I am sure we could get extra funds to either enhance the genset so that the entire department can benefit from it or else we can spend some extra funds to include some other important labs in this project. By doing this at least the work will not suffer.'

Aug 30, 2008

Employment at doorsteps for PAU engineers

Ludhiana, August 01, 2008: Agricultural engineers graduating from Punjab Agricultural University have been maintaining the trends of getting early jobs, even one year before completing their degrees. The companies, M/s John Deere Farm Equipment and M/s John Deere Technology Centre India, Pune, the group companies of Global Corporate 'John Deere' visited College of Agricultural Engineering, PAU, for holding on-campus Interviews.

These companies deal in tractors, farm equipment and earth-moving equipment world-wide. Giving details, the College Dean, Dr. P.K. Gupta said that a panel of three executives representing these companies conducteda day long recruitment process comprising written test, group-discussion and personal interviews.

They selected six agricultural engineers for various positions, namely Jasmeet Singh, Kapil Sharma, Saket Goyal, Sudhanshu, Udit Narula and Vikas Garg, who will be completing their degree in July 2009.

Dr Gupta said that commendable performances of PAU agricultural engineers in different organisations were being recognised by the top multi-national companies. Dr. Gupta further valued the commitment of members of the Training and Placement Committee of the College of Agricultural Engineering, including Dr. P.P.S. Lubana, Dr Ashok Kumar and Vishal Bector for coordinating with the leading and reputed companies to visit the campus for the recruitment of farm engineers.

The selected candidates were overjoyed at getting the openings through campus placement drives organised by the companies. Vishal Bector was involved for conducting the evening classes on career counseling and personality development for inculcating professional attributes among the candidates resulting in better performance in the interviews.

Interacting with the visiting panel from Pune, Dr. Dulcha Singh Brar, Director Students Welfare and Chairman, PAU Counseling & Placement Cell appreciated the professional skills among the agricultural engineers and also discussed the various career openings for the graduate and postgraduate students of PAU.

VC Manjit Singh Kang urged to stop Dulcha Singh Brar

4 oct 2008 The complainant in the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) sexual harassment case has again submitted an application to the Vice-Chancellor Manjit Singh Kang and Dean, College of Home Science, Neelam Grewal urging them to stop Dulcha Singh Brar from 'provoking students and teachers against her'.

On September 14, a woman employee had accused Brar, Director Students' Welfare, of sexual harassment and had submitted a written application to the PAU V-C.

Sources said the complainant had expressed in the application that she feels 'uneasy and threatened' on the campus after she lodged the complaint. 'The situation is aggravated when she has to go to Brar's office to attend meetings,' added the source.

Neelam Grewal, who has been asked to the probe the matter by the V-C, said: 'I have not seen the letter yet.'

Asked why the complainant is sent for meetings chaired by Brar, Grewal said: 'This is a routine affair but we ensure that she is protected. I had sent extra staff along with the complainant and had briefed them to take care of her.'

Eyebrows raised on PAU Vice-Chancellor Dr Manjit Singh Kang

Eyebrows have been raised on the decision of Punjab Agricultural University Vice-Chancellor Dr Manjit Singh Kang to relieve Director of Research Dr P S Minhas. The official explanation is that Dr Minhas' parent organisation, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi, has recalled him. Dr Minhas was on deputation in PAU.

Dr G S Saroa and Harmeet Singh Khingra, president and vice-president of PAU Teachers' Association said they will meet the vice-chancellor. 'We met the registrar Dr R K Mahey today and asked him about the case. Dr Mahey said all he knew was that Dr Minhas had been recalled by ICAR. We have met Dr Minhas too and he did not even know ICAR needed him back. We have sought time with Dr Kang for tomorrow and will be in a better situation to speak on the matter after this meeting,' they said.

The brewing controversy, however, can be gauged from the fact that not only is the campus shocked, even the PAU board of management is unhappy. Jung Bahadur Singh Sangha, member of the board, who is known to be a die-hard supporter of the V-C, too, has expressed shock.

'This is a shocking and unfortunate development. We do not know the exact reasons but I have seen how Dr Minhas has worked during his two years stay at PAU. He is not only a great scientist but also an asset to the university,' said Sangha.

Chairman of Punjab Farmers' Commission and former V-C of PAU G S Kalkat said, 'I do not have any information about this issue but will take up the matter with the vice-chancellor. As far as Dr Minahs is concerned, I came in contact with him after he joined PAU and I rate him as a great scientist.'

Breaking his silence over the his sudden exit from Punjab Agricultural University, Dr P S Minhas said, 'I had come to serve my alma matar and my state. We all know the crisis from which PAU and Punjab agriculture have been going through and I felt I could make some contribution in resolving the issues. I was doing just that.' Dr Minhas, who was working as Assistant Director General at IACR before he came to PAU more than two years ago,said, 'When I took the decision to come to PAU for four years, many discourage me but I was sure myself and came here.'

Dr Minhas is, however, was not ready to talk about this sudden development or his relationship with the vice-chancellor. 'I never had any conflict with Dr Kang. We have been doing as asked,' he said. Dr Minhas is considered one of those who do not work by the clock and can be seen actively participating in both administrative tasks as well as at the laboratories. 'PAU has suffered a lot of financial crisis and my aim always has been to ensure that the grants don't lapse. I drew up a plan where in we could spend Rs 76 crore in one year on our labs. Modernising PAU's labs and research station was something which we needed to do direly. The very look of these labs and research stations have changed and I think these are my achievements,' he said. When asked whether he would oppose this decision, Dr Minhas refused to comment. 'I have not thought about all this. I have never had to face such a situation in 32 years of my career.'
11.06.2010

Profile of PAU VC Manjit Singh Kang

Brief bio-data of Dr Manjit Singh Kang, Vice Chancellor, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India

Dr Manjit Singh Kang, after graduation from PAU in agriculture and animal husbandry in 1968, got his Master's Degree in Plant Genetics from the Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, USA in 1971.
He obtained MA in Botany from the Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, USA in 1977 and Ph.D. in Crop Science (Genetics & Plant Breeding) in 1977 from the University of Missouri-Columbia, USA in 1977.
He started his career as Research Associate at the Washington University, Saint Louis, USA in 1977. He served as Research Station Manager with Cargill Inc. for two years and then joined the University of Missouri Columbia as Plant Breeder in 1980. He worked as Assistant Professor in the University of Florida during 1981-86. He joined as Associate Professor at the Louisiana State University in 1986 and was promoted to Professor in the same University in 1990. He has now retired from this position to serve as Vice Chancellor of Punjab Agricultural University.
During his career, Dr Kang has made outstanding contributions in the field of Plant Breeding and Quantitative Genetics. He has authored/edited several books. He has contributed 35 book chapters and encyclopedia essays in his field of specialization. He has more than 110 refereed articles and 136 other publications to his credit. He has guided seven Ph.D and six M.Sc students in their research work and served on Advisory Committees of dozens to M.Sc and Ph.D. students.
He has provided outstanding leadership in this profession and organized many national and international conferences. He has won many honors and professional awards, such as Fellow of American Society of Agronomy, Fellow of Crop Science Society of America and a U.S. Fulbright Senior Scholar to Malaysia in 1999. He is a Sigma Xi (Scientific Research Society) Distinguished Lecturer (2007-2009).
Dr. Kang joined the PAU as Vice Chancellor on April 30, 2007.

Court case Sat Pal Gupta vs PAU

Punjab Agricultural University
Sat Pal Gupta son of Shri Jagan Nath, retired PAU employee, resident of H. No.HJ 359, Housing Board Colony, BRS Nagar, Ludhiana.

(Complainant)

Vs.


1. The Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana through Vice-Chancellor:


2. The Comptroller, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
(Opposite parties)


O R D E R


1. Complainant retired on superannuation from service of opposite party no.1 on 30.6.2007. He was entitled for pensionary benefits. But opposite party paid pension upto October, 2007. Payment of pension for November and December, 2007 upto January 2008 was not made. Pension for November and December 2007 was paid on 24.3.2008 and for Jan.2008 on 31.3.2008. Such act of opposite party in delaying the payment of pension, by filing the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, is claimed amounting to unfair trade practice, infringing his right as a consumer. He for delayed payment of pension for three months sought compensation of Rs.50,000/- as well as interest thereon.

2. Opposite parties in reply admitted factual claim of the complainant qua his retirement on superannuation and making delayed payment of pension. But averred that pension scheme for employees was introduced in the year 1991-92 and effective from 1.1.1986. Pension fund was constituted with matching share of 10% of the salary and interest earned on investment made out of surplus funds. Investment of pension funds was made in Nationalize Bank carrying interest 15-16% in the year 1991-91 which came down to 7-8% in the year 2005-06. With this arrangement, the pension fund lasted for 20-21 years. Pension fund has got depleted and there were no funds to pay the pension to the employees. Govt. of Punjab was approached to replenish the pension fund. An expert committee was constituted to suggest the matter and the committee held meeting with the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 17.6.2008 but still funds have not been released by the State Govt. Opposite parties managed to pay pension upto Jan.2008 out of its own funds available on account of encashment of FDRs and also from the 10% matching share deposited in the pension funds. Hence, there was no delay in paying the pension to the complainant. Further claimed that the complaint is barred by principle of res-judicata in writ petition no.9483 of 2008 filed before the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, as no order has been passed for payment of interest. So, this Fora can not pass order of payment of interest.

3. In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties led their evidence by way of affidavits and documents and stood heard through their respective counsels.

4. Contention of the complainant is that despite having sufficient amount in fixed deposit as evident from statement Ex.C.3, obtained under Right to Information Act, the opposite party failed to pay pension timely. Hence, for delayed payment, would be entitled for interest.

5. As far as the legal position is concerned, same is settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case State of Kerala and Ors. Vs. M. Padmanabhan Nair, reported in 1985 AIR (Supreme Court), page 356. Ratio of the case is that employer is liable to pay interest on the delayed payment of pension. But in that case, employee had retired on 19.5.1973 and was paid pension on 14.8.1975, after delay of 2 years and three months. Suit filed for interest was decreed by the trial court. But interest was reduced by the first appellate court to 6%, which was confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court as well as by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

6. In that case, the delay in granting pension was deliberate. Whereas in the instant case, delay is only of few months, that too on account of financial crunch with the opposite party. Pension for the months of November and December,2007 was paid on 24.3.2008 and for January,2008 was paid on 31.3.2008. If the opposite party at that time had any amount in fixed deposit out of pension funds, naturally such fixed deposit could not have been encashed pre-maturely as to affect the rate of interest. Therefore, if payment of pension was delayed by 2 or three months, in such circumstances it can not be equated that opposite party intentionally delayed payment of pension. Delay accrued due to financial crunch with the opposite party, qua which there is affidavit Ex.RW1/A of Sh. Rattan Lal working in Controller Branch of opposite party no.1. Also appears that for release of pension, Association of Pensioners of opposite party no.1 filed writ petition no.9483 of 2008 before the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 27.5.2008 issued direction to release the pension within one month and thereafter opposite party no.1 sought extension from the Hon'ble High Court vide order Ex.R2 dated 31.12.2008 and Ex. R.3 dated 9.1.2009. Time through these orders was extended to release the pension of the employees. But no order qua payment of interest on pension was passed. In the instant case, delay in releasing the pension does not appear to be deliberate and intentional, so as to empower the complainant to seek interest on such delayed payment. Rather, such delay occurred due to financial crunch with the opposite party. Therefore, finding no merit, the complaint is dismissed.

How PAU project fell through

LUDHIANA: A prestigious research project was lost and around Rs 20 crore went down the drain allegedly due to the personal likes and dislikes of the powers that be and professional jealously.

A three-storeyed building constructed for the project, lying vacant near the campus of Punjab Agriculture University, has now been spruced up for housing the office of the Vice-Chancellor of Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Husbandry University. The project involved research on tick-borne diseases (TBD). Its main objective was to produce a vaccine against theilereiosis (one of the TBDs) affecting imported high milk-producing cattle (taurine) and their crossbreds.

To increase milk production the solution was upgrading of the local low-yield cattle (zebu) with the taurine milk breed of the West. A nationwide crossbreeding programme was launched in the Third Five Year Plan. But theilereiosis killed 90 per cent to 100 per cent of the imported taurine cattle and 30 to 70 per cent of the improved crossbreeds. The National Commission on Agriculture observed that the disease posed the biggest hurdle in the success of the programme as neither effective drug treatment nor a vaccine was available.

Keeping this situation in view, PAU in 1971 proposed a research project to the ICAR for evolving control measures against the disease for full funding. The ICAR sanctioned a scheme under the leadership of Dr B.S. Gill, the then Dean College of Veterinary Sciences. The scheme continued for five years. The team of Dr Gill developed a vaccine against theilereiosis for the first time in India. Before that only Israel had developed such a vaccine.

To ensure the continuity of the research, the ICAR sanctioned a two-year scheme. It also asked the Punjab Government to provide funds for the scheme and take it over. The state and Central governments provided massive funds for the new building.

According to Dr Gill, the success of the research attracted offers of collaboration from Edinburgh University, the Queensland Animal Research Institute and Cambridge University. FAO and ICAR experts visited PAU and recommended to the ICAR to create a Centre of Excellence on TBD.

Dr Gill visited Australian TBD Laboratories in June, 1984, to acquaint himself with research work there. On his return Dr Gill was asked to explain why he left for Australia without the permission of the PAU vice-Chancellor. Further during the visit of Dr Gill to Australia, the Vice-Chancellor revised the building and site plan. This started a controversy. Bitter letters were exchanged between Dr Gill and the Vice-Chancellor, Dr Sukhdev Singh. As Dr Gill was nearing retirement, he suggested that the building should be got constructed commercially to be completed within one year. The Board of Management approved this proposal. But the building actually took five and a half years to complete. The university authorities continued to adopt an indifferent attitude, alleged Dr Gill, and the gulf between him and the Vice-Chancellor went on widening.

After Dr Gill's retirement, Dr Y. Bhattacharyaryulu, was targeted by the powers that be. He was humiliated and later left PAU for Haryana Agricultural University for a lower grade post to save his pension. The university authorities in 1988 merged the TBD scheme with the new Department of Immunology of the College of Veterinary Science despite a warning from the ICAR, said Dr Gill. Despite spending nearly Rs 20 crore, well-equipped laboratories and ample staff and funds, the scheme flopped.

DR. MIKHA SINGH AULAKH Vs. DR. RAJ KUMAR MAHEY, REGISTRAR, AGRICULTURE UNIVER COCP Nop 2231 of 2010


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

In CWP No.15508 of 2010

Date of decision: 04.3.2011

Dr. Mikha Singh Aulakh -----Petitioner
Vs.
Dr. Raj Kumar Mahey, Registrar, Agriculture University Ludhiana and
Another ----Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Dr. Balram Gupta, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Anamika Negi, for the petitioner.

Adarsh Kumar Goel,J.
This order will dispose of COCP Nos. 2231 and 2232 of 2010, as both the petitions involve common question.

Facts are being taken from COCP No.2231 of 2010. Case set out in the said petition is that the petitioner was appointed as Dean, College of
Agriculture, Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana on 29.1.2008 for four years or till his retirement from University service. He was due to superannuate on 31.8.2010. He filed CWP No.15508 of 2010 claiming that his age of superannuation should be treated to be 65 as per University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of teachers and other Academic staff in University and Colleges and other Measures for Maintenance of Standards in higher Education) Regulations 2010. The writ petition was ordered to be heard alongwith other connected matters and interim order of stay against retirement was also granted subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, vide order dated 7.9.2010, the petitioner was allowed to continue but by subsequent order dated 25.11.2010, he was relieved from the post of Dean and adjusted against the post of Professor.

This action being in violation of interim order granted in favour of the petitioner amounted to contempt.

We have by a separate order passed today dismissed the writ petition
holding that the regulations in question did not entitle the petitioner to
superannuate at the age of 65. In any case, the interim order was only against superannuation. It cannot be held that by relieving the petitioner form the post of Dean and posting him as Professor, there is willful violation of interim order of the Court. We, thus, do not find any ground to initiate contempt proceedings.

Both the petitions are dismissed.

(Adarsh Kumar Goel)
Judge

(Ajay Kumar Mittal)
Judge

Persistence of cold wave may hit crop production

Ludhiana: The persistence of the intense cold wave may result in a dip in crop production hitting the farming community hard, experts said on Sunday.

While assuring farmers that the current temperate will not significantly affect crop production, experts from the Punjab Agricultural University have pointed out that a further dip in mercury or the prolongation of the cold wave may affect agriculture.Even currently, dense fog has hit the growth of potatoes, peas, papayas and green vegetables.Meanwhile, city dwellers may have to put up with the cold for another two days, according to the PAU weather department. The snowfall in the northern hills saw the mercury level in Ludhiana dropping to 11.4 degree Celsius on Sunday from 14 degree Celsius on Saturday. The minimum temperate was recorded as 8 degree Celsius.

Colleges affiliated with this University

Total number of colleges affiliated with this University = 2
1 PAU Agricultural College, Gurdaspur
2 Punjab Agricultural Management and Extension Training Institute (PAMETI), Ludhiana


Some other Colleges in Punjab
Government Rajindra College, Bathinda
Gurukashi Marg
Bathinda (District Bathinda (Bhatinda))
Punjab
Baring Union Christian College BUC, Batala

Batala (District Gurdaspur)
Punjab
National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research NIPER, Mohali
Sector 67
Mohali (District Mohali)
Punjab
SD College for Women, Moga
3, Jawahar Nagar
Moga (District Moga)
Punjab
Swami Sarvanand Institute of Engineering and Technology and Science, Dinanagar
Dayanand Math
G.T. Road
Talwani Village
Dinanagar (District Gurdaspur)
Punjab


Bhai Gurdas Group, Sangrur

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