Home » Home » Order on Appeal No E260-04/22 Saeed Rashid Vs Comsats University

Order on Appeal No E260-04/22 Saeed Rashid Vs Comsats University

The assertion of the Respondent that the request for information has not been routed through proper channel is legally untenable as there is no such requirement in the Act, 2017.

The argument of the Respondent that the applicant has not stated purpose for seeking information is also legally untenable as there is no such requirement in the Act, 2017. In fact, Section (5) specifically bars officials from seeking purpose from applicants for getting access to information.

This commission finds it unfortunate that instead of going through the provisions of the Act, 2017, officers employ incendiary tactics of compelling citizens to describe motives for seeking information.

This commission maintains that disclosure of the requested information is warranted by both the letter as well as the spirit of the law. The requested information includes: tenure details, Scale: BPS/TTS, status: (Permanent/Contract), salary: (lump sum/As per scale), resignation status/ leaving date, any Ex-Pakistan leave granted/avail, any No Objection Certificate (NOC) granted, any medical leave granted/avail, number of students completed their MS/PhD under supervision of a government employee and any administrative responsibility (Dean/Chairman/HOD etc.) assigned during the tenure.

This commission is not a trial court. If there is any discrepancy in the application form submitted by the person concerned, this commission cannot take any action against the Respondent. The Appellant should approach the relevant legal forum for any remedy to address his grievance.

Download Order

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Loading. . . .

Skip to content