PIC Orders University of Gujrat to Disclose Recruitment Records for Registrar, Controller Posts
The Punjab Information Commission has ordered the University of Gujrat to provide most of the information sought about appointments to senior administrative posts at the university, while allowing the withholding of certain personal records under the Punjab Transparency and Right to Information Act 2013.
The directions were issued in Complaint No. 6-4-2026-21, titled Dr Rashid versus Vice Chancellor, University of Gujrat, during proceedings held at the commission’s office in Lahore.
According to the official order sheet, complainant Dr Rashid did not appear before the commission during the hearing. Barrister Shahzad Shabbir, legal adviser for the respondent public body, represented the University of Gujrat and submitted a written reply dated April 30 on behalf of the university administration.
The representative of the University of Gujrat during the hearing held on April 30, 2026 before the Punjab Information Commission argued that the original RTI application had certain procedural and technical deficiencies. However, it informed the commission that it was ready to provide all information not covered by exemptions under Section 13(1) of the RTI Act.
The case mainly concerned documents related to recruitment for the posts of Registrar and Controller of Examinations. The Commission was told that all requested information would be provided except the material related to affidavits submitted by all candidates for the two posts.
It noted that these affidavits contained personal information, including CNIC numbers and residential addresses. The commission ruled that such material was exempt from disclosure under Section 13(1)(b), adding that the affidavits had “no effect on recruitment” and no overriding public importance under Article 19-A of the Constitution.
The commission also examined the request for attested copies of academic transcripts and experience certificates of the three recommended candidates. It accepted the university’s position that these documents were not issued by the University of Gujrat and, therefore, attested copies could not be provided by the public body.
However, the commission directed the university to provide substantive details from those records, including academic qualifications, years of degree conferment, roll numbers, names of educational institutions and duration of relevant professional experience.
The university was also ordered to compile the information in documentary form and send it to the complainant along with the record sought at serial numbers 1 to 6 and 9 of the RTI application. The commission directed the university to inform it after compliance.
