> AICTE is not a private entity, yes, I know and agree on this. > We must have a copy of MoU to get full > details. I am not against this, I just doubt if we can get something useful from this.
> AICTE should not hide these documents. They should not but a private party is involved in this. Section 8 (1) (d) is favoring them. > Most important things is - > "they are hiding some info (MoU), MoU must be having something sercet which > they do not want to be made public" > I am sure they are. Well I had signed a MoU with a renowned company [dealing with linux], So, I can say that the company can ask the opposite party, not to share or disclose agreed terms and this is what section 8(1)(d) covers, but to get the requisite information, you can twist you query, instead of directly asking for MOU. Anyways, I am still not against your request for MOU. > MHRD recommendations were came this month, I filed RTI this 2-3 month back. Now, the question is, Is AICTE authorized to take decision independently without consulting MHRD. What is the relation between MHRD and AICTE. How these two work. What AICTE can do with and without MHRD or any other agency. is there any other agency which AICTE should consult before taking such decisions. if yes, did AICTE consulted that agency and what was the communication between AICTE and that agency. If AICTE is dependent on MHRD recommendations, why was the decision taken hurriedly. Why there was a delay in MHRD recommendations. Truly speaking I am not very interested in MOU, I want to know what made them think, that propritory software is more superior that FOSS. What research they or their expert team did to reach to this conclusion. I want to know and would like to challenge their findings. I am bad in writing, but hope you got my point. There are many experts here, I don't understand why there is so much silence. Sunil Datta www.opensourcenuts.com -- LUG@IITD - http://tinyurl.com/ycueutm
