SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 9125

के(cid:7008)(cid:7076)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:6981),मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई (cid:7408)द(cid:7016)ली, New Delhi – 110067 ि(cid:7367)तीय अपील सं(cid:6990)या/ Second Appeal No. CIC/RPCAU/A/2021/616235 In the matter of:

Pankaj Kumar … अपीलकता(cid:6981)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO, …(cid:7079)ितवादीगण /Respondent Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa, Samastipur – 848125 Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:


































R TI Application filed on:22.01.2021
CPIO replied on:18.02.2021
First Appeal filed on:23.02.2021
First Appellate Authority order:16.03.2021
Second Appeal received on:02.05.2021
Date of Hearing:07.09.2022
The following were present:

Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Kumar, participated in the hearing through video conference from NIC Samastipur Respondent: Shri. P.K. Pranav, CPIO & Associate Professor & Shri. Mahesh Hooda, Deputy Registrar (Recruitment) from Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University participated in the hearing through video conference from NIC Samastipur

O R D E R

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI Application dated 22.01.2021 seeking information as under:

“Skill supporting staff OMR related examination 27/12/2020.

1. Mera OMR sheet ka permanit copy chahiye.

2. Category wise cutoff marks kitna hai permanit copy.

3. OMR sheet ka permanit copy chahiye qualified candidates ka 44 Mera Roll No. 21106, REG No. 23179.”

Shri Ranjan Layak, CPIO, RTI Cell, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Samstipur vide letter dated 18.02.2021, enclosed a letter given by the PIO (Selection), Dr. Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Samstipur dated 07.02.2021 wherein informed to the Appellant as under:

“The appointment process for the post of Skilled Supporting Staff against Advt. No. 03/2019 dt. 28.05.2019 has been not completed as yet.”

Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 23.02.2021. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 16.03.2021, informed as under:

Grounds for Second Appeal:

The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. Appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The Appellant stated that no information has been furnished by the Respondent till date and the Respondent are trying to mislead by stating that the recruitment process has not been completed.

The Respondent submitted that the requisite information could not be furnished to the Appellant as the recruitment was still under process. However, the recruitment process is now complete, therefore, Shri. Mahesh Hooda, Deputy Registrar (Recruitment) vide letter dated 31.08.2022 has furnished the requisite information to the CPIO and the content of the same are as under:

The Commission queried the Respondent regarding the enclosure sent along with the First Appellate Order dated 16.03.2021, to which the Respondent submitted that initial reply 07.02.2021 was enclosed with the order since, the recruitment process was still not complete.

Upon being queried by the Commission, the Respondent submitted that the recruitment process got concluded in April, 2021, so the Commission further queried the Respondent that why such information is being furnished at the stage of Second Appeal if the process concluded back in April, 2021, to which the Respondent could not provide a cogent explanation.

The Commission further asked the Respondent whether the letter dated 31.08.2022 has been sent to the Appellant, to which the Respondent replied in negative and he further submitted that he has brought all the hard copies of the requisite information including certified copies of Appellant’s OMR sheet, so the Commission orally directed the Respondent to hand over the requisite information to the Appellant.

The Appellant interjected that information regarding OMR Sheets of other qualified candidates as sought vide point 3 of the RTI Application, to which the Commission remarked that the said information cannot be provided as the same falls under the category of exempted information as per section 8 of the RTI Act and the Appellant concurred with the above remark of the Commission.

Decision:

Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that that though the Respondent has attended the instant RTI Application within a stipulated time frame, no information has been furnished to the Appellant, despite the fact the recruitment process got completed in April, 2021. The Commission strictly admonishes the Respondent for no providing the desired information to the Appellant even after completion of the said recruitment process. The Commission sternly cautions the Respondent public authority that in future, they shall refrain from such cavalier approaches while dealing with the RTI Applications.

The Commission further observes that the Respondent has complied wit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top