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/MOYAS/A/2024/138196 Aseem Sharma … अपीलकता(cid:6981)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO: Sports Authority of India, New Delhi …(cid:7079)ितवादीगण/Respondents Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 22.08.2024 FA : 03.10.2024 SA : 22.11.2024 CPIO : Not on record FAO : Not on record Hearing : 11.02.2026 Date of Decision: 11.02.2026 CORAM:

Hon’ble Commissioner P R Ramesh O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.08.2024 seeking information on the following points:

“Kindly supply my result with marks obtained in the interview held on 15 June 2022 (copy enclosed) on Zoom Meeting and result of 50 selected candidates list with their marks as the list is not available on website of SAI nor in any of the leading Newspapers, under the provision of Right to Information Act 2005, Necessary Postal order worth Rs 10/-bearing Sr. No.63f 531418 dated 22.08.2024 in favour of PIO cum Dy. Director/Asstt. Director (khelo India) is enclosed here with.”

2. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 03.10.2024 FAA’s order, if any, is not available on record.

3. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 22.11.2024.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Present through video-conference.

Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar Meena, Young Professional (Legal) and Ms. Ashwini Gunukula, Young Professional (Legal)

4. The Appellant inter alia submitted that relevant information has not been provided by the PIO. He averred that after filing of this instant Second Appeal, FAA passed an order dated 24.02.2025. He averred that his marks have been provided to him, however, no reply has been provided with respect to marks of selected candidates

5. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that marks of the Appellant have been duly provided to the Appellant vide order dated 24.02.2025. Shri Rajeev Kumar Meena placed on record copy of order of FAA. A written submission dated 10.02.2026 has been received from the CPIO. The relevant extract hereof is as under:

i. According to the applicant's records, an RTI application dated 22.08.2024 was stated to have been filed before the CPI0, Khelo India Division, seeking certain information. However, the respondent respectfully submits that the said RTI application, purportedly sent by the applicant through postal mode, was never received by the respondent. Accordingly, no records relating to the alleged RTI application are available with the respondent.

ii. The appellant thereafter preferred a First Appeal dated 03.10.2024 before the First Appellate Authority received on 15.10.2024, Khelo India Division, seeking the result of the applicant along with the details of 50 selected candidates. In response, a reply dated 24.02.2025 was furnished, wherein only the marks obtained by the applicant were communicated, in accordance with the applicable norms.

iii. In the meantime, an Original Application No. 755 of 2025 on the same grounds has been filed. It is presently sub judice before the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Shimla Circuit, where the matter is pending adjudication, and has been adjourned to 19.03.2026.

İv. Notwithstanding the above. to maintain transparency and ensure timely communication, individual offer letters have been duly issued to all selected candidates, thereby completing the process of appointment and official intimation.

v. It is also submitted that, pursuant to the recruitment notification for 50 Young Professionals, a total of 654 applications were received by the department. Out of these, 183 candidates were shortlisted for screening, 50 candidates were placed on the merit list, and finally, offer l