##PAGE1##

के(cid:7008)(cid:7076)ीय सचू ना आयोग

Central Information Commission

बाबा गंगनाथ माग,(cid:6981) मिु नरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka

नई (cid:7408)द(cid:7016)ली, New Delhi – 110067

File No: CIC/NFLTD/C/2025/615780

PRANAV ANAND VIKRAM CHANDRA ….िशकायतकता(cid:6981)/Complainant

VERSUS

बनाम

The CPIO

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LIMITED,

RTI CELL, CORPORATE OFFICE,

A-11, SECTOR-24, NOIDA,

DISTT-GAUTAM NAGAR, U.P.- 201301 ….(cid:7079)ितवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing : 25.05.2026

Date of Decision : 25.05.2026

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Sudha Rani Relangi

Relevant facts emerging from complaint:

RTI application filed on : 17.01.2025

CPIO replied on : 12.02.2025

First appeal filed on : 17.02.2025

First Appellate Authority’s order : Nil

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 04.04.2025

Information sought:

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 17.01.2025 seeking the

following information:

“With reference to Post Engineer (Civil), Advt. No. 02 (NFL)/2024 Advt.

Date 11/06/2024, under RTI Act 2005, Please provide me certified copy

of the shortlisting criteria for Interview against Engineer Civil Post.

Page 1 of 5

1 / 6

Secondly, please provide me the full merit list of all the candidates out of

which some were shortlisted for interview and some got rejected along

with the reasons of rejection, if any.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 12.02.2025 stating as

under:

“Reply :- 1. Applicant may be advised to visit NFLs website and refer

clause E.b of the advertisement for Shortlisting & Selection Procedure.

2. Information pertaining to other candidates exempted under section

8.1(j) of RTI Act 2005.”

3. Aggrieved by the decision of the CPIO, the complainant filed a First

Appeal dated 17.02.2025.The FAA vide its order dated Nil, upheld the reply of

CPIO.

4. Challenging the FAA’s order, Complainant is before the Commission with

the instant Complaint.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Complainant: Absent.

Respondent: Shri Prakash Ranjan, CPIO along with Tarun Yadav, AM-HR

present in person.

5. Written statement of the CPIO is taken on record.

6. Complainant did not turn up for hearing in the NIC studio. However, to

maintain the principles of natural justice in conducting the fair hearing, the

Bench with the assistance of Registry tried to connect the Complainant

through audio conference call. On being contacted on call, the Complainant

stated that he has not received the requisite information from the CPIO and

FAA so far. Complainant contended that despite fulfilling the eligibility criteria,

he was also not selected for the subject post. Hence, this Complaint before the

Commission.

Page 2 of 5

2 / 6

7. CPIO stated that a point-wise reply has already been provided to the

Complainant on 12.02.2025. For point No. 1 of RTI application, CPIO clarified

that it was informed to the Complainant that shortlisting criteria for Interview

against Engineer Civil Post is already mentioned in the clause E.b of the

advertisement (copy of the advertisement is also attached). For point No. 2,

CPIO apprised the Bench that subject recruitment was done through lateral

hiring recruitment where candidates were shortlisted for interview based on

information provided in their application forms and scrutiny against

recruitment specifications mentioned in the Advertisement. Consequently, no

merit list exists prior to the interview. Additionally, reasons for rejection of

individual applicants are personal information of applicants and cannot be

disclosed under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

Decision

8. Heard the parties.

9. The Commission, upon a perusal of the records note that this is a

Complaint filed under Section 18(2) the RTI Act, 2005 where no further

direction for disclosure of information can be given in the light of the

judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chief Information

Commissioner and another Vs. State of Manipur & Another reported in

MANU/SC/1484/2011: AIR 2012 SC 864 wherein it was held as under:-

“…Therefore, the procedure contemplated under