Central Information Commission
Mr. Arun Kumar Attree vs Union Public Service Commission on 12 January, 2011
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/A/2009/000804SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 11 January 2011
Date of decision : 12 January 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri Arun Kumar Attree
Flat No.33, PTS Colony,
Malviya Nagar, New Delhi.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Union Public Service Commission,
(Sangh Lok Seva Ayog),
Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi - 110 069.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Shri Kulbir Singh, Joint Director & CPIO,
(ii) Shri D.B. Das, Under Secretary,
(iii) Shri Naresh Kaushik, Advocate,
(iv) Smt. Amita Kalkar Chaudhary, Advocate
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. Both the parties were present during the hearing and made their submissions.
3. The Appellant had sought some items of information concerning the Civil CIC/WB/A/2009/000804SM Services Main Examination 2008. The CPIO had provided some limited information but had declined to disclose the others by claiming exemption under Section 8(1) (d) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act and also by referring to some Supreme Court orders. The Appellate Authority had endorsed the decision of the CPIO.
4. During the hearing, the Respondents handed over the details of the cut off marks to the Appellant. The Appellant, however, was insistent that the other details about the marks awarded to him in the Commerce and Accountancy Paper1 should be provided to him. He further submitted that in spite of the denial of the CPIO to part with such information, already the segregated details of marks awarded to all the candidates appearing in this particular examination were available in the Net and, therefore, there was no reason why the UPSC should not disclose/the desired information now. In fact, the Appellant has already handed over a CD containing the entire information in this regard available on the Net. Although the Respondents argued that such illegal access to the database by hacking could not be cited as a basis for disclosure of information, we think this matter needs serious introspection on the part of the UPSC. If, indeed, the information contained in the CD provided by the Appellant is correct and genuine, there is no reason why this information should not be disclosed. There is all the more reason to disclose the information so as to discourage hackers to access data illegally and make it available in the public domain. Thus, an initiative which should rightly lie in the domain of the UPSC is being unnecessarily usurped by others.
5. In the light of the peculiar circumstances of this case and without creating any precedent, we would like to direct the CPIO to disclose the CIC/WB/A/2009/000804SM remaining information desired by the Appellant provided the information contained in the CD as above is found to be correct. If it is found not to be correct, the CPIO shall inform the Appellant accordingly.
6. With the above direction, the appeal is disposed off.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/WB/A/2009/000804SM