Central Information Commission
Mr.Chakradhar Pandey vs Ministry Of Labour And Employment on 13 July, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001411+001416/8501
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001411+001416
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Chakradhar Pandey
F-213, Opposite Mangal Market,
Post Office, Laxmi Nagar,
Delhi - 92.
Respondent : Ms. Sarojni Rane
Public Information Officer & Regional PF Commissioner Grade-II Employees Provident Fund Organization, Head Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan, 14- Bhikaiji Cama Place, New Delhi 110066.
RTI application filed on : 21/01/2010 PIO replied : 05/02/2010 First appeal filed on : 25/02/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 02/03/2010 Second Appeal received on : 04/05/2010 Information Sought
The Appellant sought information regarding - • The marks obtained in each subject by the Appellant with roll no. 5403134368, in the SSA Examination for the Delhi Division on 06/09/2009 and the cut off marks decided for qualifying that same exam.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO) The marks obtained by the appellant is unavailable, however the cut off marks for general category in the Delhi Region were 202.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory Information provided by the PIO. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA dismissed the appeal.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory Information provided by the PIO and dismissal of appeal by the FAA. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Chakradhar Pandey;
Respondent: Ms. Sarojni Rane, Public Information Officer & Regional PF Commissioner Grade-II;
The appellant has given an exam for selection for the post of social security assistant. He ha sought to know his marks obtained in the test since he was not selected. The PIO states that the selection test is done through another agency as per the Recruit Rules and hence information about the marks is not held by the Public Authority. If a public authority designates another agency to do its primary function like selection of candidates for its posts it is incumbent on the public authority to provide information about the conduct of such tests. Public Authorities cannot get away from their responsibility of having a transparent process for selection of employees. The Commission therefore directs the PIO to obtain the information from the agency who conducted the test on behalf of the public authority and provide it to the appellant.
The PIO states that she is receiving a very large number of RTI applications for supply of marks in the selection tests. Under such circumstances it would be advisable for the public authority to display this information suo-moto as per the requirement of Section-4 of the RTI Act.
The Commission under its powers under Section 25(5) of the RTI Act recommends the public authority that the information about marks of all those who appeared for selection test may be put-up on the website.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to give the complete information to the appellant before 30 July 2010.
This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 13 July 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(YM)