Central Information Commission
Mr.R.K. Sonkar vs Reserve Bank Of India on 9 February, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003557/17252
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003557
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. R. K. Sonkar
Duplex No 7, Sagar Kunj,
Kolar Road, Bhopal-462042
Madhya Pradesh
Respondent : Mr. Ashok Joshi
PIO & General Manager Reserve Bank of India, DAPM (RIA Division), Central Office, Fort, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Mumbai-400001 RTI application filed on : 01/08/2011 PIO replied : 30/08/2011, 16/09/2011 First appeal filed on : 20/09/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 19/10/2011 Second Appeal received on : 30 /11/2011 Information Sought:
1. A copy each, duly authenticated, of my Performance Appraisal Reports (PARs) for the years commencing from 1999-2000 to 2010-11.
2. Marks awarded to me in interview vis-ã-vis to those selected during 1999-2000 to 2010-11.
3. Number of S.C./S.T. Officers called ,appeared and selected vis-à-vis General category Officers called, appeared and selected during 1999-2000 to 2010- 11.
4. A copy each duly authenticated, of correspondence relating to my PARs/ conduct, etc that might have taken place, if any, between Regional Offices and Central Office.
5. Specific grounds for continued rejection and non promotion from Grade C to Grade D during last 13 years.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
PIO(1 Reply-30/08/2011)
4. As per the records available, no correspondence has been exchanged with Central Office in connection with your Performance Appraisal Reports from 1999-2000 onwards.
5. As the aggregate marks secured by you in all the Panel Years were less than those secured by the last candidate selected for promotion in that particular year and in the years 2003, 2006, 2007 2008, 2009 & 2011 your interview marks were less than the minimum qualifying marks i.e. 80 required for promotion, you could not be empanelled for promotion to Grade 'D' during the last 13 years.
PIO's (2 Reply-16-09-2011) In continuation of our letter CO.HMRD: RIA 2375/07.50.01/2011-12 dated August 30, 2011, copies of your Performance Appraisal Reports for the years ending 1999-2000 to 2009-2010 as sought for by you are enclosed. The PAR for the year 2010-2011 has not been received.
Page 1 of 2Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
FAA upheld the decision given by CPIO and disposed off the appeal.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and unfair disposal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. R. K. Sonkar on video conference from NIC-Bhopal Studio: Respondent: Ms. Jonaki Sain, Dy. Legal Advisor and Mr. Ashok Joshi, PIO & General Manager on video conference from RBI Mumbai-Studio;
The PIO has given certain information but is now directed to provide the following information: 1- Query-1: Performance Appraisal Reports for the year 2010-11. 2- Query-2: Information relating to Grade-C to Grade-D for the last 10 years if has been provided to the SC/ST Commission. If it has not been provided to SC/ST Commission data will be provided for the last five years. 3- Query-3: List of officers appeared and selected during the last five years for promotion from Grade-C to Grade-D. Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as listed above to the Appellant before 05 March 2012.
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 09 February 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(SH) Page 2 of 2