Central Information Commission
Sunil Kumar Yadav vs Ordnance Factory Board on 6 April, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: CIC/OFBKO/A/2019/111921
In the matter of:
Sunil Kumar Yadav
... Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Ordnance Factory Recruitment Centre
Ambajhari, Nagpur - 440021
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 07/08/2018 CPIO replied on : 04/09/2018 First appeal filed on : 13/11/2018 First Appellate Authority order : 12/12/2018 Second Appeal filed on : 09/03/2019 Date of Hearing : 05/04/2021 Date of Decision : 05/04/2021 The following were present:
Appellant: Present over VC at Kanpur Respondent: Shri V.V Bharde, Joint Director and CPIO, present over VC at Nagpur Information Sought:
The appellant has stated that he has appeared for the trade examination conducted by OFRC. In this context he has sought the following information:
- Provide reasons for not awarding him 5 marks on account of Ex-Trade Apprentice in the said examination.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the satisfactory reply. Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing: The appellant submitted that due to some technical error in his application he was deprived of 5 marks.
The CPIO reiterated the contents of the reply given vide letter dated 04.09.2018. He further submitted that the respondent had no role to play as, the form had to be filled by the applicant correctly. Moreover, even if 5 marks were awarded the applicant could not have make it to the merit list.
Observations:
Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 04.09.2018 provided a point-wise reply. The FAA vide order dated 12.12.2018 upheld the CPIO's reply. The Commission observed that there was no human intervention and the whole process of application was online. Moreover, the appellant's grievance relating to not awarding him 5 marks on account of Ex-
Trade Apprentice in the said examination cannot be redressed under the RTI Act.
Decision:
In view of the above observations, the reply of the CPIO is treated as just and proper. No action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयु त) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182594 / दनांक/ Date