Central Information Commission
Sandeep Sharma vs Department Of Posts on 18 June, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/POSTS/A/2023/112588
Sandeep Sharma ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: O/o Sr Supdt. of Post
Office, New Delhi ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 04.10.2022 FA : 21.11.2022 SA : 17.03.2023
CPIO : 07.11.2022 FAO : 28.12.2022 Hearing : 12.06.2024
Date of Decision: 14.06.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 04.10.2022 seeking information on the following points:
(i) Total number of candidates selected and joined duty in GDs recruitment (Including BPM, ABPM, GDSMD, GDSMC) from 2010 to 2022 in Delhi Circle who passed their matriculation examination from Secondary School Development and Certification Council, Delhi.
(ii) Total number of candidates selected and joined duty in MTS and Postman Direct recruitment from 2010 to 2022 in Delhi Circle who passed their matriculation Page 1 of 3 examination from Secondary School Development and Certification Council, Delhi.
(iii) Total number of candidates selected and joined duty in PA Cadre Direct recruitment from 2010 to 2022 in Delhi Circle who passed their matriculation examination from Secondary School Development and Certification Council, Delhi.
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 07.11.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-
(i) There is no such candidate available as per the record. So, the information sought may be treated as nil.
(ii) The information sought is not maintained in this office.
(iii) Information asked for is not available in compiled manner.
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.11.2022 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 28.12.2022 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.03.2023.
5. The appellant remained present through video conference and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh IP (PG), Ms. Neha IP (PG), Ms. Minakshi IP (PG), Mr. Mandeep Singh IP 1st, Mr. Sanjeet Hooda IP 2nd SD, Ms. Heena Dutta DG attended the hearing in Person.
6. The appellant inter alia submitted that an incomplete and wrong reply has been provided by the Respondent.
7. The respondents while defending their case inter alia submitted that the information sought by the Appellant relates to MTS/Postman/Postal Assistant Cadre who passed matriculation from a particular board and that too of a very long period of about 12 years from 2010 to 2022, it is pertinent to note that collection or collation of such information Page 2 of 3 which is spread across voluminous records and almost innumerable files would be an onerous task and would involve disproportionate amount of time and resources of public authority. Also, per section 7(9) of RTI Act, 2005, information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the Public Authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. Moreover, such collection and collation of information would be tantamount to creation of new information which had not already existed with the CPIO, however, in RTI Act, 2005 nowhere provision is there for creation of new information.
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that in the instant case, the Appellant wants CPIO to collect & collate information relating to MTS/Postman/Postal Assistant Cadre who passed matriculation from a particular board and that too of a very long period from 2010 to 2022. The Commission observes that collection and collation of information sought in the instant RTI Application will disproportionately divert the resources of public authority thereby attracting provisions of Section 7(9) of the RTI Act. Hence, no relief is ordered in the matter. With this observation the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनां क/Date: 14.06.2024 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कनल एस एस िछकारा ($रटायड) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO O/o Sr Supdt of Post Office, New Delhi, South West Division, Channaykyapuri, New Delhi - 110021
2. Sandeep Sharma Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)