Central Information Commission
Takkolu Basi Reddy vs Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti on 27 May, 2021
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/NAVVS/A/2019/648916
Takkolu Basi Reddy अपीलकता /Appellant
....अपीलकता
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti,
RTI Cell, B-15, Institutional Area,
Block B, Sector 62, Noida - 201307. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 27/05/2021
Date of Decision : 27/05/2021
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 12/04/2019
CPIO replied on : 23/05/2019
First appeal filed on : 30/05/2019
First Appellate Authority order : 17/07/2019
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : nil
1
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 12.04.2019 seeking information as follows-
1. ".....the marks of qualified candidates in the direct recruitment of principal posts exam conducted in the year 2004, February, by NVS. All the candidates, whoever qualified in written exam and then called for principal post interview.NVS had given advertisement in the year-2003,however,due to replacement of BJP Government by congress government in May, 2004, NVS had cancelled interviews for principal post and kept pending for one year without conducting interviews for principal posts. But in 2005, NVS had given fresh advertisement for principal posts and asked all 2003 applicants, no need to apply again, accordingly NVS has conducted exam for new applicants as well as old applicants in January 2006 at four places-New Delhi, Allahabad, Shillong & Chennai. Then NVS has conducted interviews from 31.03.2006 to 13.04.2006 for 390 candidates, who were qualified in written exam of January, 2006
2. .......the marks of 390 candidates in written exam of January 2006 exam and also their marks in interview given by selection committee for selection of candidates for the post of principal in NVS. Myself qualified in written exam in 2004 &in 2006 also and attended interview in 2006.hence I have decided to know the marks of 2004 exam qualified candidates and also the marks of 390 candidates who were called for interview and also their marks in 2006 interview myself also qualified in written as well as in interview in 2011exam conducted for vice-principals of JNVs on promotion .in the selection list my no. in merit was 25.I also want to know the marks of vice-
principals who attended interview in 2011 ,their written as well as their marks in interview."
The CPIO replied to the appellant on 23.05.2019 stating as follows:-
2Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 30.05.2019. FAA's order dated 17.07.2019 stated as follows:-
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio-conference.
Respondent: Represented by Krishna Gaur, Section Officer present through audio-conference.
The Appellant while narrating the factual context of his RTI Application stated that complete desired information was not provided by the CPIO till date. He went on to add that his grievance was his non selection to the post of Principal in NVS in 2004 and 2006 despite him clearing the written exams and appearing in the interview. He further stated that despite qualifying the written exam followed by an interview for the post of Vice Principal, JNV in 2011; he was again not selected for the said post which led him to file the instant RTI Application.
The Rep. of CPIO submitted that the information sought by the Appellant pertains to recruitment records for the exams conducted by NVS in the years 2004, 2006 and 2011 which are very old records dating back to 10-15 years ago. He further submitted that during the said period, NVS office had shifted twice and apparently, records of written exams got misplaced and are not traceable;3
however, whatever relevant records/information were available viz. Copy of Selection Committee Minutes, DPC Minutes, list of selected candidates, etc. have already been shared with the Appellant.
Regarding non selection of the Appellant, the Rep. of CPIO apprised the Commission the since the Appellant failed to meet the essential eligibility criteria of performance benchmark for the post of Principal, therefore his case was not recommended by the DPC.
Decision:
The Commission based upon a perusal of facts on record observes that the information sought for by the Appellant regarding the marks of other 390 candidate(s) in written exams and interview for the averred post(s) are third party's personal information per se which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This observation is in line with a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010 wherein the import of "personal information" envisaged under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act has been exemplified in the context of earlier ratios laid down by the same Court in the matter(s) of Canara Bank Vs. C.S. Shyam in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009; Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner & Ors., (2013) 1 SCC 212 and R.K. Jain vs. Union of India & Anr., (2013) 14 SCC 794.
In view of the foregoing observations, no relief can be ordered in the matter; irrespective of the fact that the relevant records are available or not.
In any case, the reply provided by the CPIO/FAA adequately suffices the information sought for by the Appellant in the RTI application as per the RTI Act.
However, the CPIO is advised to be careful in future and exercise due diligence while replying to RTI Application; and disclose only such information as is 4 permissible under the RTI Act subject to the applicability of exemption clause of Section 8/9 of the Act.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 5