Central Information Commission
Shri Umesh Trivedi vs Dep’T. Of Personnel & Training - Staff ... on 2 September, 2009
TO BE ISSUED IN HINDI
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/00544 dated 28.2.2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Shri Umesh Trivedi
Respondent - Dep't. of Personnel & Training - Staff Selection Commission
Decision announced 2.9.'09
Facts:
By an application of 3.12.07 Shri Umesh Trivedi of Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan applied to the CPIO, SSC seeking the following information:
"1. How many marks were scored by the appellant in Tax Assistants Examination 2006?
2. In General Category what was defined as 'cut off marks' i.e. what minimum marks were scored by the general category candidates for getting appointment.
3. What was the minimum number of Key Depression/hour provided for Computer Data Entry Speed Test for General Category candidates as base?
4. Please arrange to provide selection list of Tax Asstt. 2006, which should be up to the marks scored by me. Please also intimate how many candidates have been selected for appointment from this list."
To this Shri Umesh Trivedi received a response from Under Secretary Shri V. K. Aggarwal, CPIO dated 27.12.07, as follows:
"In Tax Assistants' Examination, 2006 you (Sr. No. 1705210 General Category) have achieved total 187 marks. Since you had qualified in the ability test, your name was considered for final selection but you had not been finally selected because under General Category Examination on CBDT Stream the last candidate scored 189 marks, whereas under CBEC Stream the last candidate scored 239 marks.
Only selected candidates are included in the Seniority list."
Not satisfied with the response to Q. Nos. 3 & 4 Shri Trivedi moved an appeal on 22.1.08 on the following grounds:
1"1. At Sr. No. 3, I had sought information regarding basis of selection of how many Key Depression per hour for General category candidates in Computer Data Entry Speed Test, which has not been supplied.
2. At Sr. No. 4, I had desired to know that how many candidates were finally selected and at what place my name existed, besides seeking list/information about that place. But I have not been provided with the information about my number in the list and number of candidates finally selected. For this I had sent IPO of Rs. 100/- @ Rs. 2/- per page."
Upon this, Shri Umesh Trivedi received a response again from CPIO Shri Aggarwal on 8.2.06, as below:
"Kindly refer to Commission's letter dated 27.12.2007 bearing No. 1/3/2007-RTI/456 in which information has been provided to you that only qualified candidates are included in the final seniority list. Since you had not been declared qualified, therefore, the question of your rank/place in the seniority list does not arise."
Shri Trivedi has then moved a second appeal before us with the following prayer "Please arrange to provide information sought from the CPIO and also penalize the CPIO for providing misleading information. It is also pertinent to mention here that how one person namely Shri V. K. Aggarwal can be CPIO as well as First Appellate Authority.
The appeal was heard by videoconference on 2.9.2009. The following are present:
Appellant at NIC Studio, Sawai Madhopur (Raj) Shri Umesh Trivedi Respondents at CIC Studio, New Delhi.
Shri P.S. Ahuja, S.O., SSC HQ Shri V. K. Aggarwal, US Shri Trivedi invited our attention to the questions in his first appeal and submitted that these have remained unanswered. Upon this respondent Shri P.S. Ahuja, S.O., SSC HQs submitted that in such examinations an 8000 key depression per hour was compulsory as a qualifying skill test. No candidate 2 having a depression of less than 8000 keys per hour was considered and, therefore, all successful candidates had at least a minimum of this depression. In this context, he invited the attention of appellant to the Employment News of 15.7.06 where the notice of the "Tax Assistants' Examination 2006" was issued on page 12 of which, it is laid down as follows:
"PART-II - SKILL TEST Data Entry Speed of 8,000 (eight thousands) Key Depression per hour on Computer (appropriate to the text) This "Data Entry Speed" skill Test would be of qualifying nature. Candidates allowed to take this text, will have to qualify the text at the prescribed speed on Computer, to be provided by the Commission or the agency authorized by the Commission to conduct such skill test at the Centre/venue so notified."
He also submitted that ranks are only assigned to candidates who have qualified. No rank is provided to a failed candidate. Shri Trivedi opined, however, that achieving a level of 8000 key depression per hour of Data Entry Speed could not have been achieved by all successful candidates, as this is a very demanding standard.
DECISION NOTICE We are of the view that the appeal of Shri Umesh Trivedi is thus more in the nature of seeking clarification than an appeal against failure to supply information. The information sought by appellant Shri Trivedi having been supplied, therefore, there is no substance in this appeal under the RTI Act and the same is, therefore, dismissed.
There is a valid question asked however as to how the CPIO has replied also as appellate authority. SSC is advised to ensure that this practice is eschewed with the appellate authority invariably responding to appeals unless the CPIO is directed to provide further information, but in that case, that direction can be the substance of the order of the appellate authority.
3Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 2.9.2009 Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Pankaj Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 2.9.2009 4