Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Bhola Vishwakarma vs University Of Allahabad on 20 April, 2020

Author: Vanaja N Sarna

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                             केंद्रीय सच
                                       ु ना आयोग
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                              बाबा गंगनाथ मागग
                             Baba Gangnath Marg
                        मनु नरका, नई ददल्ऱी - 110067
                        Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                             Decision no.: CIC/UOALD/A/2018/164222/03224
                                         File no.: CIC/UOALD/A/2018/164222

In the matter of:
Bhola Vishwakarma
                                                             ... Appellant
                                      VS
Central Public Information Officer
Jagat Taran Girl's Degree College,
(University of Allahabad)
32, Hamilton Road, George Town, Allahabad - 211 002
                                                            ...Respondent

RTI application filed on : 07/06/2018 CPIO replied on : 27/06/2018 First appeal filed on : 05/07/2018 First Appellate Authority order : Not on record Second Appeal dated : 18/10/2018 Date of Hearing : 15/04/2020 Date of Decision : 15/04/2020 The following were present:

Appellant: Present over phone Respondent: Professor Kamla Devi, Principal and CPIO, present over phone Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information in respect of appointment of Assistant Professor in Department of Education with reference to advertisement No.JTDC/1/2017 dated 10/10/2017:
1. Academic (details of API marks granted by Screening Committee) marks and marks scored by the appellant in the interview held for the said post.
2. What was the rank of the appellant in the final merit list.
1
3. Various details of the selected/waitlisted candidates in the format mentioned in the RTI Application.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO has not provided the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant submitted that he contested points no. 1 and 3 in his first appeal which was not disposed of.
The CPIO submitted that a revised reply in respect of point no. 1 can be given with regard to his own case but the information sought in respect of point no. 3 is related to third parties personal information and hence is exempted u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

Observations:

Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that limited information was already given in respect of point no. 3 of the RTI application and any further direction is not possible, the information sought being exempted u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. In respect of point no. 1 the CPIO shall provide a revised reply. Decision:
In view of the above observations, the CPIO is directed to provide a revised reply as per record in respect of point no.1, within 15 days from the date of lifting of the lockdown.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयक् ु त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित सत्यापित प्रतत) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दिन ंक / Date 2