Central Information Commission
Mr.Ajitsingh vs Staff Selection Commission on 24 June, 2013
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/SM/A/2012/001867
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 24/06/2013
Date of decision : 24/06/2013
Name of the Appellant : Sh. Ajit Singh,
D125, Sector No. 9, Chitrakoot Scheme,
Jaipur, Rajasthan
Name of the Public Authority : Central Public Information Officer,
Staff Selection Commission,
Block No. 12, CGO Complex, Lodhi raoad,
New Delhi 110003
The Appellant was present.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Shri R. Thakur, US & CPIO,
(ii) Shri A.K. Dadhich, US & CPIO
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. We heard both the parties.
3. Referring to the Combined Graduatelevel Examination 2011 in which he himself was a candidate, the Appellant had sought a variety of information including the cutoff marks for the interview for the Scheduled Caste candidates, copy of the detailed option for posts submitted by him and another person bearing a similar name but with a different roll number, the criteria for calling Scheduled Caste candidates for Computer Proficiency Test and the copy of the note prepared by the SSC on the reasons for not revising his result. CIC/SM/A/2012/001867 When he did not receive any reply from the CPIO within the stipulated period, he preferred an appeal and also sent a complaint to the CIC. We had remanded his complaint to the Appellate Authority with the direction that he should treat it as an appeal and pass a speaking order. Following our direction, the Appellate Authority had passed an order directing the CPIO to provide the relevant information immediately. The CPIO concerned, thereafter, wrote to the Appellant and informed him that the category wise breakup of the candidates including the Scheduled Caste candidates selected for different interview posts and the highest and the lowest marks secured by such candidates selected against each post/state was already uploaded on the website of the SSC under the heading 'Results'.
4. After carefully considering the facts of the case and the submissions made before us, we find that the response of the CPIO is not adequate. The uploading of some information on the website does not serve the purpose of the Appellant completely. For example, the document showing the option for posts given by both the Appellant and his namesake bearing a different roll number could not be available in the website of the SSC. Such information would have to be provided in hardcopy form. Therefore, we direct the CPIO concerned to provide this information to the Appellant within 10 working days of receiving this order along with the guidelines containing the criteria for calling Scheduled Caste candidates for the Computer Proficiency Test and the copy of the note prepared by the SSC, if any, showing the reasons for not revising his results.
5. Apart from the above, the CPIO concerned needs to show cause as to why we should not impose penalty on him for not responding to the Appellant within the stipulated period or not providing any information. In terms of the provisions of subsection 1 of section 20 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, CIC/SM/A/2012/001867 we direct the CPIO concerned (R Thakur) to appear before us on 23 July 2013 at 10.15 a.m. and offer his explanation.
6. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra) Chief Information Commissioner 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.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SM/A/2012/001867