Central Information Commission
Shri K. Thomas vs Syndicate Bank on 22 January, 2009
Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/PB/A/2008/00642-SM dated 04.04.2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated 22.01.2009
Appellant: Shri K. Thomas
Respondent: Syndicate Bank
The Appellant was absent inspite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri N. K. Sripathi, Assitt. General Manager, was present.
The brief facts of the case are as under.
2. The Appellant had requested the CPIO, in his letter of 14 January 2008, seeking a number of information with regard to the examination conducted by the Bank to select personnel. The CPIO, in his reply of January 25, 2008, provided some information but denied a number of information on the ground that it was personal information which had no relation to any public interest or activity and, hence, covered under section 8(1) (j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. He also stated that the minimum marks fixed in the qualifying examination, interview details and tabulation sheet of marks being of confidential nature were exempt under section 8(1) (d) of the same Act. Not satisfied with the reply given by the CPIO, the Appellant filed an appeal before the first Appellate Authority on 6 February 2008. That authority decided the appeal in his order dated 27 February 2008. He concurred with the decision of the PIO providing some additional information and denying some other. However, he also provided some additional statistics in regard to the number of candidates who applied and the number shortlisted for interview. It is against this order of the Appellate Authority that the Appellant has now approached the Commission in second appeal.
3. During the hearing, the Appellant was not present. He has requested the Commission to hear the case in his absence as he would not be able to attend the hearing before the Commission because of the distance and his poor health. We carefully examined the contents of his request for information and the information provided by the CPIO. We also took into consideration the submissions made by the Respondent. We find that in addition to the information already provided by the CPIO, the following additional information in response to item C, D, E and F of the request for information should be provided within 10 working days from the receipt of disorder.
C. Minimum marks fixed in the qualifying examination under general category for selecting applicants for the interview.
D. Total marks allotted for the interview.
E. Criteria adopted for the selection of the post i.e., whether it is based
on the marks scored in the interview only or marks scored in the interview plus that of qualifying examination.
F. Interview details such as, name of centers, dates of interview, number of persons attended in each centre on each day.
4. With the above directions the appeal is disposed off. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Satyananda Mishra) 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.
Sd/-
(Vijay Bhalla) Assistant Registrar