Central Information Commission
Dr. Babasahed Datta Patil vs Ccras, New Delhi on 20 January, 2010
Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/2010/000011
Dated 20th January, 2010
Name of the Complainant : DR. BABASAHED DATTA PATIL
Name of the Public Authority : CCRAS, NEW DELHI
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTI application on 01.08.09 with the PIO, CCRAS, New Delhi seeking information regarding the recruitment of Research Officer Ayurveda by CCRAS against 5 points including list of eligible candidates, list of candidates qualified, actual marks secured by each candidate, selection criteria and the total marks secured by all the candidates. The PIO replied on 09.09.09 providing point wise information. Not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed his First Appeal on 11.09.09. The First Appellate Authority replied on 08.10.09 providing further information and enclosing the list as sought by the Complainant. Still on not satisfied with the reply, the Applicant filed a Complaint on 08.11.09 before the Commission stating that the marks secured by each candidate, selected for interview has not been provided to him and also added that he has not received the remaining amount of Rs.300/- that he had sent to the Public Authority.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner scheduled the hearing for 20th January, 2010.
3. Mr. Lakshmi Kanta Ganguli, Admn. Officer-cum-PIO represented the Public Authority.
4. Efforts were made to contact the Complainant over his mobile but the Complainant's mobile remained switched off.
Decision
5. The Respondent PIO submitted that information against points 1,2, 4 & 5 has been provided to the Complainant. With regard to point 3 actual marks secured by each candidate was also provided by the Appellate Authority. The Respondent also stated that the Appellate Authority on 08.10.09 had provided the detailed break up of marks secured by all candidates to the Complainant. Hence, the Commission holds that complete information has been provided and with regard to the remaining amount of fees with the public authority, directs the PIO to deduct fees for photocopying at Rs.2/- per page and return the remaining amount to the Complainant by 20th February, 2010.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc:
1. Dr. Babasaheb Datta Patil Vanashree Doctor's Colony Near Lion's Blood Bank Gadhinglaj Dist. Kolhapur Maharashtra - 416 502.
2. The PIO Central Council for Research in Ayurveda JLNBCEHA Bhawan No.61-65, Institutional Area Janakpuri New Delhi.
3. The Appellate Authority Central Council for Research in Ayurveda JLNBCEHA Bhawan No.61-65, Institutional Area Janakpuri New Delhi.
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC