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 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Shrikant Banduji Asekar vs Steel Authority Of India Ltd. (Sail) on 12 August, 2022

Author: Vanaja N Sarna

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                          क य सच  ु ना आयोग
                   CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                            बाबा गंगनाथ माग
                           Baba Gangnath Marg
                       मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
                       Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                                         File no.: - CIC/SAIL1/A/2021/611167
In the matter of
Shrikant Banduji Asekar
                                                                ... Appellant
                                         VS
Central Public Information Officer
Steel Authority of India Ltd.
Rourkela Steel Plant (RSP)
Rourkela - 769 011 (Odisha)
                                                                ...Respondent
RTI application filed on             :   15/12/2020
CPIO replied on                      :   24/12/2020
First appeal filed on                :   18/01/2021
First Appellate Authority order      :   30/01/2021
Second Appeal Filed on               :   25/03/2021
Date of Hearing                      :   12/08/2022
Date of Decision                     :   12/08/2022

The following were present:
Appellant: Present over VC

Respondent: Subhra Rajashree, AM (Personnel) and CPIO's representative, present over VC Information Sought:

The appellant has stated that he had applied for the post of Fireman cum Fire
-engine Driver but his selection was not done. In this regard, he has sought the following information:
1. Provide the excel sheet of the selected candidates with their original category and selection category with their marks.
2. Provide documents related to provision of ex-servicemen reservation posts and the list of selected candidates.
1
3. As per the notification, total vacant posts were 81 but 67 candidates had been selected. Provide details of the selection process for the remaining 14 vacant posts.
4. Provide details of the candidates who could not pass the physical test and medical test after issue of the appointment letter.

Grounds for filing Second Appeal:

The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that he should be given the complete information. He pointed out that data related to recruitment being not available is not possible. The CPIO's representative submitted that a suitable reply was given vide letter dated 24.12.2020. However, she relied on her written submissions dated 11.08.2022 wherein in respect of point no. 1 it was stated that the information sought is not maintained in the desired manner. In respect of point no. 2 revised information was given which was earlier available on the website. In respect of point no. 4 exemption was claimed u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act for denying the information.

Observations:

Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 24.12.2020 replied to the appellant and stated that information sought is not maintained in respect of points no. 1,2 and 4 of the RTI application and hence, cannot be provided. In respect of point no. 3 of the RTI application, it was replied that due to non availability of suitable candidates, the remaining 14 vacant posts could not be filled up.

The FAA vide order dated 30.01.21 disposed of the first appeal and concurred with the CPIO's reply. He further held that the appellant had not advanced any substantial reason in his appeal, within the purview of the RTI Act and grounds on which the appeal has been made has no merit. The CPIO in the written submissions provided the updated correct reply on points no. 2 and 4 of the RTI application. Moreover, on a query during the hearing the CPIO's representative submitted that the available information can be given in the format it is available.

Decision:

The Commission therefore directs the CPIO to send the copy of the written submissions dated 11.08.2022 to the appellant and also a revised reply on point no. 1 as discussed during the hearing within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order. The CPIO shall note that for point no. 1 the excel sheet of the selected candidates shall only be given and the rest of the details i.e 2 category and marks are exempted u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act if it was not uploaded on the website earlier.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.



                                          Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना)
                                   Information Commissioner (सच
                                                              ू ना आयु त)
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत          त)


A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011- 26182594 /
 दनांक / Date




                                      3