Central Information Commission
Neel Kamal vs Mcd on 11 November, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/MCDND/C/2023/638411
CIC/MCDND/A/2023/646198
Neel Kamal ....निकायतकताग /Complainant
.....अपीलकताग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Office of the Chief Auditor,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi E-1 Block,
27th Floor, Dr. SPM Civic Center,
Minto Road, New Delhi - 110002 ....प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 06.11.2024
Date of Decision : 11.11.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
The above-mentioned Appeal and Complaint have been clubbed together for
decision as these are based on similar RTI Applications, hence are being
disposed of through a common order.
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 13.06.2023
CPIO replied on : 12.07.2023
First appeal filed on : 13.07.2023
First Appellate Authority's order : 04.09.2023
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 07.08.2023, 25.09.2023
Page 1 of 8
CIC/MCDND/C/2023/638411
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an (offline) RTI application dated 13.06.2023 seeking the following information:
"1. The mark given to me in Paper-7 Q. No. 2(a) is 01 out of 10 marks, on which ground 01 mark awarded to me in this question? Answer key may please provide with full description.
2. The marks given in the Paper-7 Q. No. 2(b) is 0 (zero) out of 16 marks and it is also a compulsory question, on which ground zero marks awarded to me in this question? Answer key may please provide with full description.
3. How many candidates with name and Index No. were awarded with zero marks in compulsory question of Paper-7 i.e. 2(b)?
4. How many candidates with name and Index No. were awarded with 01 and 0(zero) mark in 2(a) and 2(b) respectively in compulsory question?
5. How many candidates with name and Index No. were awarded with more than 01 and 0(zero) mark in both compulsory question i.e. in 2(a) & 2(b)?
6. I have already provided the Answer proof in respect of 2(a) but department have not consider it so, answer Key of both questions of Paper-7 i.e. 2(a) & 2(b) according to marks given to me must be provided, as without exact answer key nothing is justified and legitimate.
7. How many candidates with name and Index No. were written all 5 point or some points in question no. 2(a) of paper-7 and what marks awarded to them must be mention according to points written on answer sheet?"
The CPIO furnished a reply to the complainant on 12.07.2023 stating as under:
S. Information sought Information supplied No. 1 The mark given to me in Paper -7 Information sought for by you is Q. No. 2(a) is 01 out of 10 marks, interrogatory nature. Hence, CPIO is on which ground 01 mark not bound to provide the awarded to me in this question? interrogatory nature information.
Answer key may please provide Further, regarding answer key, you with full description. are advised to refer to the syllabus and reference books mentioned therein for this paper.
2 The marks given in the Paper -7 Q. -As above-
No. 2(b) is 0 (Zero) out of 16 Page 2 of 8marks and it is also a compulsory question, on which ground zero marks awarded to me in this question? Answer key may please provide with full description.
3 How many candidates with name This information pertains to third and Index No. were awarded with party. zero marks in compulsory question of Paper -7 i.e. 2(b)? 4 How many candidates with name -As above-
and Index No. were awarded with 01 and 0 (Zero) in 2(a) and 2(b) respectively question? in compulsory 5 How many candidates with name -As above-
and Index No. were awarded with more than 01 and 0 (Zero) in both compulsory question i.e. 2(a) and 2(b)?
6 I have already provided the Regarding answer keys, you are once Answer proof in respect of 2(a) again advised to refer to the syllabus but department have not consider and reference books mentioned it so, answer Key of both therein for these papers. questions of Paper-7 i.e. 2(a) & 2(b) according to marks given to me must be provided, as without exact answer key nothing is justified and legitimate.
7 How many candidates with name This information pertains to third and Index No. were written all 5 party. point or some points in question no. 2(a) of paper-7 and what marks awarded to them must be mention according to points written on answer sheet?"
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal.
CIC/MCDND/A/2023/646198 Information sought:
Page 3 of 8The Appellant filed an (offline) RTI application dated 13.06.2023 seeking the following information:
"1. The mark given to me in Paper-7 Q. No. 2(a) is 01 out of 10 marks, on which ground 01 mark awarded to me in this question? Answer key may please provide with full description.
2. The marks given in the Paper-7 Q. No. 2(b) is 0 (zero) out of 16 marks and it is also a compulsory question, on which ground zero marks awarded to me in this question? Answer key may please provide with full description.
3. How many candidates with name and Index No. were awarded with zero marks in compulsory question of Paper-7 i.e. 2(b)?
4. How many candidates with name and Index No. were awarded with 01 and 0(zero) mark in 2(a) and 2(b) respectively in compulsory question?
5. How many candidates with name and Index No. were awarded with more than 01 and 0(zero) mark in both compulsory question i.e. in 2(a) & 2(b)?
6. I have already provided the Answer proof in respect of 2(a) but department have not consider it so, answer Key of both questions of Paper-7 i.e. 2(a) & 2(b) according to marks given to me must be provided, as without exact answer key nothing is justified and legitimate.
7. How many candidates with name and Index No. were written all 5 point or some points in question no. 2(a) of paper-7 and what marks awarded to them must be mention according to points written on answer sheet?"
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 12.07.2023 stating as under:
S. Information sought Information supplied No. 1 The mark given to me in Paper-7 Information sought for by you is Q. No. 2(a) is 01 out of 10 marks, interrogatory nature. Hence, CPIO is on which ground 01 mark not bound to provide the awarded to me in this question? interrogatory nature information.
Answer key may please provide Further, regarding answer key, you with full description. are advised to refer to the syllabus and reference books mentioned therein for this paper.
2 The marks given in the Paper-7 Q. -As above-
No. 2(b) is 0 (zero) out of 16marks and it is also a compulsory question, on which ground zero marks awarded to me in this question? Answer key may please provide with full description.
Page 4 of 83 How many candidates with name This information pertains to third and Index No. were awarded with party. zero marks in compulsory question of Paper-7 i.e. 2(b)? 4 How many candidates with name -As above-
and Index No. were awarded with 01 and 0(zero) mark in 2(a) and 2(b) respectively in compulsory question?.
5 How many candidates with name -As above-
and Index No. were awarded with more than 01 and 0(zero) mark in both compulsory question i.e. in 2(a) & 2(b)?
6 I have already provided the Regarding Answer keys, you are once Answer proof in respect of 2(a) again advised to refer to the syllabus but department have not consider and reference books mentioned it so, answer Key of both therein for these papers. questions of Paper-7 i.e. 2(a) & 2(b) according to marks given to me must be provided, as without exact answer key nothing is justified and legitimate.
7 How many candidates with name This information pertains to third and Index No. were written all 5 party. point or some points in question no. 2(a) of paper-7 and what marks awarded to them must be mention according to points written on answer sheet?"
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.07.2023. The FAA vide its order dated 04.09.2023, held as under.
"In view of the above, this office had conveyed you for the meeting with the First Appellate Authority on 09.08.2023 at 11.00 A.M. As per schedule mentioned in the letter of this office, the meeting was organized with First Appellate Authority. It is also stated that you had not submitted the queries in written, however, the queries raised by you during the meeting had been clarified positively."Page 5 of 8
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant/Appellant: Not Present.
Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Mann, Assistant Audit Officer & CPIO and Shri Rajpal Meena, Senior Auditor & APIO present in person.
The Respondent submitted that vide their letter dated 12.07.2023, they have provided complete point-wise reply/information to the Complainant/Appellant as per his RTI application. Further, the Complainant/Appellant was present in his first appeal hearing where his issues has been clarified positively.
Upon being queried by the Commission with respect to point Nos. 1, 2 and 6 of the RTI application, the Respondent apprised that it is a departmental examination in which question paper is of descriptive type and hence, there is no answer key for descriptive papers.
Decision:
The Commission based on a perusal of the facts on record observes that the core contention raised by the Complainant/Appellant in the instant Complaint/Appeal was non-receipt of complete information from the Respondent. In this regard, it was noted that factual position in the matter has already been informed to the Appellant/Complainant as per his RTI application.
During the hearing, the Respondent has also clarified it is a departmental examination in which question paper is of descriptive type and hence, there is no answer key for descriptive papers. Further, the Complainant/Appellant is not present to contest the submissions of the Respondent or to substantiate his claims further.
Now, being a Complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act, the facts of the case do not warrant any action under Section 18(2) of the RTI Act against the CPIO Page 6 of 8 as it does not bear any mala fides or an intention to deliberately obstruct the access to information as alleged by the Complainant. Here, it is relevant to quote a judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of Registrar of Companies & Ors v. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Anr. [W.P.(C) 11271/2009] dated 01.06.2012 wherein it was held:
" 61. It can happen that the PIO may genuinely and bonafidely entertain the belief and hold the view that the information sought by the querist cannot be provided for one or the other reasons. Merely because the CIC eventually finds that the view taken by the PIO was not correct, it cannot automatically lead to issuance of a show cause notice under Section 20 of the RTI Act and the imposition of penalty. The legislature has cautiously provided that only in cases of malafides or unreasonable conduct, i.e., where the PIO, without reasonable cause refuses to receive the application, or provide the information, or knowingly gives incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroys the information, that the personal penalty on the PIO can be imposed...."
No relief can be granted in the matter.
The above-mentioned second appeal and complaint are disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 7 of 8 Copy To:
The FAA, Office of the Chief Auditor, Municipal Corporation of Delhi E-1 Block, 27th Floor, Dr. SPM Civic Center, Minto Road, New Delhi - 110002 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)