Central Information Commission
V P Prabhas vs Shree Chitra Triunal Institute For ... on 4 March, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सुचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मुिनरका, नई द ली- 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: CIC/SCTMS/A/2019/113223
In the matter of:
V P Prabhas
... Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences
& Technology (SCTIMST),
Biomedical Technology Wing,
Poojapura, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 012, Kerala
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 17/09/2018 CPIO replied on : 24/10/2018 First appeal filed on : 15/11/2018
First Appellate Authority order : 20/12/2018 Second Appeal filed on : 19/03/2019 Date of Hearing : 04/03/2021 Date of Decision : 04/03/2021 The following were present: Appellant: Not present
Respondent: Dr Maya, Scientist D and CPIO, present over VC at Thiruvananthapuram Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information with regard to the interviews held at SCTIMST on 02/06/2018 for the position of Scientist D (Molecular Biology) pursuant to Advt. No. P&A11/09/SSSC/SCTIMST2018 dated 02/04/2018:
1. List of the candidates short listed for the interview for the above post. Copy of application form of each candidate showing particulars such as name, address, academic qualifications, experience, research publications, national/international awards/recognitions, fellowships etc.
2. What was the screening criteria for candidates called for interview?
3. Whether all the candidates, who were called for interview fulfilled the essential qualifications as per the advertisement referred to above.
4. What were the marks given to each candidate in the interview.
5. And other related information.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant was not present at the VC venue despite due service of notice on 20.02.2021 vide speed post acknowledgment no. ED528665865IN.
The CPIO reiterated the contents of the reply dated 24.10.2018. She further submitted that the first appeal was disposed of on 20.12.2018.
Observations:
Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 24.10.2018 had replied to the appellant and provided the list of shortlisted candidates in respect of point no. 1 of the RTI application. In respect of points no. 2 to 10 of the RTI application information sought was denied stating that answering to questions is not envisaged under the RTI Act. The FAA vide order dated 20.12.2018 disposed of the first appeal and enclosed the CPIO's reply dated 24.10.2018.
The appellant has not availed of the opportunity to contest the CPIO's reply or to substantiate his second appeal. Moreover, the Commission finds no flaw in the CPIO's reply.
Decision:
In view of the above observations, the Commission is not inclined to provide any relief to the appellant.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मा णत स या पत ित) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182594 / दनांक/ Date