Central Information Commission
Mr. A. Ramalingam vs Bsnl, New Delhi on 10 December, 2009
Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/C/2009/000597
Dated 10th December, 2009
Name of the Applicant : MR. A. RAMALINGAM
Name of the Public Authority : BSNL, NEW DELHI
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTI application on 11.02.09 with the CPIO / BSNL, New Delhi requesting for the following information:
a) Marks obtained in the TES Gr-B LDCE EXAM 2007 for him after re-totaling the papers.
b) Photocopy of the Examination Answer sheets written by him
c) Beak-up of number of him opted to appear and selected on the basis of various specialization of the examination.
d) Answer keys for the paper I and paper II(CDOT).
2. On not receiving any reply from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a Complaint before the CIC on 09.06.09 stating he has applied for supply of photocopy of the answer sheets of LDCE for the promotion of JTO(T) to SDE(T) held on 15.09.07, but till date, no information has been received from the concerned authority. He may be supplied photocopies of the above said exam. A Notice was issued by the CIC dated 30.10.09 directing the PIO to provide information and also to respond to the show cause Notice issued to him to for not furnishing information and directing him to appear before the Commission on 10.12.09 with the relevant files and documents.
3. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner scheduled the hearing for 10th December, 2009.
4. Mr. Suresh Kumar, DGM(MIS) & CPIO and Mr.Joginder Singh, AGM(RTI) represented the Public Authority.
5. The Complainant was not present during the hearing.
Decision
6. The Respondent submitted that an interim reply was provided to the Complainant on 01.04.09 giving a list of the departmental candidates who have filed applications under RTI Act, 2005 and also supplying information relating to marks/evaluated answer sheets, while directing the Chief General Manager, Circle, BSNL CPIO to furnish a copy of present status of information with respect to each of the applicants, as furnished by the Departmental Examination Branch, to the Complainant. He also stated that complete information was supplied to the Complainant.
7. The Respondent in his letter dated 17.11.09 to the Commission stated that :
i) Information in the RTI application dated 11.02.09 was supplied though the office of Chief General Manager, Chennai to the Complainant vide their office letter on 13.08.09.
ii) The Complainant has though the application under reference, asked for copy of the Examination answer Sheets written by him in the TES Limited Departmental Competitive Examination 2007. He added that earlier when the decision to disclose evaluated answer sheets of the departmental examination to the candidate was given, exemption from disclosure was sought by BSNL as a special case. This was done because of the apprehension of all the unsuccessful candidates applying for copies of answer sheets under the RTI Act, 2005. On being denied the exemption by the Commission, the organization was flooded with requests for copies of answer sheets from unsuccessful candidates.
iii) he supply of answer sheets for each candidate involves taking out the original from the voluminous records, concealing its security code and photocopying of 24 pages from Paper I to Paper II. This tedious and voluminous work had put the entire work machinery of Examination Branch and RTI-Cell of BSNL Co. in disarray and out of gear.
iv) To systematically provide the copies of answer sheets to candidates from field units all over the country, the work of providing answer sheets was initiated circle-wise. In the meantime, all the field units were duly informed about the exercise undertaken. The candidate, in turn, was also informed by the field units about the situation. Thereafter, copies of answer sheets of candidates were supplied circle-wise.
v) In the meantime answer keys were put suo-motto on the website.
vi) A proposal is also under active consideration in BSNL to suo moto disclose answer sheets to the candidates so that the candidates can apply for answer sheets in the normal process and do not require to use the RTI route for getting the information.
8. In view of the submission by the Respondent, the Commission while noting that a decision has been taken to disclose the answer sheets to the candidates, condones the delay in providing the information to the Complainant and drops the penalty proceedings against the CPIO.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian) Assistant Registrar Cc:
1. Mr. A. Ramalingam H.No.56/22 - 1, Teachers Colony S.S. Salai S.D.E. Telegraphs Rasipuram - 637 408.
2. The PIO Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited A-703, Satesman House B-148, Barakhamba Road New Delhi.
3. The Appellate Authority Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited A-703, Satesman House B-148, Barakhamba Road New Delhi.
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC