Central Information Commission
Shri Baban Singh vs Union Public Service Commission (Upsc) on 26 February, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2009/000081 dated 16.2.2009
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant - Shri Baban Singh
Respondent - Union Public Service Commission (UPSC)
Decision announced: 26.2.2010
Facts:
By an application of 18.3.2008 Shri Baban Singh of Hazari Bagh, Jharkhand applied to the Secretary, UPSC seeking the following information:
"Vide my application dated 18.12.07 I had requested Shri P. K. Sharma, Dy. Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Home Department to provide me a copy of the proceedings of Selection Committee meeting regarding promotion in Indian Police Service, which was forwarded to your Commission for providing me the same, but I have not received the same so far.
It is, therefore, prayed that the same may be collected and provided to me alongwith other information sought by me in the above application."
To this Shri Baban Singh received a response dated 27.6.08 in which CPIO Ms. Richa Mishra, DS (AIS) UPSC has referred to the application of 18.3.08 as a reminder to an application of 15.1.08 to which she replied stating that a reply had already been sent on 17.3.08 and the position remained unchanged. That reply of 17.3.08 was as follows:
"you have sought a copy of the proceedings of the SCM held on 18.12.2007 for promotion to the IPS of Jharkhand Cadre, under RTI Act. In this regard I may inform you that the selection process has not been completed so far. As such copies of minutes of the Selection Committee Meetings cannot be provided at this stage."
Against that information, appellant Shri Baban Singh has moved an appeal of 17.4.08 with the following prayer:
"It is prayed that I may kindly be provided with a copy of the proceedings of the Selection Committee organized on 18.12.07 for 1 considering my case for services under Indian Police Service from Jharkhand Police Service and also for taking action on the other points mentioned by me."
In support of this prayer appellant Shri Baban Singh has submitted as follows:
"The charges levied against me in the Departmental action are based totally on surmises and fictitious facts and inspite of my repeated requests, these have neither been considered at any level nor have I been cleared from these charges".
Upon this Shri Baban Singh has received an order from appellate authority Shri M. P. Tangirala, Jt. Secretary (AIS) UPSC dated 7.5.08, as below:
"The first piece of information sought by the appellant / applicant is the proceedings of the Selection Committee Meeting for promotion to IPS of Jharkhand Cadre, held on 18th December, 2007. It is stated on record by the CPIO that the selection process is as yet incomplete, as the Minutes of the SCM held for the year 2007 have not yet been approved by the Commission. It is also separately noted that Sections 5, 6 & 7 of the IPS (Appointment by promotion) Regulations, 1955 lay down the Regulations governing the preparation of a list of suitable officers, consultation with the Commission and select list. Admittedly, the approval of the Commission is necessary as according to Sec. 7(3) of these Regulations, the list as finally approved by the Commission shall form the Select List of the members of the State Police Service.
CPIO has also been able to produce copy of Central Information Commission's letter No. CIC/MA/A/2006/00546 dated 3.8.2006 addressed to Smt. Usha Kajagar, which inter alia ". . . .It is observed that the information sought for has been denied to on the ground that the selection process is as yet in compilation.
You are advised to seek the information after the completion of the selection process. "
Under the circumstances, there is merit in the contention of the CPIO that the Minutes of the SCM held on 18.12.2007 cannot be provided at this stage as the proceedings in this case have not yet attained finality. However, in view of the contentions raised in appeal, I feel it would be appropriate to direct the CPIO to inform the appellant of the fact their attaining finality within fifteen days of 2 the approval of the Select List by the Commission under the Promotion Regulations, so that the appellant may seek any further information that he desires."
The CPIO's submission on this appeal before appellate authority had rested on the following grounds:
"Clarifications sought from the State Government regarding a criminal case pending against one of the officers in the zone of consideration are yet to be received. As such the recommendations of the Selection Committee have not been placed before the Commission for approval so far. Thus the selection process has not been completed in this case."
Shri Baban Singh has then approached us with a second appeal- addressed, incidentally, to the "Central Information Club"! He has in this sought that the information sought may be provided to him forthwith. The appeal was heard on 24.2.2010 by video conference. Only appellant Shri Baban Singh is present at NIC Studio, Jharkhand. When contacted on telephone, CPIO Ms. Richa Mishra submitted that she had not received the hearing notice.
Appellant Shri Baban Singh submitted that he had in fact received a letter of Sept. 24, 2008 from CPIO Ms. Richa Mishra, DS informing him that "since the recommendations of the Selection Committee had been approved by the UPSC and the approval conveyed to the Govt. of India, a copy of the minutes of the Selection Commission, after applying severability clause in terms of Rule 10 of RTI Act 2005 is forwarded."
Appellant has, therefore, submitted that the only plea he now had remaining was to obtain a copy of the relative assessment listed against each name which had been deleted exercising the principle of severability under sub sec. (1) of Sec. 10 of the RTI. Since there was no copy of this letter on file, the same has been obtained by Email from the NIC Centre, Jharkhand.
DECISION NOTICE 3 The appeal notice in this case had been sent on February 10, 2010 to the CPIO & Appellate Authority, UPSC. A copy had also been endorsed to appellant Shri Baban Singh, who not only had received the same but actually appeared in the hearing. This had been preceded by an Email of 2.2.2010 intimating the venue of the hearing. CPIO's excuse that she was not informed of the hearing was, therefore, unacceptable and we, therefore, proceeded ex-parte. We find, however, that there are number of appeals moved by Shri Baban Singh before this Commission. In each of these, the request is as follows:
FILE NO. CIC/WB/A/2009/000420 Request of 15.1.08 - "My name exists in consideration zone for promotion from Jharkhand Police Service to Indian Police Service. I am interested in knowing the effect of Departmental Enquiry being conducted against me, in considering my case by the Selection Committee, for promotion from Jharkhand Police Service to Indian Police Service."
FILE NO. CIC/WB/A/2009/000582 Request of 19.11.08 - in which the gist of the request is that the minutes of the SCM may be sent without applying the severability clause.
FILE NO. CIC/WB/A/2009/000602 In this case the request is similar to that in appeal in File No. CIC/WB/A/2009/000582.
Since in all these cases the basic issue now amounts to the application of the severability clause in the answers provided to appellant Shri Baban Singh and since that was not the issue in the present appeal, we now direct that three remaining appeals will be brought together for a hearing on 11/3/2010 at 4.00 p.m. by video conference when all parties are directed to be present.
In the present case, however, the information sought was a copy of the Minutes of the Selection Committee Meeting which has been provided after 4 applying the severability clause, as transpires from the hearing. For this reason, the present appeal is not sustainable and is hereby dismissed. There is however, the question of delay in response, with the request of 18.3.'08, albeit considered a 'reminder,' being responded to only on 27.6.'08, although a reply had become due on 17.4.'08. CPIO Ms Rich Misra will explain the reasons for this delay when we consider the remaining appeals on the subject on 11.3.'10.
Reserved in the hearing for examination of the remaining appeals, this decision is announced on this 26th day of February, 2010. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 26.2.2010 Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Pankaj Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 26.2.2010 5