Central Information Commission
Balram Jha vs Union Public Service Commission on 25 March, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/UPSCM/A/2024/621884
Balram Jha ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
Union Public Service Commission, ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
New Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 21.04.2024 FA : 20.05.2024 SA : Nil
CPIO : 16.05.2024 FAO : 22.05.2024 Hearing : 12.03.2025
Date of Decision: 25.03.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.04.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1) What is my score in written examination (recruitment test) conducted on 19 August 2023.
2) What is my score in Interview (personality test) conducted between 01 April 2024 & 03 April 2024.
3) What is my Final Score out of 400, On which final merit list is prepared & published on 18 April 2024.
4) What is my Final Merit Rank in Economically weaker section (EWS) Category.Page 1 of 3
5) What were Cut off marks of written examination (recruitment test) of candidates who called for interview. Please provide the data categories wise of UR, EWS, OBC Category.
Since recruitment process for 13 post of Assistant Architect post is completed and final result is already published by UPSC on 18 April 2024. So, there is not any issue to provide the information seek above.
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 16.05.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
Point No. 1,2,3. Marks obtained by the candidate bearing Roll No. 1100593 are 111.68/300 in RT and 68/100 in PT. Final score is 179.68/400.
Point No. 4. Sought information is not available in the compiled format.
Point No. 5. Category wise minimum suitability of marks in RT is as under: out of 300: UR-117.50, EWS-98.33, OBC-112.50, PH-HI-50.83.
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.05.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 22.05.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
5. The appellant remained present in Person and on behalf of the respondent Mr. K Thomas Maring-US, Mr. Ashish Chopra-SO and Mr. Shivam-ASO attended the hearing in Person.
6. The appellant requested to withdraw the appeal and close the matter.
7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that a suitable reply as per the provisions of the RTI Act has been furnished to the Appellant. Moreover, the Appellant has been recommended for the said post.
Page 2 of 38. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the appellant expressed his willingness to withdraw the instant appeal and close the matter. That being so, the Commission finds no scope for further intervention in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 25.03.2025 Authenticated true copy Sharad Kumar (शरद कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Union Public Service Commission, CPIO, RTI Cell, Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi-110069
2. Balram Jha Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)