Central Information Commission
Venkatesan M. vs Staff Selection Commission on 14 November, 2024
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/SSCOM/A/2023/653258 +
िशकायत सं ा / Complaint No. CIC/SSCOM/C/2023/653007
Venkatesan M. ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Staff Selection
Commission, New Delhi ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal/complaint:
Sl. No. Second Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of
Appeal / RTI CPIO's First FAA's Second
Complaint Application Reply Appeal Order Appeal /
No. Complaint
1. 653258 16.10.2023 29.11.2023 16.11.2023 23.11.2023 Nil
2. 653007 16.10.2023 No Reply 16.11.2023 23.11.2023 Nil
Note : The above-mentioned appeal and complaint have been clubbed together for
decision as both the RTI application are identical in nature.
Date of Hearing: 12.11.2024
Date of Decision: 13.11.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
Second Appeal No. CIC/SSCOM/A/2023/653258 Page 1 of 4
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.10.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Regarding JUNIOR ENGINEER (QUALITY ASSURANCE), ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT advertised vide Post code No. NR13321 of Advertisement No. Phase IX/2021/Selection Posts
(i) Could you please share the status of the DV attended candidates for this post NR13321
(ii) Could you please share the number of candidates attended DV for the same with category wise for NR13321
(iii) Could you please let us know why SSC released additional result for this post NR13321 even though required number of candidates attended the DV?
(iv) Will SSC hold the results of this post NR13321 until additional list dv completed?
1.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16.11.2023. The FAA vide order dated 23.11.2023 stated as under:
"No script found in ACTION HISTORY OF RTI REQUEST No. SSCNR/R/E/23/02878."
1.2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 29.11.2023 and the same is reproduced as under :-
"All relevant information website sscnr.nic.in, regularly update."
1.3. Aggrieved with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Complaint No. CIC/SSCOM/C/2023/653007
2. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 16.10.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 2 of 4 Regarding JUNIOR ENGINEER (QUALITY ASSURANCE), VEHICLE advertised vide Post code No. NR13621 of Advertisement No. Phase IX/2021/Selection Posts
(i) Could you please share the status of the DV attended candidates for this post NR13621
(ii) Could you please share the number of candidates attended DV for the same with category wise for NR13621
(iii) Could you please let us know why SSC released additional result for this post NR13621 even though required number of candidates attended the DV?
(iv) Will SSC hold the results of this post NR13621 until additional list dv completed?
2.1. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 16.11.2023. The FAA vide order dated 23.11.2023 stated as under:
"No script in ACTION HISTORY OF RTI REQUEST No. SSCNR/R/E/23/02871."
2.2. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint dated Nil.
Hearing Proceedings:
3. The appellant/complainant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Asheesh Chaudhury, Under Secretary, attended the hearing in-person.
4. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had replied to the appellant on 29.11.2023. Further, the appellant had uploaded copy of their partial reply, whereas they had furnished the following reply:
"The information sought by you is sensitive in nature and does not serve larger public interest. Hence, the information cannot be provided under Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act."
The CPIO further stated that the information sought was not readily available to the CPIO and the DV for the post code NR 13621 was going on at that time i.e. Page 3 of 4 14.08.2023 to 05.01.2024. Therefore, disclosure of such sensitive information might have affected the recruitment process adversely. However, the results have already been declared, hence, the information sought has become infructuous.
5. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that the respondent had provided adequate response, as per the records available under their custody and as per the stage of recruitment at the time of receipt of the RTI application. During the hearing, the respondent informed the Commission that the results have been declared. Keeping in view contents of the RTI application, the cumulative information sought in point no. (ii) of the application shall be informed to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. However, it was not a case of non-response and there appears to be no merit in the complaint. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of and the adjoining complaint is closed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 13.11.2024 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कनल एस एस िछकारा, ( रटायड) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Staff Selection Commission, CPIO, RTI Cell, C.G.O. Complex, Block-12, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
2. Venkatesan M. Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)