Central Information Commission
Mr.Shri Madan Mohan Kr Maurya vs Insurance Division on 31 May, 2010
Central Information Commission
Room No.296, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi110066
Telefax:01126180532 & 01126107254 websitecic.gov.in
Appeal/Complaint: No. CIC/DS/A/2009/000029
Appellant /Complainant : Shri Madan Mohan Kr. Maurya
Siwan
Public Authority : Life Insurance Corporation of India
Muzaffarpur (Shri K.M. Srivastava
CPIO and Sh. Sahil Lal, AA - through
Video conferencing).
Date of Hearing : 31 /05/2010
Date of Decision : 31/05/2010
Facts:
1. RTI application dated 2.4.2009 was submitted by Shri Madan Mohan Kr. Maurya to CPIO, LIC of India, Muzaffarpur in which he sought information regarding criteria prescribed for qualifying for promotion from Assistant to higher grade Assistant along with guidelines for fixing seniority point etc. He also sought information on the result of interview for promotion held on 23.1.2009, cut of point of selection list i.e., minimum marks on which candidates interviewed was promoted and the merit list of all 112 interviewees eligible for promotion with qualification and seniority point.
2. The result of this examination was declared on 29.1.2009.
3. The matter was examined by the CPIO who responded vide his order dated 27.4.2009 in which he denied information to the appellant on the grounds that he was in no way connected or affected by the information and that the information sought is confidential.
4. Being aggrieved by the response, the appellant preferred First appeal before the FAA dated 9.5.2009.
5. The matter was disposed of by FAA dated 15.5.2009 vide which disclosure was denied since it pertained to department promotional system and under sub section (d)(e) and (g) of Section 8(1) of the ACT.
6. The matter was heard today through video conferencing. Respondents were present. Appellant did not attend.
7. Video link could not be established with Siwan. However, the Commission afforded him opportunity to present his arguments through audio conferencing by the Commission but the appellant was not present at the NIC, Studio.
Decision
8. After hearing their submissions in respect of this RTI application, the Commission directs that in respect of point (a) prescribed qualification by the department for promotion of Assistant to higher grade Assistant may be provided to the appellant.
9. Point (b) the Commission directs respondent to provide the guidelines for fixing seniority point as requested for in the RTI application.
10. Point (c) the respondents are directed to provide the internal marks obtained by the candidates figuring at Serial 15 of the merit list. The names of the candidates need not be disclosed.
11. Point (d) the respondents are directed to provide the minimum, marks obtained by the candidate at the bottom of the list of candidates who were promoted after interview.
12. The above information may be provided in the interest of transparency and fairness of selection process undertaken by a Public Authority who is accountable for quality of the human resource that it selects. Undoubtedly the quality of services that the Public Authority provides is largely dependant on the quality of its work force and transparency on this account will certainly augment its accountability to those to whom it serves.
13. Ordered as above.
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu) Information Commissioner (DS) Authenticated true copy:
(Tarun Kumar) Joint Secretary & Addl. Registrar Copy to:
1. Shri Madan Mohan Kr. Maurya District Bar Association Bhawan, Civil Court, Siwan (Bihar).
2. Shri K.M. Srivastava, CPIO, LIC of India Divisional Office: CRM Department Umashankar Prasad Marg, Muzaffarpur842002.
3. Shri Sahil Lal AA, LIC of India, Divisional Office: CRM Department Umashankar Prasad Marg, Muzaffarpur842002.