Central Information Commission
Mr.Vijay Kumar vs Ministry Of Railways on 3 December, 2012
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/002294
Date of Hearing : December 3, 2012
Date of Decision : December 3, 2012
Parties:
Applicant
Shri Vijay Kumar
C/o Late Shri Parmeshwar Singh
VPOBahadurpur
PO - Rajendra Nagar
Patna 800 016
The Applicant was not present during the hearing
Respondents
Railway Recruitment Board
Divisional Office Compound
Mumbai Central
Mumbai 400 008
Represented by : Shri Deepak Pardeshi, PIO
Shri Suresh Salostar
NIC, Mumbai
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/002294
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI Application dt.28.1.12 with the PIO, RRB, Mumbai seeking the norms based on which results of the examination held on 8.1.12 and 22.1.12 with respect to advertisement No.2/2010 for the post of Goods Guard will be finalized. He also sought the marks in the written examination against two roll nos. The PIO replied on 28.2.12 stating that the selection process is still not completed and information can be furnished once the process is completed. The Applicant then filed an appeal dt.6.4.12 with the Appellate Authority reiterating his request for the information. The Appellate Authority replied on 9.5.12 providing clarification in respect of the basis on which marks are given. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.5.6.12 before CIC.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Respondents submitted that the selection process is still not finalized and that it will be completed only by June 2013
3. The Commission after hearing the Respondents directs the PIO to provide the merit list and the marks obtained by the successful candidates as well as the norms based on which results will be finalized within two weeks of completion of the selection process to the Appellant. With regard to the information sought against the two roll Nos., PIO is directed to provide the information if one of the Roll Nos. happens to be the Appellant's and if he is unsuccessfukl in the first exam since the candidates who have passed the first stage have still to appear for further tests. The marks obtained by the second candidate, if not successful, is denied u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, as there is no larger public interest or activity related to its disclosure. If the candidate was successful, in any event information cannot be provided since the candidate has still to appear for other tests.
4. The appeal is disposed off with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (G. Subramanian) Deputy Registrar Cc
1. Shri Vijay Kumar C/o Late Shri Parmeshwar Singh VPOBahadurpur PO - Rajendra Nagar Patna 800 016
2. The Public Information Officer Railway Recruitment Board Divisional Office Compound Mumbai Central Mumbai 400 008
3. Officer in charge, NIC