Central Information Commission
Kunal Chouhan vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 25 June, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/UTOCH/A/2024/106317
Kunal Chouhan .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
DSP - Rectt. & Trg., Chandigarh
Police, Headquarters,4th Floor,
Additional Deluxe Building,
Sector 9, Chandigarh - 160009 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 26.05.2025
Date of Decision : 24.06.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 20.11.2023
CPIO replied on : 19.12.2023
First appeal filed on : 10.01.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 24.01.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 27.02.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an (offline) RTI application dated 20.11.2023 seeking the following information:
"It is submitted that the following documents w.r.t. recruitment of Constable in Band Staff in Chandigarh Police in the year of 2022 may kindly be provided :-Page 1 of 6
1. Complete list of candidates who qualified trade test and PMT (including waiting list) for side drummer
2. Complete list of candidates who qualified trade test and PMT (including waiting list) for side drummer with marks obtained in trade test and PMT for side drummer
3. Complete list of candidates who qualified trade test and PMT (including waiting list) for side drummer showing their merit numbers also."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 19.12.2023 stating as under:
"The requisite information was sought from the In-charge Recruitment Cell, who denied the information under 8(1) (j) of the Right to Information Act-2005, being third party information and the same was provided to the applicant vide letter No. 16/RTI-23/DSP-cum-CPIO/Rectt & Trg. dated 19.12.2023."
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.01.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 24.01.2024 upheld the reply of the PIO.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the following grounds:
"1. That I had applied for the post of Constable in Band and my roll number was 20226564 and application number was 2255030006394. I had filled three options i.e. (1) Side Drummer (2) Bass Drummer and (3) Horn.
2. That I was called for Trade Test on 22-09-2022 at Police Lines Sector-26, Chandigarh.
3. That I qualified the trade test of my first choice of Side Drummer in addition to Bass Drummer also.
4. That my Physical Efficiency Test and Physical Measurement Test was held on 13-10-2022 and I also qualified both these tests.
5. That during the final result my name has been kept in waiting list of Bass Drum, whereas in my form I had preferably filled Side Drummer as my first choice.
Thus to get know the above facts I applied for information under RTI Act- 2005 to provide the below mentioned information regarding Recruitment of Constable (Band Staff) in Chandigarh Police-2022.
xxxxx Page 2 of 6 I hove received reply in this record from Dy. Superintendent of Police, Recruitment & Training-cum-CPIO UT Chandigarh that "Point No. 1,2 & 3:-
The desired information is denied under section 8 (1)(j) of the Right to lnformation Act-2005"
Further in this regard I filed my 1st appeal before Superintendent of Police, Hqrs 1st Appellate Authority (under RTI Act). which was as under:-
1. That in point number 01, I requisite complete list of candidates who qualified trade test and PMT (including waiting list) for side drummer and CPIO denied it u/s 8(1) (i) of RTI 2005, whereas this is just general information and not contains personal information of any candidate. It would have also been. displayed by the department for the candidates.
2. Similarly point No.2 and 3 didn't contain candidate's personal information whereas I need to know that where my name stands in merit list and marks obtained. Further it is also mentioned here that I am not a third party, although I had also appeared in this recruitment for the post of Constable in Band and my roll number was 20226564 and application number was 2255030006394.
In this regard 1st Appellate Authority given his decision that he has considered the appeal filed by the appellant viz-a-viz comments of DSP- cum-CPIO/Rectt & Teg. He being first appellate authority -CPIO/Rectt & Training is satisfied with the reply of CPIO, as the information sought in the RTI application is third party information. Hence no more action is required in the matter and the appeal is disposed of accordingly. In this regard my humble submission is that I am not third party, whereas I had applied for information being a candidate for recruitment in Band Staff at Chandigarh Police.
It is therefore requested before your goodself that my appeal may kindly be considered and requisite information may kindly be get provided. I shall be highly thankful to you."
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
5. The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through videoconference.
Respondent: Shri Amrao Singh, CPIO, DSP (Training) present through video conference.
6. The Appellant while inviting attention of the Commission towards the contents of his instant Appeal stated that the information has been wrongly Page 3 of 6 denied by the CPIO under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act ignoring the fact that he was one of the candidates applied in the subject recruitment and his name appeared only in the waiting list even though he qualified the test.
7. Upon being queried by the Commission, the Respondent stated that recruitment process in this matter is over in 2023, and the wait list of the relevant period has been exhausted as on date. However, he agreed to provide relevant information to the Appellant.
Decision:
8. The Commission, after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of the records observes that core contention raised by the Appellant in this appeal was denial of merits list of candidates and marks awarded to every candidate in trade test/PMT for the subject recruitment. In response to which, the Respondent claimed that list of candidates including their names contains the elements of personal information of third parties which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
9. Here, it is noteworthy that earlier the denial of information regarding the selected candidates used to be upheld by the Commission in previous decisions. However, the situation has changed with the recent decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai on a date 11.11.2024 in the case titled Shri Onkar Dattatray Kalmankar Vs. PIO, Registrar, District and Session Court, Pune and Ors. (WRIT PETITION NO.9648 OF 2021) dated 11.11.2024. Thus, the replying CPIO cannot be faulted.
10.It may not be out of place to mention that the confidence in the selection process of the candidates who got job through subject channel would be boosted by disclosing the names of the selected candidates and the marks obtained by them, if any. Transparency and accountability in such recruitment process would be promoted. The disclosure of the list of selected candidates in a recruitment process cannot be said to be purely personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. In any event, the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information. Such disclosure would promote transparency and accountability and dispel the lingering doubts about wrongdoings in the public recruitment process. Such disclosures would strengthen the recruitment process by boosting public confidence in it.
Page 4 of 611.Further, the Commission would like to invite the attention of the Respondent towards a judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Shri Onkar Dattatray Kalmankar Vs. PIO, Registrar, District and Session Court, Pune and Ors. (WRIT PETITION NO.9648 OF 2021) dated 11.11.2024, wherein the Court has made the following observations:
"....27. In this case, we are concerned with a selection process for the post of Junior Clerk in the District Court at Pune. Essentially, this is a process by which applications were invited from all eligible candidates by issuing a public advertisement. In that sense, this public process must be transparent and above board. The marks obtained by the candidates in such a selection process cannot ordinarily be held to be "personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest". Furnishing such information would also not cause an unwarranted invasion of the individual's privacy.
28. The legislature has not exempted all personal information under Section 8(1)(j) but only such personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. Since the selection process for Junior Clerks at the District Court in Pune was essentially a public activity which commenced with public advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates, we do not think that the disclosure of marks obtained by the candidates participating in such a process would amount to personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest. Given that such selection processes must be transparent and above board, it would be in the public interest to disclose such information rather than withhold it and allow any doubts about the process (however unjustified such doubts may be) to linger.
xxx xxx xxx
51. Since we have found that the disclosure of the marks obtained by the candidates in the written test, typing test and interviewers did not constitute any exempted information or did not affect the confidentiality of the exam so conducted, we must say that the approach of the District authorities in Wardha contributed to the promotion of transparency which should typically be promoted in matters of public recruitment. Withholding such information unnecessarily allows doubts, however unreasonable, to linger, which is not very healthy in promoting transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and public recruitment processes. Regarding RTI, it is repeatedly asserted that sunlight is the best disinfectant.Page 5 of 6
52. Therefore, though the Wardha disclosure may not be binding precedents, we still think there was nothing wrong with the District Authorities at Wardha making such disclosures. By making such disclosures, the district authorities at Wardha cannot be said to have breached or acted in ignorance of the provisions in Section 8(1)(j) and Section 11 of the RTI Act or Rule 13(e) of the Maharashtra District Courts Right to Information (Revised Rules) 2009 or instructions no.19 issued to the candidates in the advertisement inviting applications for recruitment to the post of Junior Clerk."
12.In view of the above, the Commission directs the Respondent to provide the certified true copy of list of the candidates selected including those in the waiting list in order of merit category-wise (as per reservation policy) along with information such as their names, Roll No., marks obtained on the subject as mentioned in the RTI Application, free of cost to the Appellant, within two weeks of the date of receipt of this order.
13.The FAA to ensure compliance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh Police, Headquarters, Room No. 410, 4th Floor, Additional Deluxe Building, Sector 9, Chandigarh - 160009 Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)