Central Information Commission
Mrsampat Prajapat vs Border Security Force on 30 November, 2015
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi110067
Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2014/000342/SB
Dated 01.12.2015
Appellant : Shri Sammpat Prajapat,
S/o Shri. Karan Singh Prajapat
CoOperative Bank ke Samne, Vill Gotan,
Tehsil Medtacity, Jila Nagour Rajasthan
Respondent : Central Public Information Officer,
HQ Rajasthan Frontier BSF,
Mandore Road
Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Date of Hearing : 30.11.2015
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application filed on : 11.10.2013
First Appeal filed on : 19.11.2013
Second Appeal filed on : 24.01.2014
ORDER
1. Shri. Sammpat Prajapat filed an application dated 11.10.2013 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), HQ Rajasthan Frontier BSF, seeking information on four points relating to the Head Constable (RO) Examination, March, 2013 including
(i) total marks obtained and result of Roll No. 113240401001, (ii) marks obtained in the written test, dictation test and interview, (iii) copy of evaluated answer sheet and (iv) Rank in the merit list.
2. Not satisfied with the nonresponse of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal dated 19.11.2013 before the FAA. As he was not satisfied with the nonresponse of the FAA, the appellant filed second appeal dated 24.01.2014 before the Commission on the ground that CPIO has not provided the complete information.
Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Sammpat Prajapat was present in person. The respondent Shri S.C Yadav, DIG, BSF attended the hearing through video conferencing.
4. The appellant submitted that complete information has not been provided to him on the ground that under Section 24(1) of the RTI Act, BSF is exempted from the purview of the RTI Act, except when the information pertains to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.
5. The respondent submitted that BSF has been declared an exempt organization under Section 24(1) read with Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, information sought by the appellant does not pertain to allegations of corruption and human rights violations. The provisions of the RTI Act are, therefore, not applicable in this matter. Nonetheless, information relating to total marks obtained by the appellant in the examination, rank in the merit list and cutoff marks for OBC category were provided to the appellant vide letter dated 12.12.2013.
Decision:
6. The Commission is aware that under Section 24(1) r/w Second Schedule of the RTI Act, 2005, BSF has been declared an exempt organization. Hence, the provisions of the RTI Act are not applicable to the BSF except when the information pertains to allegations of corruption or human rights violations. The Commission also notes that the respondent has provided part information to the appellant.
7. The High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) 7453/2011 dated 09.10.2013 (Union of Indian vs Adarsh Sharma) had held that: "5. .......if an information of the nature sought by the respondent is easily available with the Intelligence Bureau, the agency would be welladvised in assisting a citizen, by providing such an information, despite the fact that it cannot be accessed as a matter of right under the provisions of Right to Information Act........................................
It is again made clear that information of this nature cannot be sought as a matter of right and it would be well within the discretion of the Intelligence Bureau whether to supply such information or not........."
8. In view of the above, the Commission would like the BSF to consider the request of the appellant and provide information to the extent possible to the appellant.
9. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties (Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer