Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The appellant sought the following information in relation to job positions in Department of Tourism, Hotel, Hospitality and Heritage Studies:

1. As the university advertised the posts of 01 Professor (XII Plan) and 01 Associate Professor (XII Plan); List of candidates with their work experience, educational qualifications, present place of employment and API Scores claimed by the applicants who applied for Professor (XII Plan) and Associate Professor (XII Plan).

2. He had submitted the documents containing filled proforma of prescribed Academic Performance Indicator on 03.05.2016. He wants to know his API score as finalized by the screening committee for the above job positions.

3. Reason for not considering his candidature for the Professors (XII Plan) or Associate Professor (XII Plan) interview

4. Other related information.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondents during Hearing:

The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply on point 1 and 2 of the RTI application. He also raised his grievance on point 2 of the RTI application stating that he had submitted the supporting documents to substantiate his API score but the respondent authority had not considered the same.

The CPIO contended that an appropriate reply was already provided as per record. On a query by the Commission as to how the CPIO offered inspection of information of third parties, the CPIO clarified that the bio-data of candidates like educational qualification, work experience are already in public domain and while disclosing the same they mask the address, date of birth, contact number of third parties which are personal information.

On a perusal of the reply of the deemed PIO, it was observed by the Commission that the reply on all the points were proper except on point no. 1 of the RTI application. In respect of point no. 1, the list of candidates with their work experience, educational qualifications, only were disclosable and their present place of employment, API Scores claimed by the applicants who applied for Professor (XII Plan) and Associate Professor (XII Plan) are personal information of the third parties which are exempted u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The respondent informed that the appellant did not turn up for inspection despite being given an opportunity to do so.