CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Club building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market, Old JNU Campus, New Delhi- 110067. Tel: 011 - 26182593/26182594 Email: [email protected] File No : CIC/VS/A/2015/002293+ CIC/VS/A/2015/002462+ CIC/VS/A/2015/002465+ CIC/VS/A/2015/002463

In the matter of: Kishor Vasuduv Palave At Post Nadgon, Tal , Pin No. 425310, Dist. Jalgoan ,Maharasthra & Patil Yogesh Devidas At. Post- Nadgaon, Tal- Bodwad, Distt- , - 425310 & Ajit Bhikan Pinjari Khadka Road, Mohammadi Nagar, Near al- Heera School behind Raj Bharti Press , Distt- Jalgaon Maharashtra- 425201 & Shaikh Rizwab Ahmed Plot No. 53, Pralhad nagar Ring Road, Bhusawal Distt- Jalgaon Maharashtra- 425201 ...Appellants

VS

Central Public Information Officer APIO and Sr Personnel Officer (Recruitment), Railway Recruitment Cell, C P M Office Building, P D Mello Road, Wadi Bandar, Central Railway, Mumbai Maharashtra- 400010 ...Respondent

Dates Sl File No. RTI date CPIO reply First Appeal FAA Order Second No Appeal 1 CIC/VS/A/2015/002293 09.03.2015 01.04.2015 11.06.2015 31.07.2015 01.10.2015 2 CIC/VS/A/2015/002462 09.03.2015 01.04.2015 10.06.2015 31.07.2015 01.10.2015 3 CIC/VS/A/2015/002465 10.03.2015 01.04.2015 10.06.2015 28.07.2015 01.10.2015 4 CIC/VS/A/2015/002463 09.03.2015 08.04.2015 10.06.2015 31.07.2015 01.10.2015

Date of hearing : 09.03.2017

1

Information sought: The appellant had sought information relating to 10 candidates who had qualified in the written examination, details of marks scored by them and copies of their answer sheets, other details relating to Group D vacancy. Grounds for Second Appeal

The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

Order

Appellant : Present Respondent : PIO, Shri Ajay Raj, APO

During the hearing the respondent CPIO submitted that they had provided the requisite reply vide their letter dated 01.04.2015 in connection with the RTI applications dated 09.03.15 and 10.03.2015. The appellant submitted that he received the requisite reply but was not satisfied with the same.

On perusal of the case record, it was seen that reply provided on point nos. 1 and 4 of the said RTI application is not proper. The present respondent CPIO is directed to provide to the appellant point wise reply complete in all respects based on information as available on record including certified true copies of the documents on point nos. 1 and 4 e.g. note sheet, letters, correspondence, e-mails etc free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act within 15 days of the receipt of the order. For this purpose, CPIO/PIO may take assistance of any other office/department u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act. It is relevant to note that in para 5, mention was made of details relating to chargesheets issued to other officers. In the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs Cen.Information Commr.& Ors on 3 October, 2012 Hon’ble Supreme Court stated as follows:

“13. We are in agreement with the CIC and the courts below that the details called for by the petitioner i.e. copies of all memos issued to the third respondent, show cause notices and orders of censure/punishment etc. are qualified to be personal information as defined in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. The performance of an employee/officer in an organization is primarily a matter between the employee and the employer and normally those aspects are governed by the service rules which

2

fall under the expression “personal information”, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or public interest. On the other hand, the disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of that individual. Of course, in a given case, if the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer of the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, appropriate orders could be passed but the petitioner cannot claim those details as a matter of right.”

In view of the judicial dicta, such information is not possible to be provided to the appellant. The respondent CPIO is further directed to send a compliance report containing the copy of the reply and the despatch details of the same to the appellant within 07 days thereafter to the Commission for record. With the above direction, the appeal is disposed of.

[Amitava Bhattacharyya] Information Commissioner

Authenticated true copy

(A.K. Talapatra) Deputy Registrar

3