CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003455/11114
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003455
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Tarun Sharma
House Number 123, Lane No. 13,
Balweer nagar extension,
Shahdara, Delhi-110032
Respondent : Ms. Kamlesh Hatta
Public Information Officer & Dy. Secretary
Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board,
Government of NCT of Delhi,
FC-18, Institutional Area, Karkadoma,
Delhi-110302
RTI application filed on : 28/07/2010
PIO replied : 03/09/2010
First appeal filed on : 29/09/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 08/10/2010
Second Appeal received on : 08/12/2010
Information sought :
The Appellant has appeared for the examination of Junior Engineer Mechanical/ Electrical, Delhi Jal Board
on 21/06/09 and he enclosed the receipt of submission of all certified certificates as required. He is seeking
information regarding the following queries:
1. Reason for not furnishing the above mentioned exam’s results.
2. The Appellant learnt that his result was kept pending due to not submission of Identity proof and
was not informed about it. Provide the receipt of any information regarding it sent through any letter.
3. Provide photocopy of receipt of the medium through which the notice was last sent as on 17/02/10 as
well as the notice also.
4. Furnish copy of the document in which competent authority has confirmed that the candidate has
obtained the information.
5. Specify the details of DSSSB-(Recruitment Policy) clause and also furnish photocopy of it.
6. Provide details as to why the information regarding admission being closed wasn’t furnished to the
appellant.
7. Specify details as to when the roll number was sent to the appellant’s house then why such important
information was withheld from him.
8. Furnish reply to all above mentioned questions with proof and relevant copies enclosed.
PIO’s reply :
In response to question 1 the Appellant was informed that the result is not sent to every individual candidate
as such and that the photocopy of exam result is published on the notice board as well as uploaded on the
internet. In response to question 2 and 3 the PIO provided that the candidates, whose required documents
and identity proof wasn’t submitted, their results were pending and information was sent that all documents
were to be submitted within 15 days and final notice was sent on 17/02/10 which if not replied would cancel
the candidature. Regarding question 5 the information cannot be furnished as not available. In response to
question 4,6,7,8 the candidate was sent the final notice through speed post and it was not received back by
this branch. The photocopy is enclosed herewith.
First Appeal:
Information received from the PIO is unsatisfactory, confusing and misleading
Order of the FAA:
Incomplete information received by the appellant and details of the Speed Post vide with the letter that was
sent to him seeking copy of documents in respect of his qualifications, not received. The Appellant was
asked to re-see all the points and give information in more details as per records within 10 days and within
same time PIO and OIC (CC-I) are directed to give the information.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Vague and misleading information received from the PIO despite orders from the FAA to furnish
satisfactory reply.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Tarun Sharma;
Respondent: Mr. Mahabir Singh, Superintendent on behalf of Ms. Kamlesh Hatta, Public Information
Officer & Dy. Secretary;
The Appellant had applied for the job and is seeking information of proof that he was intimated that
his application was deficient. The PIO has provided the information based on the available records and has
given him a copy of the dispatch register which shows that the said letter has been sent. However, the
Appellant is seeking a copy of the speed post receipt by which the intimation was sent to him and the
respondent states that they do not maintain this. Since the Respondent has stated that they do not have
information in terms of speed post receipts of intimation sent the Commission is not able to help the
Appellant any further. However the Commission recommends to the Chairman, DSSSB to institute a
mechanism whereby the speed post receipts would be available of communications of this nature sent to the
applicants.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information available on the records has been provided.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
24 January 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (Su)
CC:
To,
Chairman, DSSSB through Ms. Kamlesh Hatta, Public Information Officer & Dy. Secretary;