CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2009/01040 dated 6-6-2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant: Shri Nisar Ahmed Tamboli, Dhule
Respondent: Union Public Service Commission (UPSC)
Decision Announced 4.1.'10
FACTS
By an undated application received in the UPSC on 18.2.2008 Shri
Nisar Ahmed Tamboli of Dhule, Maharashtra applied to the CPIO, UPSC
seeking the following information:
“Name and address of the Muslim candidates passed in the year
2007 in the interview of: (a) IAS, (b) IPS, (c) IFS, (d) Allied
Services.
Name and address of the Muslim candidates failed in the Main
exam held in 2007 of (a) IAS, (b) IPS, (c) IFS, (d) Allied Services.
Name and address of the Muslim candidates failed in the
Interview held in 2007 of (a) IAS, (b) IPS, (c) IFS, (d) Allied
Services.
Name and address of the Muslim candidates failed in the
preliminary exam held in 2007 of (a) IAS, (b) IPS, (c) IFS, (d)
Allied Services.
To this Shri Nisar Ahmed Tamboli received a response dated
27.2.2008 from CPIO Shri Prachish Khanna, DS, UPSC informing Shri
Tamboli as follows: –
“In this regard, it is regretted that the desired information is not
available as the Commission do not maintain religion-wise data
of the candidates appearing in the Civil Service Examination.”
Shri Tamboli, acknowledging that UPSC does not maintain religion-
wise data of the candidates, and not pressing for the information regarding
preliminary examinations, Shri Tamboli has then pleaded as follows before
the Appellate Authority UPSC, Shri K. S. Bariar, Jt. Secretary (Exam):
“The DVD maintained by the Commission of the addresses of
the total candidates who failed in main exam (Written) and main
exam (Interview Test) is possible to make available to the1
appellant. The appellant will sort out the names of the Muslim
candidates.”
Appellate Authority Shri K. S. Bariar Jt. Secretary (Exam), UPSC has,
however, dismissed the appeal by an order of 18-4-2008 as follows: –
“I observe that the reply given by the CPIO, UPSC to the
appellant is appropriate and just. In view of the above, I find
nothing to be interceded in the matter at the appellate stage.”
Shri Tamboli has then moved a second appeal before us with the
following prayer: –
“(i) Order the Central public Information Officer, to provide
the information in the form of DVD free of charge with the
virtue of section 7 (6) and 19 (8) (a) (i) of the Act.
(ii) Order the Central Public Information Officer to
compensate the appellant Rs. 8,000/- (eight thousand) as
T. A. & D. A. for attending the hearing to the Commission,
New Delhi, with the virtue of section 19 (8) (b).
(iii) Impose a penalty Rs. Two hundred and fifty from 17th
March, 2008 till information is received by the appellant,
u/s 20 of the Act.
(iv) To recommend for disciplinary action against the Central
Public Information Officer under the provision of Central
Civil Services Rules, 1964, on the strength of section 20
of the Act.”
The appeal was heard on 4.1.2010. Arrangements had been made for
videoconference with Dhule, Maharashtra. The following are present at CIC
Chambers, New Delhi.
Respondents
Shri Naresh Kaushik, Advocate.
Ms. Amita Kalkal Chaudhry, Advocate.
Ms. Aditi Gupta, Advocate.
Shri Prachish Khanna, Dy. Secretary & CPIO.
Shri D. B. Das, Under Secretary.
Although informed of the date of hearing and arrangement for
videoconference through our notice of 29-12-2009 appellant Shri Nisar
Ahmed Tamboli opted not to be present. At the time of hearing his cell phone
was also switched off and he was not available at his residence. Officials of
NIC reported that appellant had not contacted them with regard to the hearing.
Learned Counsel for respondents Shri Naresh Kaushik submitted that
religion wise information is not stored with regard to the candidates appearing
2
for the UPSC Examination. Moreover it is only the list of successful
candidates that is compiled. There is no list of failed candidates. For the
purposes of conducting the exam roll numbers are assigned but there is no
list maintained of the failed candidates either in the UPSC or in the DOPT,
which is the administrative Ministry for the examinations at issue.
DECISION NOTICE
Because the concerned public authority, in this case the UPSC, does
not hold the information sought, there is no information that CPIO, UPSC
could have provided to appellant Shri Nisar Ahmed Tamboli. This should not,
however, deter Shri Tamboli from pursuing his declared objective of
organizing a voluntary Pre-training Center for Muslim candidates, since there
is little doubt that the representation of Muslims in the services is, in terms of
percentage, well below their proportionate percentage in India’s population.
Appellant Shri Tamboli may seek guidance on organising such a programme
from the Jamia Hamdard New Delhi, contactable at
inquiry@jamiahamdard.edu, which runs a programme of this nature. With
these remarks, because the appeal under RTI has no merit, however, this
appeal is now dismissed.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost
to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
4-1-2010
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO
of this Commission.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar)
Joint Registrar
4-1-2010
3