CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000655/7601
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000655
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Ms. Saroj,
22/257, Trilok Puri,
Near Mayur Vihar Police Station,
Delhi - 110091.
Respondent : Ms. S. R. Spolia
Public Information Officer & Dy. Registrar
Navyug School Educational Society,
Head Office, N.P. Primary School,
Hanuman Road, New Delhi- 110001.
RTI application filed on : 03/11/2009
PIO replied : 03/12/2009
First appeal filed on : 14/01/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 05/03/2010
Second Appeal received on : 11/03/2010
Date of Notice of Hearing : 25/03/2010
Hearing Held on : 28/04/2010
Sl. Information Sought (related to TGT/PRT Reply of the Public Information Officer
recruitment drive 2008-09 in NSES) (PIO)
1. Rules followed in selection process. Proper procedure as per recruitment rules had
been followed in selecting the candidates.
2. Category of selected candidates – General, SC-21, ST-11, OBC- 24, UR- 58 had been
OBC, SC and ST. selected.
3. Photocopy of the Appellant’s written test along Information could not be provided since the
with interview marks. process of recruitment was still in progress.
4. Grading given during selection process to Same as above.
contract teachers working with NSES vis a vis
selected candidates from outside.
5. Candidate wise age of selected students. Concerns 3rd party information, disclosure of
which has no relevance to any public interest or
activity.
6. The reasons for the discrepancy between no of NSES had reserved the right to increase or
advertised posts and the actual no of selected decrease the no of vacancies. The provision was
candidates. mentioned in the employment notice.
7. The rule under which the institute has selected There is no subject wise reservation in NSES.
TGT SC, “A or B” post in OBC category in the
3rd list published especially when the same
information was not published for the post of
TGT SC, A or B in OBC category.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The appellant has been shown the marks obtained etc. the appellant was satisfied with the
position of her merit list.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and no order passed by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Ms. Saroj;
Respondent: Ms. S. R. Spolia, Public Information Officer & Dy. Registrar;
The PIO has given certain information but is now directed to give following additional
information to the Appellant:
1- Query-1: Procedure followed in the Selection process.
2- Query-3: Photocopy of written test alongwith interview marks.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to give the information as directed above to the
Appellant before 10 May 2010.
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
28 April 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RR)