CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001490/13717
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001490
Relevant Facts
Emerging From the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Satish Kumar
Village-Patheda
Do. Bawana
District-Mahendragad.
Respondent : Mr. V. K. Bansal
PIO & Dy. Secretary
Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board
DSSSB, GNCTD
FC- 18, Institutional Area,
Kardooma Delhi
RTI application filed on : 17/03/2011
PIO replied on : 13/04/2011
First Appeal filed on : 16/04/2011
First Appellate Authority order on : 25/04/2011
Second Appeal received on : 02/05/2011
Information Sought:
The information sought pertains to Result No.15 Drawing Teacher, Post Code 17/2010 and please
furnish the answers regarding the following questions:
1. Please furnish the Papers of those examinees who have secured up to 77 marks in Paper-II,
which means of those who are in top 380 rank in the Merit List.
2. Please furnish the Answer Papers of those examinees who have secured up to 77 marks in
Paper-II, which means of those who are in top 380 rank in the Merit List.
3. Those examinees which are there in the Merit List from rank 344 to 347 and 349 to 351 have
secured 78 marks but why examinees who secured 346 and 347 ranks were selected through
OBC quota when examines who secured 344 and 345 were not selected.
4. Why was not SANA AFREEIN, whose Roll No. is 017125599 got 125 marks selected?
5. Why was not the Waiting List prepared?
6. Why were not Raju Saini whose Roll No. is 01714990 who got a rank of 344 and Niranjan
Jaiswaal whose Roll. No. is 01714321 got rank of 345 selected for OBC quota when 78 marks
are secured in Paper-II?
7. If some of the selected examines do not join then will the next examinees on the Merit List
get a chance of selection?
8. Please furnish a copy of the Joining Report of the Drawing Teacher who joins in.
9. Please furnish a copy of the Drawing Teacher who gives interview.
10. Why there are 79 vacant posts when UR-7, OBC-9, ST-93?
11. If all those Candidates whose Candidature is kept pending, if their Candidature is abrogated
then will the next candidate be called for the interview?
12. Are OBC/SC candidates who are form outside Delhi provided the benefit of the OBC/SC
category.
13. What has the Supreme Court ordered, latest, regarding OBC/SC?
14. Why candidates who have secured 5,12,14,16,24,25,27,29 and etc. were selected through
OBC quota when they figure in the Merit List?
Reply of the PIO:
The PIO has provided point-wise information to the Appellant.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
No reply from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Not On Record.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Non-reception of the full and correct information sought.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a
perusal of the papers it appears that the information available on the records has been provided to the
Appellant. However, some of the queries of the appellant appear to seek voluminous information and
may be useful if the Appellant inspects the relevant records. The Commission directs the PIO to
facilitate an inspection of the relevant records if the Appellant comes for inspection on 23 August
2011 from 10.30AM onwards.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the records on 23 August 2011
from 10.30AM onwards if the Appellant comes for inspection.
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 July 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (DS)