CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001307/4017
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001307
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Md. Salim Khan
12A/24, Gali No. 10, Vijay Mohalla,
Maujpur, Delhi-53
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Bhim Rao Ambedkar College
Main Wazirabad Road, Yamuna Vihar,
Delhi-110094.
RTI application filed on : 23/02/2009 PIO replied : 02/04/2009 First appeal filed on : 13/04/2009 First Appellate Authority order : 13/05/2009 Second Appeal filed on : 21/05/2009 Information sought:
The Appellant in his RTI application has sought following information regarding
selection of Non-Teaching Post:
S. Information Sought PIO’s Reply
No
1. Details of selection Selection process in college is according to the rules of the
process and members in Delhi University and there is different system for the
selection committee. selection of different posts.
2. Details of appointment Details of appointment between 2000 to 2008 are given
between year 2000 to below :
2008 and number of
candidates and details of Jagbir Thakur Ravindra Krishna Narendra
reserved and general 30.08.60 Prasad Singh Kumar Kumar
seat as well. 26.9.77 5.8.85 1.4.68 2.10.58
P. Kumar Uttam Pavitra Bhupendra
15.7.70 Singh Bhardwaj 17.7.78
6.9.64 10.6.77
Deepak Punit Promila
Shrma Kumar Sharma
10.7.78 10.11.72 18.7.62
Mathoram Bharat Sanghraj
3.4.83 Lal Singh
15.7.75 18.7.85
S. Bhawani Kanishka
Sachdeva Singh Noutiyal
10.2.76 23.7.89 30.8.81
S. Kumar
8.7.78
Manoj
Kumar
12.10.74
3. Number of the selected Almost all selected candidate from abovesaid list has
candidate who was on worked on ad-hoc/daily wages basis.
ad-hoc/daily. Whether
all the selected
candidates were on ad-
hoc or some were
outsiders.
4. Details of basis on There is no selection process for Ad-hoc/Daily wages
which these candidates posts in Delhi University so no advertisement published.
were selected on Ad-
hoc/Dailywages.
Whether any
advertisement was
published in any
National Newspaper? If
yes, then give a copy of
that advertisement.
5. Whether the Does not apply.
composition of selection
committee was
constitutional? Details
of the member of
selection committee.
6. Give the reason if the Same as in question no. 4.
committee was not
formed.
7. Give the details, of the No such record is kept in college.
candidates if they
belong to any working
person in the college
and the basis and
standards of their
selection as well.
8. Give the details if any Candidates are selected by selection committee according
of the selected candidate to the rule of college.
had any kind of
experience.
9. Date of Birth of the Same as in question no. 2.
selected candidate.
10. Give the reason for not Same as question no 8, University is bound to follow the
selecting me on the post decision of Selection Committee.
of Office Attendant for
which the appellant had
applied and later gone
through interview.
11. Details of the VC Details of representative is private.
Representative/Nominee
for recruitment on the
reserved seat of
OBC/SC/ST/SC in the
University.
Grounds for First Appeal:
The Appellant termed the PIO’s reply as unsatisfactory and incomplete information and
in addition to this he added t0w more questions related to delay in providing information
by the PIO after 3 and ½ month of the date on application was filed by him and defiance
of rule of RTI by PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority
The FAA said that some of the Appellant’s queries had been answered by the PIO and
some queries had been added later in his appeal. The FAA advised the Appellant to file a
separate RTI Application to get information with requisite fee and asked to visit in PIO’s
office on 22.05.2009 at 4pm.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete reply from PIO and non-receipt of information from FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Md. Salim Khan
Respondent: Mr. A.K. Dhall, PIO.
The PIO will give the following information to the Appellant:
1. Names and designations of the selection committees’ members.
2. Whether the selected candidates are of SC, ST, OBC or general category?
3. Whether the selected candidates were earlier working as ad hoc / daily?
4. Minutes of the Selection Committees meetings.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO will give the information as described above to the Appellant before 20th July
2009.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
If information is not provided in the time stipulated under Section 7(6) of the RTI Act, it has to be provided
free of cost to the Appellant
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
7 July 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(GJ)