CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi -110 066.
Tel.: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /SG/A/2008/00186/1261
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2008/00186/
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Nishat Kumar,
44, Saraswati Apartment,
Sector – 9, Rohini,
Delhi – 110085.
Respondent 1 : Mr. Rameshwar Dayal,
DS & CPIO,
Union Public Service Commission,
Sangh Lok Seva Yog,
Dholapur House, Shah Jahan Road,
New Delhi - 110069.
RTI application filed on : 06/08/2008
PIO replied : 04/09/2008
First appeal filed on : 18/09/2008
First Appellate Authority order : Not Mentioned.
Second Appeal filed on : 05/11/2008
Details of information required as under:
S.No. Information Sought PIO's Reply
1. The number of vacancies in the Section The number of vacancies reported by DOP&T in
Officer grade (Category I) only for SOS the Section Officer Grade (Category I), 2005 the
LDCE 2005 intimated by the DOPT; following point-wise information is furnished;
category wise, General/Sc/ST. General - 126, SC - 11, ST - 16.
2. Number is the candidates; category wise, The number of candidates qualified in the written
General/SC/ST, qualified in the written part of exam for evaluation of service record in
part for evaluation of service record in category I for the said exam are;
respect of Section Officer grade General - 302, SC - 38, ST - 08.
(Category I) on the basis of above exam
and result declared on 5th August 2008.
3. What is the relationship between number The relationship between number of vacancies
of vacancies and number of candidates, and number of candidates qualified the written
qualified in the written part for part of examination cannot be disclosed as it is
evaluation of service record in respect of intrinsically linked to the processing of result
Section Officer grade (Category I) on the which is a confidential activity. Moreover, the
basis of above exam; category wise, disclosure of the same would also not serve any
General/SC/ST. public interest. The information is exempted from
disclosure under Section 8 (i)(d) of the RTI Act,
05.
First Appellate Authority Ordered:
Not mentioned.
Relevant Fact emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Nishat Kumar,
Respondent: Mr. Rameshwar Dayal PIO with Mr. Naresh Kaushik Advocate
The respondent has given information on point 3 after the decision of the First appellate
authority on 12/12/2008. The appellant points out a discrepancy in the number of candidates
who qualified in the two letters given by the PIO on 4/9/2008 and 12/12/2008. The
respondent has explained the reason for this discrepancy and that the reporting has been
changed due to a High Court order. The explanation appears plausible.
Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
The PIO will give the explanation for the difference in the numbers in the two
letters of 4/9/2008 and 12/12/2008 to the appellant before 5 February 2009.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
January 23, 2009.
(For any further correspondence, please mention the decision number for a quick disposal)