Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/A/2009/001012SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 12 January 2011
Date of decision : 12 January 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri Ramanathan C S
Advocate, M M Building,
Kalabhavan Road, Ernakulam North,
P O Cochin, Kerala.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Union Public Service Commission,
(Sangh Lok Seva Ayog),
Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi - 110 069.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Shri C.L. Guleria, Under Secretary & CPIO,
(ii) Shri Rameswar Dayal, Joint Secretary & AA,
(iii) Shri Naresh Kaushik, Advocate,
(iv) Ms. Joymoti, Advocate
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
Decision Notice
Appeal allowed
Elements of the decision:
CPIO is directed to provide information.
2. We heard this case through video conferencing. In spite of notice, the
CIC/WB/A/2009/001012SM
Appellant was not present. The Respondents were present in our chamber. We
heard their submissions.
3. The Appellant had wanted to get a list of all the candidates along with
the categories under which they had been selected who had been finally
recommended for appointment to Electrical Engineering group based on the
Engineering Services Examination conducted in June 2008 and the
interview/personality test conducted in May 2009. He had also wanted to get
the marks secured by those candidates both in the written test and
interview/personality test. The CPIO had refused to disclose the information by
claiming exemption under Section 8(1) (j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The Appellate Authority has also endorsed this decision.
4. During the hearing, the Respondents reiterated the same argument and
submitted that such information was personal in nature and should not be
disclosed. We however do not agree with this line of argument. We have
consistently held that several details about the successful candidates in any
selection process should be disclosed in the public domain. If a candidate is
found successful in a selection process leading to his appointment to the post
under the Government, such details about him, especially those attributes
which constitute the basic eligibility criteria for the selection, can no longer be
classified as personal information. In other words, if a candidate would not
possess those attributes, he would not be selected in the first place. To ensure
transparency in the selection process, it is essential that such attributes are
widely disseminated. We do not find anything personal about the information
sought by the Appellant in this case.
4. Therefore, we direct the CPIO to disclose to the Appellant within 15
working days from the receipt of this order a complete list of all the candidates
CIC/WB/A/2009/001012SM
recommended for appointment to the Electrical Engineering group based on the
examination mentioned above during 2008/2009 including the category to
which they belonged and marks they received in the written test and the
interview/personality test, separately.
5. With the above direction, the appeal is disposed off.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
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.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2009/001012SM