CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2010/000062
Dated, the 17th March, 2010.
Appellant : Shri Saroj Kumar Mishra Respondents : NALCO
Hearing in this second-appeal was held on 11.03.2010 through
videoconferencing (VC). Appellant was present in person at NIC VC
facility at Kakinada (East Godavari), while the respondents ―
represented by the APIO, Shri D.M. Rao ― were present at NIC VC
facility at Bhubaneswar. Commission conducted the hearing from its
New Delhi office.
2. The question in this second-appeal is the point brought up by the
appellant, through his RTI-application dated 19.08.2009, i.e. disclosure
of his Annual Appraisal Ratings (AARs) through certified copies from the
period 1988-89 to 2008-2009 including Moderation Committee Reports
and opportunity for inspection of the originals after receipt of the
certified copies.
3. Respondents disclosed to the appellant only his AAR Grades, but
not the original reports citing certain earlier decisions of this
Commission.
4. Appellant has argued that as per Commission’s Full Bench decision
in P.K. Sarin Vs. Directorate General of Works (CPWD); Appeal No.
CIC/WB/A/2007/00422; Date of Decision: 19.02.2009, he was entitled
to receive not only the statement of his grades, but also the copies of
his AARs along with all attached documents.
Decision:
5. It is not necessary to complicate this matter in the light of other
decisions of the Commission because the disclosure-obligation of this
category of information has been settled through CIC’s Full Bench
decision as cited by the appellant (at para 4 above.)
6. CPIO is, therefore, directed to take action as per the above Full
Bench decision for disclosure of the requested information to the
appellant within two weeks of the receipt of this order.
AT-17032010-03.doc
Page 1 of 2
7. Matter disposed of with these directions.
8. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-17032010-03.doc
Page 2 of 2