Inspection of files dealing with DPCs held on for promotion – disclosure of overall grading of officials cannot be said to cause unwarranted invasion of privacy – disclose APAR grading of only those officials found fit by the DPC for promotion
The present appeal dated 24.04.2012, filed by Shri Inderjeet against Airports Authority of India, New Delhi, was taken up for hearing on 13.06.2013 when the Respondents were present through Shri R N Srivastava, GM(HR). The Appellant, however, chose not to be present.
Facts of the Case:
2. The Appellant filed his RTI application dated 03.11.2011 with the CPIO, Airports Authority of India (AAI), New Delhi seeking inspection of files dealing with DPCs held on different dates/ years for promotion to the post of DGM (Comm) and their postings on promotion.
3. The CPIO, in response, through his reply dated 28.11.2011, informed the Appellant that he can inspect the files mentioned in his RTI application on 01.12.2011 at 03:30 p.m.
4. The Appellant accordingly undertook the inspection on scheduled date and requested for copies of certain document from the inspected files.
5. The CPIO, however, in response, vide his letter dated 20.12.2011 provide copies of only part documents to the Appellant, while denying the rest (of the documents) on the ground that the same belong to third party.
6. Being aggrieved by the CPIO’s reply, the Appellant filed his first appeal dated 11.01.2012 before the Appellate Authority which the Appellate Authority decided vide his order dated 27.01.2012. In this order, the Appellate Authority held that the CPIO has provided information as required under the Act, while also recording that moreover inspection of records has been provided to the Appellant.
7. The Appellant thereafter filed the instant appeal before the Commission challenging the order of the Appellate Authority.
8. During the hearing, the Respondents inform the Commission that only information which they have withheld from disclosure in the instant case is “PAR grading” related to other officers on the ground that the same pertains to third party. The Appellant, however, in his instant appeal to the Commission argues that the “APAR grading” is a document which are prepared/generated by the HR discipline cell on the basis of the PARs of the candidates in the panel of promotion. Therefore, the same cannot be termed as third party information under the RTI Act.
9. On consideration of the submissions above and on perusal of records, the Commission observes that disclosure of overall grading of officials promoted by the DPC cannot be said to cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual. The Respondents are, therefore, directed to provide this information i.e. the overall “APAR grading” of only those officials found fit by the DPC for promotion, and for the Appellant himself within 10 days of receipt of this order to the Appellant.
Citation: Shri Inderjeet v. Airports Authority of India in Case No. CIC/SS/A/2012/002167