Staff Selection Commission was asked regarding lack of transparency in allocation of posts in Combined Graduate Level Examination - CIC took a very serious view of the delay in replying; PIO cautioned to attend to RTI applications with seriousness
1. Shri K. Dinesh filed an application dated 27.01.2014 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Staff Selection Commission seeking information on his representation dated 11.10.2013 to the Secretary, DOPT regarding lack of transparency in allocation of posts by S.S.C. in Combined Graduate Level Examination (CGLE), 2012, which was forwarded to Dr. D.D. Sharma, Member, SSC, including (i) does anyone by the name Dr. D.D. Sharma holding designation of Member, SSC exist (ii) if yes, then was the appellant’s representation forwarded to him by Secretary, DOPT and (iii) what action was initiated by him on the said representation, etc.
2. The appellant filed the present appeal dated 20.06.2014 before the Commission on the ground that he was not provided the information sought in his RTI application by the CPIO, SSC, (DOPT), New Delhi despite the FAA’s Order and requested the Commission to direct the concerned authorities to provide the information sought by him and investigate corruption/malpractices by officials of S.S.C.
3. The appellant Shri K. Dinesh attended the audio hearing. The respondent Shri R. Thakur, CPIO and Under Secretary, SSC was present in person. 4. The appellant submitted that he wants to know as to why action was not taken on his representation dated 11.10.2013 at that point of time. The appellant further submitted that he had filed an application with CAT, Hyderabad and CAT vide order dated November, 2013 had considered his application and passed an order in his favour. Thus, his grievances have been redressed.
5. The respondent submitted that the FAA vide order dated 29.05.2014 had directed US, C1/ 1 and CPIO to provide information to the appellant.
6. The Commission notes that complete information is yet to be provided by the respondent. The Commission takes a very serious view of this delay. The public information officers are entrusted with the responsibility of providing information to the citizen under the RTI Act. It is expected that the CPIO on receipt of a request shall as expeditiously as possible and in any case within 30 days provide information. In this case the CPIO did not discharge her responsibility properly. The CPIO is directed to ensure that in future the RTI applications are dealt with due seriousness and the provisions of the RTI Act are implemented in letter and spirit.
7. The Commission directs the CPIO and Under Secretary, C1/ 1, SSC to provide information to the appellant as to why action was not taken on his representation dated 11.10.2013 submitted to the Member, SSC within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.
9. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Citation: Shri K. Dinesh v. Staff Selection Commission in Decision No. CIC/RM/A/2014/004072/SB