Information regarding vacancy of nursing tutor/clinical instructor at AIIMS Patna was sought - CIC: Respondent shall submit a copy of the reply, which he claimed to have sent to the Appellant with necessary proof that the reply had been served upon
Information sought and background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.01.2019 seeking information on following 03 points regarding vacancies of nursing tutor/clinical instructor at AIIMS Patna in terms of advertisement dated 21.03.2017.
1. What is the criteria for the final selection of candidates?
2. I am Dinesh Kumar Jain S/o Deepchand Jain, Roll No. 6402, Category UR, I have Ist rank in written test and I full fill all criteria for the post as per notification. I have appeared in the interview, but why I am not selected in the final selection of candidates.
3. Please provide list of marks obtain by all short listed candidates in interview.
The CPIO/Administrative Officer, AIIMS, Patna vide letter dated 23.01.2019 replied as under:-
i. Interview was conducted for shortlisted candidates.
ii. Information about How and Why cannot be given under RTI Act Information available in physical custody of CPIO can only be given under RTI Act.
iii. There is no information available to provide. However, your RTI application is transferred under Section 6(3) of RTI Act 2005 to the CPIO of DEAN office, AIIMS Patna.
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.02.2019, which was not adjudicated by the FAA. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, hearing through video conference was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Respondent alone is present for hearing while the Appellant has chosen not to attend the hearing despite service of hearing notice in advance, nor has he submitted any reason for his absence. Respondent claimed that adequate response has already been provided to the Appellant, which he undertakes to submit before the Commission.
In the light of the aforementioned facts of the case, it is hereby directed that the Respondent shall submit a copy of the reply, which he claimed to have sent to the Appellant, before the Commission with necessary proof that the reply had been served upon the Appellant, by 15.05.2021, failing which appropriate penal action shall be initiated as per law.
The appeal is thus disposed off with these directions.
Y. K. Sinha
Chief Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Dinesh Kumar Jain v. AIIMS, Patna in Second Appeal No. CIC/AIIMS/A/2019/116023, Date of Decision: 16.04.2021