Question paper of Assessment test pertaining to IIT Madras recruitment was denied - Respondent: Such analytical cases are limited in number, and if it is disclosed, the same will give undue advantage to someone who receives it - CIC: Denial upheld
The appellant has sought the following information pertaining to IITM recruitment Advertisement No. IITM/R/1/2016 dated 22.01.2016:
1. Question paper of Assessment test conducted on 01.05.2017.
2. Marks of all candidates i.e. Assessment & Interview marks separately with community status.
3. Whether the selected candidates were internal candidates or external candidates. If external candidate, their previous department & their pay level in the pay matrix.
Grounds for Second Appeal
The CPIO did not provide the desired information. Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing: The Appellant was not present for the hearing. The representative of CPIO submitted that an appropriate reply has been provided to the appellant on 17.07.2017 and the First Appellate Authority also disposed of the first appeal on 02.08.2017. On being enquired by the Commission as to why the question paper as sought for by the appellant on query no 1 cannot be disclosed, the representative submitted that the assignment test paper is an analytical paper in the form similar to case studies to understand the candidate’s spontaneous decision making ability for the job profile of an Assistant Registrar. Since such cases are limited in number, if it is disclosed, the same will give undue advantage to someone who receives it. He further submitted that since the questions are limited in number, they are often repeated and hence cannot be disclosed.
From a perusal of the relevant case records and based on the submissions made during the hearing, the Commission observes that the CPIO has provided an appropriate & point-wise reply in time. Moreover, since the appellant was not present to contest the reply of the CPIO, no action is warranted.
The Commission upholds the submission of the CPIO. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna
Citation: Dheepa C v. Registrar & Central Public Information Officer Indian Institute of Technology, Madras in Decision no.: CIC/IITMD/A/2017/606359/00243, Date of Decision: 14/03/2019