Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

BEFORE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
APPEAL UNDER SECTON 19(3) OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005
Case No.1371 of 2007
D.D. 17.8.2007
Sri. G.Madhavan, Chief Information Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh
Dr.Naresh Kumar ... Appellant
Vs.
First Appeallate Authority, ... Respondents
Haryana P.S.C. Chandigarh & Anr.
Information under R.T.I. Act:
Appellant a candidate under PH quota for the post of Principal (School Cadre) after the interview
sought for information pertaining to selection of candidates against the said quota – Information was
refused on the ground that writ petitions were filed both in the High Court and the Supreme Court –
Though the cases before the High Court and the Supreme Court were filed under R.T.I. Act the
Information Commission disposed of the case by keeping the request for information in abeyance till
the decision of the competent Court.
Facts:
Haryana PSC
Dr.Naresh Kumar, appellant filed an application in August, 2006 requesting for information pertaining
to the selections made for the post of Principal (School Cadre) in the year 2002. The appellant was
a candidates who was interviewed against the quota for physically handicapped category and desired
to have information pertaining to selection of candidates against this quota. Vide letter dated 17.10.2006
a reply was sent to him by the respondent department that against these selections writ petitions have
been filed both in the Punjab & Haryana High Court as well as Supreme Court of India and it is not
possible to give information till these writs are decided. He wrote vide letter dated 20.10.2006 to the
Secretary, Haryana Public Service Commission pointing out that his interview was only with regard to
posts reserved for physically handicapped persons and the information required by him only pertained
to selection of physically handicapped category. He desired to know from the respondent department
whether there is any writ pending about the selection made against this category in the Court. Vide
letter dated 14.12.2006 he was informed that irrespective of the fact of the writ pending in any category
of selection it is not possible to give information until the writs are decided by the competent courts.
The appellant vide letter dated nil pointed out that the decision of CWP No.16913 of 2002 which is
being quoted for denying information to the appellant in the letter dated 5.4.2007 was much before the
promulgation of the RTI Act. He was informed that since the selections have been challenged before
the Punjab & Haryana High Court as well as the Supreme Court and keeping in view the decision
275