STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
LAWS(P&H)-2008-12-82
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on December 08,2008

STATE BANK OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

HEMANT GUPTA,J. - (1.) THE challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 07.10.2008 (annexure P-7) passed by Central Information Commissioner, directing the petitioner to provide the marks obtained by the selected candidate under various heads; the marks obtained by respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as the 'applicant') under various heads and the marks secured by the applicant during the last four years, if any, for the performance.
(2.) THE applicant was considered for promotion as Security Officer from Middle Management Grade Scale-III (for short 'MMGS-III') to Senior Management Grade Scale-IV (for short 'SMGS-IV') in the promotion year 2006-2007. The applicant sought the following information on 20.06.2007 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :- 1. The policy/criteria adopted by the Bank for inclusion in the zone of Selection and promotion of Security Officers from MMGS-III to SMGS-IV for the promotion year 2006-2007. 2. For the sake of transparency, please advise me the score of my last five years performance like the prevailing practice of advising the test performance to general cadre officers. My shortcomings, if any, which had formed the basis of excluding my name from the list of the last year promotions." 3. The petitioner has been granted information in respect of the policy criteria adopted by the petitioner. However, the following information ordered by the Central Information Commissioner is disputed by the petitioner in the present writ petition. "1. The marks obtained by the last selected candidate under various heads (without disclosing the name). 2. The marks obtained by the appellant under various heads. 3. If some marks have been prescribed for the performance, the marks secured by the appellant during the last four years against the performance."
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that such information was not sought by the applicant in his application under the Act and that the information sought is exempted from disclosure in terms of Section 8(1)(e) and (j) of the Act.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.