CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066 F.No.CIC/SS/A/2013/003009-YA Date of Hearing : 28.01.2015 Date of Decision : 28.01.2015 Appellant : Shri A.B. Bhattacharjee Nagpur Respondent : Shri Bijay Swaroop, GM(P) & CPIO Coal India Ltd. Kolkata Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad : : : : : 21.06.2013 22.07.2013 08.08.2013 13.09.2013 05.12.2013 Relevant facts emerging from appeal: RTI application filed on PIO replied on First Appeal filed on First Appellate Authority (FAA) order on Second Appeal received on Information sought: Appellant sought copies of annual confidential reports which were considered by the DPC for promotion from E5 to M1 grade pertaining to an executive of CIL viz. Shri P.K. Sinha, along with copy of his CR and service book. Relevant facts emerging during hearing: Both the parties are present and heard through video conference. Appellant sought the above information by filing an RTI application dated 21.06.2013. PIO vide reply dated 22.06.2013 denied the information u/s 8(1)(j) RTI Act. FAA vide order dated 13.09.2013 upheld the stand of the PIO to deny the information. Appellant submitted that he has sought the information in public interest because he suspected malpractices by the public authority in promotion and appointment of officers. He submitted that Shri P.K. Sinha was posted at Kawadi mines when there was a mine disaster and where many people have lost their lives. In spite of this he has manipulated to get rapid career advancement in the organisation. On a query by the Commission as to whether there is any report or inquiry in the matter indicting Shri Sinha for the same. The appellant submitted that the cases are pending in the court of law. Respondent submitted that the DPC was done according to the guidelines issued by the CIL where if any person is charge sheeted or any disciplinary proceedings are pending against him or he was under suspension or under conviction or any penalty is in operation against him, then he will not be considered for promotion. In addition, vigilance clearance and clearance from the angle of mine safety are also considered. The official once considered for promotion through DPC then it is ensured that there is no proceedings are pending against him. Respondent further reiterated their stand to deny the information u/s 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act. Decision: After hearing both the parties and perusal of the record, the Commission does not find any merit in the appellant’s plea. He is not able to establish any larger public interest for disclosure of information that is personal in nature. Accordingly, the Commission upholds the stand of the public authority to deny the information to the appellant u/s 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. (Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission. (B.D. Harit) Deputy Secretary & Deputy Registrar