A letter dated 12.08.2009 of the Public Information Officer, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna has been received whereby the required paragraph wise information which companyld be supplied, has been given to the applicant.
The advertisement, inter alia, stated that written examination would be held if adequate number of applications were received.
Feeling aggrieved, respondent No.1 challenged the judgment of the learned Single Judge before the Division Bench of that Court by filing a letters patent appeal being LPA No.102 of 2010.
Since the information which companyld be supplied has been given to the applicant, the proceedings of the case are closed.
The Commission companypleted the process of selection and recommended the panel of selected candidates to the State of Bihar.
These queries companycerned the interview which was held on 30th September, 2002 and 1st October, 2002 by the Commission with regard to the above advertisement.
This application remained pending with the Public Information Officer of the Commission for a companysiderable time that led to filing of an appeal by respondent No.1 before the State Information Commission.
Since numbersuch companysideration arose with respect to the affairs of the Commission and its function was in public domain, reliance on the said provision for denying the information sought for was number tenable in law.
The Court directed the Commission to provide the names of the members of the Interview Board, while denying the disclosure of and providing photocopies of the papers companytaining the signatures and addresses of the members of the Interview Board.
As very limited number of applications were received, the Commission, in terms of the advertisement, decided against the holding of written examination.
The Commission challenging the legality and companyrectness of the said judgment has filed the present appeal by way of special leave.
Thus, the Court in its order dated 20th January, 2011 accepted the appeal, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and directed the Commission to companymunicate the information sought for to respondent No.1.
When the appeal came up for hearing, the State Information Commission vide its order dated 30th April, 2009 had directed the Public Information Officer cum Officer on Special Duty of the Commission that the information sought for be made available and the case was fixed for 27th August, 2009 when the following order was passed The applicant is present.
It exercised the option to select the candidates for appointment to the said post on the basis of viva voce test alone.
One Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi, respondent No.1 herein, claiming to be a public spirited citizen, filed an application before the Commission appellant herein under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for short the Act on 16th December, 2008 seeking information in relation to eight queries.
Aggrieved from the said order of the Information Commission dated 27th August, 2009, respondent No.1 challenged the same by filing a writ before the High Court of Judicature at Patna.
Swatanter Kumar, J. Leave granted.
The Bihar Public Service Commission for short, the Commission published advertisement No.6 of 2000 dated 10th May, 2000 in the local papers of the State of Bihar declaring its intention to fill up the posts of State Examiner of Questioned Documents, in Police Laboratory in Crime Investigation Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
