JOIN USTransparency takes a backseat in KPSC
Transparency and the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) seem to be poles apart. The authorities do not seem to have learnt any lessons after the alleged fraud in the selection process five years ago came to light.
In 2007, the KPSC had organised exams to recruit Assistant Executive Engineers (Class-I).
Based on the examination results, the engineers were appointed to various government departments.
Vain bids
However, the KPSC did not make public the rank list of the written exam and results of the interviews, giving rise to suspicion. Ever since the exam took place, engineers aspiring for government jobs had been making vain bids to get certified copies of the rank list (classification wise) of the engineers who passed the examination.
One such candidate is G Raju from Mysore, who has been continuously struggling to get the list.
On February 22 this year, he sought information under the RTI Act, 2005 from the KPSC secretary about the rank list of the written exam and the interview results. A fortnight later, KPSC rejected his application, saying the information he had sought could not be provided, without giving any valid reason.
The denial of information, however, came with a piece of advice that options were open to approach the First Appellate Authority (FAA) of the KPSC with a first appeal.
Decision erroneous
Raju then approached the Second Appellate Authority, which is the Karnataka Information Commission (KIC), saying that the decision of the FAA was erroneous and was in contravention of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
He argued that the KIC, Central Information Commission and various High Courts had held that all information relating to the appointments made to posts in State and Central governments could not be withheld by any authorities.
“Therefore, the appellant respectfully submits that the orders issued by the KPSC be set aside and appropriate directions be issued to provide a certified copy of the information sought by the appellant,” Raju said in his appeal.
The appeal (KIC2939 /PTN2012) before the KIC first came up for hearing before the Information Commissioner on September 6 this year. But, all of a sudden, the case was adjourned for December 7 (Friday). On Friday, when Raju's representatives came to the KIC for the hearing, they were told that it had been postponed to February 8, 2013.
Veeresh Belur, appearing on behalf of Raju in the KIC, brought the adjournment to the notice of Chief Information Commissioner A K M Nayak, who expressed helplessness to deal with such sudden developments.
Belur told Deccan Herald, “These adjournments pertaining to some serious cases are not healthy traditions. It might give rise to suspicions. When K K Misra was the Chief Information Commissioner, he used to ask other information commissioners to hear cases pending before the absent information commissioner.”