Promotion Denied? RTI for DPC Minutes

Ramesh works as a Section Officer in a Central ministry. For three years he watched juniors get promoted while his name never moved up. The office would only tell him, “the DPC did not consider you suitable.” No reason, no papers, no comparison. He suspected his last two Annual Confidential Reports (ACR) carried below-benchmark grading, but nobody would show him the file. He had two choices: stay quiet, or use the Right to Information Act to open the black box. This guide shows what Ramesh did, what the law allows, and how you can copy it.

The Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) is the panel that decides who gets promoted. It reads your ACR/APAR (the yearly performance report your boss writes about you), checks the seniority list, applies the benchmark, and either recommends you or super-sedes (skips) you. If you are skipped, the DPC minutes hold the reason. Those minutes are the single most useful paper for a promotion grievance, because they show how you were measured against your colleagues.

The good news: the Central Information Commission has held, again and again, that DPC minutes are not covered by any exemption under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. They must be given to you.

1. Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman, (1991) 4 SCC 109 — decided 27 August 1991. This Supreme Court judgment created the sealed-cover procedure for promotions. The rule: the sealed cover can be used only after a charge-memo (charge-sheet) is issued to you, not on a mere preliminary investigation. If you are fully exonerated, you get notional promotion. If any penalty is imposed, the sealed-cover findings are not acted upon and your case goes to the next DPC. The procedure rests on two DoPT Office Memorandums — OM No. 22011/1/79-Estt.(A) dated 30 January 1982 and OM No. 22011/2/86-Estt.(A) dated 12 January 1988.

2. DoPT Master Circular on DPCs, OM No. DOPT-1721625311004 dated 22 July 2024 — one circular consolidating 42 earlier OMs from 1975 to 2022. It fixes DPC composition, the model calendar, the zone of consideration, the benchmark (Very Good for Pay Level 12 and above, Good below that), the APAR window (five years preceding the T-minus-2nd year), the sealed-cover review cycle (every six months; ad-hoc promotion only after two years if the matter stays unresolved), panel validity (one year; lapses after one year and six months), review and supplementary DPCs, and the duty of the Appointing Authority to decide on DPC recommendations within three months.

3. K.M. Varshney v. Director General, Audit, Defence Services, CIC/WB/A/2007/00576 (6 October 2008) — the Central Information Commission held that DPC proceedings and minutes are not covered by any exemption under Section 8(1) and must be disclosed, applying the Full Bench ruling in *Rakesh K. Singh v. Lok Sabha Secretariat* (April 2007). The Commission also relied on Dev Dutt v. Union of India, (2008) 8 SCC 725, the case that made communication of ACR entries a constitutional duty.

4. Pratibha Hada v. Department of Posts, CIC/POSTS/A/2017/184861 (16 April 2018) — the CIC held that denying promotion-related information and the copy of the financial-upgradation screening-committee minutes on privacy grounds is not justified. The CPIO must sever genuinely personal third-party information under Section 10 and give you the rest, free of cost. Token compensation of Rs. 1,000 was awarded.

5. Sital Chandra Adhikari v. National Library, CIC/NALIB/C/2016/290730 (4 January 2018) — the CIC held that Section 8(1)(i) (cabinet papers) does not cover DPC minutes. It relied on DoPT OM No. 1/34/2013 dated 29 June 2015, which requires suo-motu disclosure of recruitment, promotion and transfer information under Section 4. A penalty of Rs. 1,250 was imposed on the CPIO for wrongful denial.

6. Dr. Madhu Khare v. UPSC (CIC, 5 October 2012) — the CIC held that the relative grading of ACRs done by the DPC is not personal information and must be disclosed. The reasoning: the relative grading forms the basis for promotion the same way a caste certificate forms the basis for appointment. So the complete chart showing the grading of all officers the DPC considered is disclosable, while the ACRs themselves stay personal and go only to the officer concerned. This is the legal backbone of the anonymised comparables approach below.

7. APAR communication duty — DoPT OM No. 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A)(Pt.II) dated 14 May 2009 made communication of all APAR entries to the officer reported upon mandatory from the reporting period 2008-09 onward, with 30 days for a representation. For below-benchmark ACRs of the period before 2008-09 still reckonable for a future DPC, disclosure is required under OM No. 21011/1/2010-Estt.(A) dated 13 April 2010, with 15 days for representation. (The loose phrase “ACR communication became mandatory in 2010” is imprecise — the all-entries duty starts from 2008-09 via the 2009 OM; the 2010 OM only covers older below-benchmark entries.)

Step 1 — Identify the Public Information Officer. The DPC is run by the Appointing Authority for your post. Address the RTI to the CPIO of that authority. If you do not know the exact designation, write “CPIO, Appointing Authority for the post of [post name].” The office will route it internally.

Step 2 — Draft the application. Keep it specific. Ask for five things:

1. Certified copy of the minutes of the DPC held on [date] for promotion to [post].
2. My own ACR/APAR grading for the five years considered by that DPC, along with the date each was communicated to me.
3. The seniority list as on the date of the DPC.
4. The anonymised relative grading chart of all officers considered by the DPC (the chart that Dr. Madhu Khare says is disclosable) — names of colleagues can be masked, gradings cannot.
5. The recorded reason for my super-session, and whether the sealed-cover procedure was invoked against me.

Step 3 — Pay the fee. Rs. 10 for Central Government public authorities, payable by cash, Indian Postal Order, demand draft, banker's cheque, or online through rtionline.gov.in. If you hold a BPL card, the fee is waived with proof. The CPIO must reply within 30 days. There is no fee for the first appeal.

Step 4 — Use this template.

To: The Central Public Information Officer,
    Appointing Authority for the post of [post name],
    [Ministry / Department]

Subject: Application under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005.

1. I am [name], holding the post of [present post] since [date].
   My employee ID is [number].

2. The DPC for promotion to [post] sat on [date]. I was not
   recommended. Please furnish certified copies of:

   (a) the DPC meeting minutes;
   (b) my ACR/APAR grading for the five years the DPC
       considered, with the date each was communicated to me;
   (c) the seniority list as on the DPC date;
   (d) the anonymised relative grading chart of all officers
       considered by the DPC (names masked, gradings shown);
   (e) the recorded reason for my super-session; and
   (f) whether the sealed-cover procedure under
       U.O.I. v. K.V. Jankiraman was applied to me, and if so,
       a copy of the charge-memo issued.

3. Fee: Rs. 10 by [IPO / cash / online receipt no.].

Date:                        [Signature]
Place:                       [Name, address, phone]

If a disciplinary case is pending against you, the department may have kept your name in a sealed cover instead of deciding promotion openly. Jankiraman sets the limit: the sealed cover can be used only after a charge-memo is issued to you — not on a vague preliminary probe. So in your RTI, always ask point-blank: “Was the sealed-cover procedure applied to me? If yes, give me the copy of the charge-memo.” If the department used the sealed cover without a charge-memo, that is a legal flaw you can take to the Central Administrative Tribunal. See how to file a CAT case and, if you need the disciplinary file itself, RTI for departmental enquiry and charge-sheet copy by RTI.

You cannot ask for your colleagues' full ACRs — those are personal information and will be (correctly) refused. But you can ask for the relative grading chart that the DPC used. This chart shows, without names, how each candidate scored on each attribute. It lets you check two things: whether your grading was fairly recorded, and whether someone with a lower grading was promoted over you. This is exactly what Dr. Madhu Khare approved. Frame the ask as “anonymised relative grading chart of all officers considered by the DPC for promotion to [post] on [date]” — never as “ACR of [colleague's name].”

1. Asking for others' ACRs by name. That is barred under Section 8(1)(j). Ask for the anonymised relative grading chart instead.
2. Forgetting the sealed-cover question. If a disciplinary matter is pending and you skip this ask, you miss the strongest legal angle. Always include it.
3. Vague dates. Write the exact DPC date. A loose “recent DPC” lets the CPIO reply that the record is not identifiable.
4. Stopping at the first refusal. Many CPIOs deny DPC minutes citing “cabinet papers” or “personal information.” Both have been rejected by the CIC. File the first appeal.
5. Believing “ACR communication began in 2010.” It began in 2008-09 via the 2009 OM. The 2010 OM only covers older below-benchmark entries. Use the right date in your representations.

1. Level 1 — CPIO reply (30 days). If you get nothing, or a wrongful denial, move up.
2. Level 2 — First appeal under Section 19(1). File with the First Appellate Authority of the same public authority within 30 days of the CPIO's silence or reply. No fee. The FAA must decide in 30 days (45 if the CPIO was consulted). See how to file an RTI first appeal and the fuller first and second appeal guide.
3. Level 3 — Second appeal to the CIC under Section 19(3). This is where Varshney, Pratibha Hada and Sital Chandra Adhikari were decided. The Commission can order disclosure, severance under Section 10, and a penalty on the CPIO.
4. Level 4 — CAT. If the real fight is the promotion itself, RTI gets you the proof; the Central Administrative Tribunal gets you the remedy. Pair the two: file RTI for the record, then file the CAT challenge with that record attached.

1. Pair RTI with a CAT challenge. RTI gives you the papers; CAT gives you the promotion.
2. Check the APAR communication trail first. Before filing, list the dates each ACR was communicated to you. If an entry was never communicated, the DPC could not legally rely on it (Dev Dutt) — that gap alone can sink the super-session.
3. Ask for the model-calendar date. The Master Circular fixes a model DPC calendar. If your DPC sat months late, note it — procedural delay is a valid grievance angle.
4. Keep the Rs. 10 receipt and postal proof. The 30-day clock runs from the day the office receives your application, not the day you post it.

1. Q: Is communication of my ACR/APAR entries mandatory? Yes. From the reporting period 2008-09 onward, every entry must be communicated to you (DoPT OM dated 14 May 2009). If an entry was never shown to you, use RTI to get the delivery record.
2. Q: I had an adverse ACR and filed a representation. Can I use RTI? Yes. Ask for the disposal order on your representation. The 2009 OM requires it to be decided within 30 days.
3. Q: The CPIO says DPC minutes are cabinet papers. Is that right? No. Sital Chandra Adhikari (CIC, 2018) held Section 8(1)(i) does not cover DPC minutes.
4. Q: The CPIO says my colleagues' privacy blocks the chart. No. Pratibha Hada says sever the personal parts under Section 10 and give the rest; Dr. Madhu Khare says the relative grading is not personal information at all.
5. Q: Can I get the ACRs of officers promoted over me? Not their full ACRs. You can get the anonymised relative grading chart — names masked, gradings shown.
6. Q: I was put in a sealed cover but never got a charge-sheet. That is what Jankiraman forbids. Ask in your RTI for the charge-memo; if none exists, take it to CAT.

• RTI for your own ACR/APAR copy
• RTI for transfer policy
• How to file an RTI first appeal
• First and second appeal guide
• How to file a CAT case
• Charge-sheet copy by RTI
• RTI for departmental enquiry
• How to file an RTI in India

1. Union of India v. K.V. Janakiraman [(1991) 4 SCC 109] — https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1142043/
2. DoPT Master Circular on DPCs, OM No. DOPT-1721625311004 dated 22 July 2024 — https://doptcirculars.nic.in/OM/ViewOM.aspx?headid=4&id=496
3. K.M. Varshney v. DG Audit Defence Services, CIC/WB/A/2007/00576 (6 Oct 2008) — https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1913468/
4. Pratibha Hada v. Department of Posts, CIC/POSTS/A/2017/184861 (16 Apr 2018) — https://indiankanoon.org/doc/126210346/
5. Sital Chandra Adhikari v. National Library, CIC/NALIB/C/2016/290730 (4 Jan 2018) — https://indiankanoon.org/doc/157503326/
6. DoPT OM on communication of all APAR entries, OM 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A)(Pt.II) dated 14 May 2009 — https://www.gconnect.in/orders-in-brief/apar-communication-of-all-entries.html
7. RTI Online FAQ — Rs. 10 fee, modes of payment, 30-day limit — https://rtionline.gov.in/faq.php
8. Dev Dutt v. Union of India, (2008) 8 SCC 725 (basis of APAR communication duty, relied on in Varshney).

Last reviewed: 3 July 2026.

If this guide helped you fight an unfair promotion denial, The RTI Playbook walks you through the full RTI toolkit — drafting, fees, appeals, and the moments where RTI meets a tribunal. And if you want this kind of plain-language public-law help to keep reaching people for free, please donate to support this work.

RTI for DPC minutes — complete guide on getting promotion committee records and challenging denial:

1. Step 1: What is a DPC and why are its minutes important? (a) the DPC — the Departmental Promotion Committee — is the committee — that recommends — the promotion — of the government employees — (the Central Government — and the State Government — and the PSUs), (b) the DPC — consists of: (i) the Chairman — (a senior officer), (ii) the members — (the technical — and the administrative — experts), (iii) the UPSC — representative — (for the Group A — and the Group B — posts — in the Central Government), © the DPC minutes — are the record — of: (i) the eligibility list — (the employees — eligible — for the promotion), (ii) the APAR — (the Annual Performance Appraisal Report) — grading — of the employees, (iii) the seniority list, (iv) the reservation — and the roster, (v) the recommendation — and the reasoning, (d) the DPC minutes — are important — because: (i) the promotion — depends — on the DPC — and the denial — can be challenged — with the DPC minutes, (ii) the DPC minutes — reveal — the criteria — and the process — and the bias — if any.
2. Step 2: How to file RTI for DPC minutes. (a) the DPC minutes — are the information — under the RTI Act — and can be sought — from the public authority — (the department — or the ministry), (b) the RTI application — can ask: (i) “Provide the certified copy — of the DPC minutes — for the promotion — to the post [name] — held on [date] — including: (a) the eligibility list, (b) the APAR grading — of all the candidates, © the seniority list, (d) the reservation — and the roster — position, (e) the recommendation — and the reasoning”, (ii) “Provide the criteria — and the benchmark — for the promotion — to the post [name] — including: (a) the qualification, (b) the experience, © the APAR benchmark, (d) the seniority — criterion”, (iii) “Provide the action taken — on the DPC recommendation — including: (a) the approval — by the competent authority, (b) the promotion order — date and the number, © the reason — for the delay — if any”, © the application fee — is Rs 10 — by the IPO — or the online payment — on the rtionline.gov.in — for the Central Government.
3. Step 3: What if the DPC minutes are denied? (a) the common denials: (i) the DPC minutes — are the “third party” — information — and cannot be disclosed — (this is WRONG — the DPC minutes — are the official record — and the larger public interest — warrants the disclosure), (ii) the APAR — is the “personal information” — under Section 8(1)(j) — and cannot be disclosed — (this is partially correct — but the APAR — of the employee — seeking the promotion — CAN be disclosed — and the APAR — of the other candidates — can be disclosed — in the larger public interest), (iii) the DPC minutes — are the “cabinet paper” — under Section 8(1)(i) — (this is WRONG — the DPC minutes — are not the cabinet paper), (b) the appeal: (i) the First Appeal — file — with the First Appellate Authority — within 30 days — of the denial — or the silence, (ii) the Second Appeal — file — with the CIC — within 90 days — of the First Appeal — decision — or the silence, © the CIC — has consistently — held — that the DPC minutes — are disclosable — and the APAR — of the candidates — is disclosable — in the larger public interest — (the CIC — has ordered — the disclosure — in many cases).
4. Step 4: DPC process and the records. (a) the DPC process: (i) the eligibility list — is prepared — by the administrative wing — from the seniority list — and the APAR — and the qualification, (ii) the DPC — meets — and reviews — the eligibility list — and the APAR — and the seniority — and the reservation, (iii) the DPC — recommends — the promotion — based on the merit — and the seniority — and the reservation, (iv) the competent authority — approves — the DPC recommendation — and the promotion order — is issued, (b) the records: (i) the eligibility list, (ii) the APAR — of all the candidates, (iii) the seniority list, (iv) the reservation — and the roster — position, (v) the DPC minutes — (the discussion — and the recommendation), (vi) the approval — by the competent authority, (vii) the promotion order.
5. Step 5: How to use the DPC minutes in the tribunal. (a) the DPC minutes — can be used — as the evidence — in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) — or the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) — for: (i) the promotion — denial — (the employee — was eligible — but not promoted — and the DPC minutes — show the bias — or the error), (ii) the promotion — reversal — (the promotion — was reversed — and the DPC minutes — show the illegality), (iii) the seniority — dispute — (the DPC minutes — show the seniority — position), (b) the CAT — can order: (i) the production — of the DPC minutes, (ii) the quashing — of the promotion — if the DPC — was illegal, (iii) the promotion — of the employee — if the denial — was illegal.
6. Step 6: File RTI on DPC minutes — the practical steps. (a) the RTI application — is filed: (i) at the PIO — of the department — or the ministry — by hand — or by post, (ii) online — on the rtionline.gov.in — for the Central Government — or the state RTI portal — for the state government, (b) the application fee — is Rs 10 — by the IPO — or the online payment, © the PIO — must respond — within 30 days — (or 48 hours — if the life — or the liberty — is involved), (d) the First Appeal — is filed — within 30 days — of the denial — or the silence, (e) the Second Appeal — is filed — with the CIC — within 90 days — of the First Appeal — decision — or the silence.
7. Step 7: Practical tips. (a) file RTI — for the DPC minutes — immediately — after the promotion — is denied — or the result — is announced, (b) ask for the certified copy — and not just the inspection, © ask for the APAR — of all the candidates — and not just the self — (the CIC — has held — that the APAR — of the other candidates — is disclosable — in the larger public interest), (d) file the First Appeal — within 30 days — of the denial — or the silence, (e) file the CAT — application — along with the RTI — for the faster — relief, (f) Example: An employee — was denied — the promotion — and he filed — the RTI — for the DPC minutes — the PIO — denied — citing the “personal information” — he filed — the First Appeal — and the FAA — ordered — the disclosure — of the DPC minutes — and the APAR — and the DPC minutes — showed — that the APAR — of a junior — was upgraded — after the DPC — and the promotion — was quashed — by the CAT — and the employee — was promoted.

See DPC Minutes RTI and APAR RTI.