SC allows disclosure of evaluated answer-sheets to examinee under RTI

New Delhi, August 9, 2011: 

In a landmark judgement today, the Supreme Court allowed disclosure of the answer-sheets to the examinee, under Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The bench comprising Hon’ble Mr Justice RV Raveendran and Hon’ble Mr Justice AK Patnaik dismissed the petitions filed by different public authorities and affirmed the judgement of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court allowing the disclosure of answer-sheets. 

The case was filed by the Central Board of Secondary Education, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, West Bengal Council for Higher Education, University of Calcutta, Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, West Bengal Central School Service Commission and Assam Public Service Commission, challenging the common order and judgement dated 05/02/2009 passed by the division bench of the Calcutta High Court.

Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) has filed an intervention application on behalf of the applicants – Mazdoor Kisaan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) and Join Operation for Social Help (JOSH) on 30.04.2010. Mr Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar, Advocate from HRLN argued the case successfully for MKSS and JOSH.

On 14.08.2007, one Mr Pritam Rooz had filed an application under Right to Information Act seeking for copies of his answer-sheets from the Calcutta University. The varsity informed him that as per university policy, the same cannot be disclosed. Rooz then approached the Calcutta High Court. In a detailed order dated 28.03.2008, Hon’ble Justice Mr Sanjib Banerjee allowed the petition filed by Pritam Rooz and directed the University of Calcutta to disclose the answer-sheets.

The order was challenged before the division bench of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court by the University of Calcutta. The CBSE also approached the division bench of the Calcutta High Court against another order of the single bench of thesame court allowing disclosure of the answer-sheet. While dismissing the appeals filed by these institutions, the division bench of the Calcutta High Court vide its common order and judgement dated 05.02.2009 affirmed the decision of the single bench. Against the order dated 05.02.2009, these institutions approached the Supreme Court. Subsequently, various other institutions conducting examinations like Institute of Chartered Accountants in India, Assam Public Service Commission, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, West Bengal Council for Higher Education, West Bengal Central School Service Commission and Bihar Public Service Commission also joined in and opposed the disclosure of answer-sheets to the examiners.

It was contended by the Petitioners that the evaluated answer-sheets are not covered under the definition of the word “information”. Secondly, they argued that the evaluated answer-sheet is kept with the examination-conducting institutions under fiduciary capacity. It was also contended by these institutions that if the disclosure is allowed, the entire system will collapse.

However, Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed all these contentions. The bench clarified that the evaluated answer-sheet is covered under the definition of “information”. It also clarified that it is the duty of the Public Authority to allow maximum disclosure as envisaged by the RTI Act.

Dealing with the issue of “fiduciary relationship”, the apex Court has explained the same in detail and held that the examination conducting bodies cannot retain the evaluated answer-sheets under any fiduciary capacity. Hence, the Court held that the exemption under section 8(1)(e) will not apply to the disclosure of answer-sheets.

The Court also dismissed the contention that the entire system will collapse once disclosure is allowed under the RTI Act. As a matter of fact, it was argued on behalf of the MKSS and JOSH that some universities allow disclosure of answer-sheets under the RTI Act and they do not face any difficulty in the process and their system has not “collapsed”.

As this judgement has dealt with various examination conducting bodies including the Public Service Commissions, universities, CBSE and other boards, professional bodies like ICAI, the directive will apply to every examination conducted by any institution in India.

For further details contact:

Mr Saurabh Shama, JOSH: +91-9811872752 ( saurabhinvincible@gmail.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it )

Ms Aheli Chowdhury, JOSH: +91-9811765959 ( aheli.chowdhury@gmail.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it )

Mr Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar, Adv., HRLN: +91-9868002365 ( litigation.delhi@hrln.org This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it )

आरटीआई से आईआईएमसी में दाखिला

सिद्धांत तिवारी  
ये मामला आईआईएमसी के हिंदी पत्रकारिता विभाग का है, जिस में एक छात्र ने लिखित परीक्षा दी थी.  लिखित परीक्षा में उसका नाम नहीं आता है और वो इस बात को लेकर गंभीर हो जाता है क्योंकि उसे अपने दिए हुए पेपर पर पूरा विश्वास था,  जिस कारण वो रिजल्ट आने के तीन दिन बाद 20 जून को आरटीआई डाल देता है, जिस में वो पूछता है कि मेरे लिखित परीक्षा की मुझे कॉपी दिखाई जाये. अब यहाँ पर परिस्थिति करवट बदलती है.

ठीक एक महीने बाद यानी की 19 जुलाई को उसके पास आईआईएमसी से फोन जाता है और वो कहते हैं कि भइया तुम्हारा नाम लिस्ट में था,  हमसे उसे नेट में चढ़ाने में गलती हो गयी और आप ऐसा करें कल इंटरव्यू के लिए आ जाएं. उसे इंटरव्यू के लिए तब बुलाया जाता है जब दाखिले की सारी प्रक्रिया पूरी हो जाती है और ऐसा इसलिए होता है क्योंकि गलती आईआईएमसी वालों ने की थी.

वो तो शुक्र था कि लड़का जिम्मेदार और समझदार था इसलिए उसने फ्रस्‍ट्रेशन में आकर कोई गलत कदम नहीं उठाया. इसके आगे का मामला सुनिए जब वो इंटरव्यू के लिए जाता है तो उसे समझाया जाता है कि छात्रों की कॉपी को जाँचने में जिस कंपनी की मदद ली गयी थी उसने गलती की थी और उसे ब्लैक लिस्ट कर दिया गया है.  इसके बाद उसका इंटरव्यू होता है जिस में पैनल में तीन लोग होते हैं. इंटरव्यू में उसके बारे में पूछा जाता है. फिर ये पूछा जाता है कि कहां कहां इंटर्नशिप की है,  वो डीयू कम्‍यूनिटी रेडियो बताता है फिर उससे रेडियो के बारे में पूछा जाता है.

ध्यान रहे वो हिंदी पत्रकारिता के लिए इंटरव्यू दे रहा होता है फिर भी रेडियो की बात की जाती है. इसके बाद अन्ना की मुहिम से जुड़े सवाल पूछे जाते हैं. फिर अंत में कहा जाता है कि आप आरटीआई भी डालना जानते है. फिर उसको कहा जाता है कि अब आप जा सकते हैं.  वो इंटरव्यू रूम से बाहर आ जाता है और थोड़ी देर के लिए कैंटीन में वक्त बिताने के लिए चला जाता है. फिर पूछता है कि सर क्या हुआ मेरे इंटरव्यू का. सर उसे उसके इंटरव्यू के मार्क्स दिखाते हुए कहते हैं कि ये देखो तुम्हें 15 में से 10 नंबर मिले हैं और लिखित परीक्षा में तुम्हारे 85 में से 63 नंबर है. ऐसा करो तुम 28000 रुपये लेकर आ जाना तुम्हारा दाखिला हो गया है.

वो खुशी खुशी घर आता है और 22 जुलाई को फीस जमा करा देता है और उसका दाखिला हो जाता है. उसे इंटरव्यू के नंबर उसी दिन बता दिए जाते हैं जिस दिन उसका इंटरव्यू होता है.  उस छात्र के साथ इंटरव्यू के नाम पर सिर्फ औपचारिकताएं की गयीं, जबकि अन्य प्रतिभाशाली छात्रों के साथ भारत के भौगौलिक स्थिति के बारे में पूछा गया. उस दौरान ऐसा लग रहा था कि उन्होंने पहले से ही सिलेक्शन कर लिया हो.  मामले की गंभीरता को देखते हुए मार्ग दिखाएँ इस दिशा में रोकथाम की पहल कैसे की जा सकती है. मित्रों ज्ञात रहे की इस पुरे प्रकरण के साक्ष्य और दस्तावेज़ मेरे पास मौजूद हैं, जिस में उस छात्र से की गयी बातचीत की रिकॉर्डिंग भी शामिल है.  इसके अलावा आप अपने सुझाव भेज कर मेरा मार्गदर्शन करें.

Electricity bill reduced

Vishnu Rajgadia
Manoj Narsaria purchased a flat in Ranchi. He was given an electricity bill without the meter having been read for an amount exceeding Rs. 5,588. Scared that his electricity would be disconnected he deposited an amount of Rs.1,500 along with a protest letter. On 15 May he went to the chief engineer of the electricity board with the application for the correction of the electricity bill, but he was not heard. He submitted an RTI application and was surprised to see that the electricity bill was reduced to Rs. 302 within a week.

Transporter gets his due

Transporter gets his due payment of Rs. 9 lakhs
Vishnu Rajgadia
A transporter, Durgakant Jha, a resident of Ranchi received Rs. Nine lakhs due to him for over three years. He had got a contract from the Jharkhand Education Project for transporting books in May 2004. He completed the work costing Rs. 9.25 lakhs but had not been paid the amount two years after the work was completed. He got his money just after filing an RTI application.

Sugandh Kumar Gets Passport

Vishnu Rajgadia
Sugandh Kumar, a student from Bokaro had to go abroad for studies. He needed a passport urgently. He applied for one. For five months, he could not get it. He filed an application under RTI. His passport was made within two hours. He had asked the following questions-
1. I had submitted an application for a passport. Please tell me the daily progress made on my application.
2. According to the rules, the passport should have been made in 45 days. Pls provide me the names and designations of the officials who were supposed to take action on my application and who have not done so during five months. What action would be taken against these officials for not doing their work and for causing harassment to the public?
3. By when would I get my passport now?