CIC: provide evaluated answer books; It is a duty of the public authority u/s 4(1)(b) of RTI Act to inform all candidates about decision of selection board along with reasons, so that the citizens need not file RTI applications for the routine information
1. Appellant through his RTI application sought to know marks secured by him in preliminary exam and mains exam for the post of TGT, certified copy of his answer sheet, whether two tier exam conducted on one day or two day as per new syllabus. Having received no reply from the PIO within prescribed time, the appellant made First Appeal. Claiming non furnishing of information from the respondent authority, appellant approach the Commission through this present second appeal.
Proceedings Before the Commission:
2. The respondent officer submitted before the Commission that the detailed information has already been provided to the appellant vide letters dated 7.11.2014 & 27.10.2014. The appellant on the other hand submitted that they had not provided the marks obtained in Mains Examination and answer sheet of the appellant. Appellant also stated that they have not uploaded the marks of the exam conducted in 2010 on their website, declared in 2014 and also raised the question of lack of details of PIO & their contacts on the official website.
3. The respondent officer then furnished all papers and stated that the appellant scored 83 marks in the mains examination and copies of answer sheet earlier were not given because the examination sheets were considered as top confidential and these were kept under lock and key of two to three officers at that time. The Public Authority is willing to provide the same and handed over the copy of answer sheet to the appellant before the Commission. The officer submitted that now, as per the new system of exam, they are uploading the details of marks obtained by the candidates in the selection board.
4. Having heard the submission and after perusal of records, the Commission observed that the appellant asked the records of 2010 which are not uploaded in the website and also not provided that copy of answer sheet to the appellant at first instances which they should have provided as per the SC direction in the case of Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr. … Appellants Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. (CIVIL APPEAL NO.6454 OF 2011 [Arising out of SLP [C] No.7526/2009]), operating part of the decision is as under:
“27. We, therefore, hold that an examining body does not hold the evaluated answerbooks in a fiduciary relationship. Not being information available to an examining body in its fiduciary relationship, the exemption under section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; is not available to the examining bodies with reference to evaluated answerbooks. As no other exemption under section 8 is 39 available in respect of evaluated answer books, the examining bodies will have to permit inspection sought by the examinees.”
5. Thus, Commission directs the respondent authority to upload the results, marks obtained or anything regarding selection and nonselection of candidates on their official website. It is a duty of the public authority to inform both selected and non selected candidates, the entire information about decision of selection board along with reasons, so that the appellant like Poonam Upadhya need not file any more RTI applications for that routine information. This information has to be furnished under Section 4 (1) (b) of RTI Act. Hence, the above mentioned information shall be disclosed on the website within 21 days from the date of receipt of order. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Citation: Poonam Upadhyay v. Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board in Case No. CIC/SA/A/2014/001844