Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'answer sheet rti'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Request for Community Support
  • Connect with Community
  • Learn about RTI
  • Website News & Support
  • Read RTI News & Stories
  • RTI Act Critics's RTI Act Critics Topics
  • Fans of RTI India's Fans of RTI India Topics
  • Insurance Consumer's Insurance Consumer Topics
  • Activists of Transparency and Accountability's Activists of Transparency and Accountability Topics
  • Issues with BWSSB's Issues with BWSSB Topics
  • Law+Order-Bangalore-32's Law+Order-Bangalore-32 Topics
  • Issues With Electricity Board's Issues With Electricity Board Topics
  • RTI Activists's RTI Activists Topics
  • YOGA's YOGA Topics
  • help each other's help each other Topics
  • forest and wild life's forest and wild life Topics
  • Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C.'s Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C. Topics
  • RTI Activist+Politics's RTI Activist+Politics Topics
  • hostels and lodging places's hostels and lodging places Topics
  • RTI Activists in Rajasthan.'s RTI Activists in Rajasthan. Topics
  • RTI info warriors in Haryana's RTI info warriors in Haryana Topics
  • DisABILITY Rights and RTI's DisABILITY Rights and RTI Topics
  • Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI.'s Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI. Topics
  • Eco club's Eco club Topics
  • Self Employment in Sport's Self Employment in Sport Topics
  • RTI related to land issue's RTI related to land issue Topics
  • Open SourceTechnology support to RTI's Open SourceTechnology support to RTI Topics
  • TRAP group's TRAP group Topics
  • Odisha RTI Activists's Odisha RTI Activists Topics
  • right to information activists's right to information activists Topics
  • Mumbai's Mumbai Topics
  • Chartered Accountants's Chartered Accountants Topics
  • ngosamachar's ngosamachar Topics
  • Growing INDIA's Growing INDIA Topics
  • we are all friends.'s we are all friends. Topics
  • RTI for Government employees's RTI for Government employees Topics
  • Dhanus - Pending Salaries's Dhanus - Pending Salaries Topics
  • Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors's Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors Topics
  • Mahamumbai's Mahamumbai Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • anti corrupt police's anti corrupt police Topics
  • Save Girl in Punjab's Save Girl in Punjab Topics
  • Rent Apartment in US's Rent Apartment in US Topics
  • RTI Kerala's RTI Kerala Topics
  • maharashtra's maharashtra Topics
  • Right Way Of India(RTI)'s Right Way Of India(RTI) Topics
  • Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India's Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India Topics
  • Navi Mumbai's Navi Mumbai Topics
  • electricity curruption in up's electricity curruption in up Topics
  • SHARE n STOCKS trading's SHARE n STOCKS trading Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • ex-serviceman activities's ex-serviceman activities Topics
  • SSCC's SSCC Topics
  • Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates's Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates Topics
  • jharkhand RTI activist group's jharkhand RTI activist group Topics
  • Suhail's Suhail Topics
  • govt.servant's govt.servant Topics
  • RTI Uttar pradesh's RTI Uttar pradesh Topics
  • anti-corruption team's anti-corruption team Topics
  • Manaism's Manaism Topics
  • Insurance's Insurance Topics
  • sonitpur datri sewa samity's sonitpur datri sewa samity Topics
  • indian youth manch's indian youth manch Topics
  • HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies's HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies Topics
  • youth's youth Topics
  • aastha's aastha Topics
  • RTI for Citizens's RTI for Citizens Topics
  • learn always's learn always Topics
  • R.T.I.'s R.T.I. Topics
  • Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana's Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana Topics
  • Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna's Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna Topics
  • MBA, business and new entrepreneur.....'s MBA, business and new entrepreneur..... Topics
  • students seeking help's students seeking help Topics
  • RTI Corporate's RTI Corporate Topics
  • Electrical group's Electrical group Topics
  • V4LRights's V4LRights Topics
  • Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool's Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool Topics
  • Gaming's Gaming Topics
  • WE Born to help's WE Born to help Topics
  • help the elderly citizen's help the elderly citizen Topics
  • Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association's Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association Topics
  • Corruption free Country's Corruption free Country Topics
  • surajyam's surajyam Topics
  • kanpurvictims's kanpurvictims Topics
  • Railway Group A Services's Railway Group A Services Topics
  • Encroachment of public property by private giants's Encroachment of public property by private giants Topics
  • Case Status - Anti Corruption's Case Status - Anti Corruption Topics
  • Aam Aadmi (The Common Man)'s Aam Aadmi (The Common Man) Topics
  • Court Marriage in Punjab's Court Marriage in Punjab Topics
  • ALL's ALL Topics
  • Youth India Social Group (YISG)'s Youth India Social Group (YISG) Topics
  • ye kya fandda h's ye kya fandda h Topics
  • mindset's mindset Topics
  • anti corruption's anti corruption Topics
  • activism's activism Topics
  • common's common Topics
  • state group's state group Topics
  • social help group's social help group Topics
  • landlords of uttar pradesh's landlords of uttar pradesh Topics
  • Concern Citizens Forum for India's Concern Citizens Forum for India Topics
  • edusystem's edusystem Topics
  • Ratna Jyoti's Ratna Jyoti Topics
  • development in indian village's development in indian village Topics
  • technovision's technovision Topics
  • Mighty India's Mighty India Topics
  • Against Corporate Fraud's Against Corporate Fraud Topics
  • Stop crime's Stop crime Topics
  • NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti's NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Topics
  • Authenticated Public Plateform's Authenticated Public Plateform Topics
  • shalin's shalin Topics
  • terminater's terminater Topics
  • RTI Wind Energy's RTI Wind Energy Topics
  • Go..................?'s Go..................? Topics
  • Co-Op Housing Society's Co-Op Housing Society Topics
  • we are equal's we are equal Topics
  • Phoenix Deals's Phoenix Deals Topics
  • Theft Cases in chandigarh's Theft Cases in chandigarh Topics
  • Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits's Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits Topics
  • Solar Systems's Solar Systems Topics
  • Get aware about ur Education and related rights's Get aware about ur Education and related rights Topics
  • Save Mumbai's Save Mumbai Topics
  • Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board's Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board Topics
  • ashayen's ashayen Topics
  • unemployment's unemployment Topics
  • Employee Solution's Employee Solution Topics
  • is kanpur university against sc/st's is kanpur university against sc/st Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics


  • Uncategorized
  • Section 18 (1)
  • Section 11
  • For Common Man
  • Section 16
  • Section 2(h)
  • Section 8 (1)(j)
  • Simplified RTI
  • Government Employee and RTI
  • RTI Act 2005
  • Success Stories
  • Exempt Organisation
  • DG IT
  • Section 8 (1) (e)
  • Section 2 (h) (d) (i)
  • Supreme Court Decisions
  • Section 2 (j) (i)
  • Section 2
  • Section 8
  • Section 20
  • Section 19
  • SIC Punjab
  • High Court Decisions
  • Section 9
  • Section 24
  • DoPT
  • RTI Awareness
  • Section 6 (3)
  • Section 6
  • Section 2 (f)
  • Opinion
  • Department of Posts
  • Ministry of Railways
  • Departments
  • Ministry of Home Affairs
  • Ministry of Corporate Affairs
  • Ministry of Law & Justice
  • Government of NCT of Delhi
  • Delhi Police
  • Ministry of Human Resource Development
  • Staff Selection Commission
  • Court Decisions
  • CIC Decisions
  • Activism
  • Section 25
  • University
  • Section 7
  • Ministry of Agriculture
  • Section 3
  • RTI Discussions
  • Section 19 (8) (b)
  • Section (1) (d)
  • Section 8 (1) (d)
  • DIrectorate of Education
  • Govt of NCT of Delhi
  • Cooperative Housing Society
  • RTI for School
  • Member RTI
  • Municipal Corporation
  • Ministry of Defence


  • RTI Directory
  • Important RTI Decisions
  • Other Important Court Decisions
  • Sample RTI
  • Acts & Circulars


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...

Found 123 results

  1. sethi_davinder

    Test Answer Sheets

    Hi we have received one rti application to provide answer sheets of test conducted to recruit peons in our institute. The applicant has demanded the answer sheets of selected candidates. It seems that the applicant was a candidate who appeared in the test but was not selected. Can we provide answer sheets of the written test under rti act 2005? Is there any ruling of information commission related to this type of matter? Kindly help me.. Davinder sethi assistant professor cum pio
  2. PPSC need not give info under RTI, rules SC as reported by R Sedhuraman, Legal Correspondent, Tribune India, New Delhi, September 2 Setting aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court verdict, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC) need not allow candidates to have unrestricted access to examination records under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. A three-member Bench headed by Chief Justice SH Kapadia passed the order yesterday on petitions filed by PPSC and its former member Jaspinder Singh Jakhar, challenging the March 29, 2006 HC order. The HC had directed the PPSC to provide information to a candidate who contended that he had stood first in the 1993 examination for the post of Punjab Civil Service (PCS) Executive after the written test and interview. However, the results were subsequently fudged due to his father’s political affiliation and under pressure from then Chief Minister it was alleged. He had sought the court’s permission to inspect the original records of the written exam and the interview to check whether the marks had been corrected/overwritten before being fed into the computer. The candidate contended that he had come to know of the bungling from none other than Jakhar, who was on the interview board, after he had ceased to be its member. The apex court Bench, which included Justices KS Radhakrishnan and Swatanter Kumar, allowed the special leave petitions filed by the PPSC and Jhakar, represented by counsel Shyam Dewan and Bimal Roy Jad. Source : The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News
  3. As reported by Prafulla Marpakwar in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 11 August 2010: State edu dept plans online answersheets for SSC students - Nagpur - City - The Times of India State edu dept plans online answersheets for SSC students MUMBAI: A month after massive success in the online admission system for junior colleges, the school education department has now drafted an ambitious proposal to provide online answersheets to all the 16 lakh odd SSC students, with a move to ensure a complete transparency in the entire evaluation process. "We are in the process of developing a software in consultation with the information technology department. It has been proposed to make answersheets available to the students on payment basis." "Entire transaction will be online. Our aim is to make the evaluation process accountable as well as transparent," a senior official told TOI on Tuesday. The proposal assumes significant importance since Pune information commissionerVijay Kuvalekar and his Nagpur counterpart Vilas Patil, in different orders, had asked the SSC board to allow inspection of answersheets to two students, who have filed an application under the Right To Information (RTI) Act. Though the SSC board permitted inspection of answersheets to the two students, simultaneously, the SSC board knocked the doors of the Bombay high court, saying, as a policy, it will not be possible to allow the students to inspect their answersheets.
  4. As reported by Shyam Ranganathan in thehindu.com on 23 July 2010: The Hindu : States / Tamil Nadu : Answer scripts, public record, says Information Commission Answer scripts, public record, says Information Commission “Answer scripts written by examinees are … public record of the examining public authority,” the Tamil Nadu Information Commission has ruled in a recent order asking the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University to provide copies of answer scripts to a petitioner. A. Ramesh Manikandan, president, Human Rights Legal Awareness Society, had filed a petition asking to examine answer scripts in four papers held by the University and to take copies of the same. He had also asked for video coverage by the press during the inspection. This was rejected by the public authority under Section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act which exempts “information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual” in 2008. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the Appellate Authority and, failing to obtain the information, appealed to the State Information Commission. The Commission held an inquiry on August 18, 2009, and ordered that the petitioner should be allowed to inspect the records and be given a copy within a week of its order, but the University preferred to approach the Madras High Court against this . The High Court, initially ordered a stay in September 2009, and then upheld the Commission's order in April 2010 and ordered that the Commission should conduct an inquiry again. No to videographing Following this, the Commission noted in its recent order that “examinations are expected to be conducted in a free and fair manner” and that the right to privacy would not “interfere over the right to transparency when evaluating a public examination in detail.” It directed that the information be provided to the petitioner and that copies be provided on payment of the fees prescribed by the RTI Act. But the Commission noted that videographing of the process and the pressure of press persons during the examination process” may not be allowed.
  5. Attached is a full bench order of the Punjab SIC regarding disclosure of ones own answer sheets. Please pay attention to: 1. Item 5.1/5.2/5.3 regarding tenability of Complaint/First/Second Appeal under Sec 18/Sec 19 either separately or simultaneously . (This is the similar view as taken by the APSIC in the decision I had circulated earlier.) Quote: The Legislature, in its wisdom, has incorporated two independent remedies and routes for citizens, who may feel let down by a PIO. Section 18 of the RTI Act confers an original jurisdiction on the Commission, whereas Section 19 is an appellate jurisdiction, exercisable only after the remedy of first appeal has been exhausted. It is an established principle of interpretation of law that provisions of a Statute are to be so construed as not to render any part of the statute redundant. So construed, Section 19 of the Right to Information Act confers a specific right on an information seeker to evoke the appellate authority, first at the level of the departmental officials and thereafter a second appeal to the Commission. Section 18 of the Act ibid confers a right on the information seeker to directly complain to the Commission, bypassing first appellate authority, subject to satisfaction of the conditions mentioned therein. Section 18 is an enabling general provision to initiate an inquiry, if there is a reasonable ground to enquire, on a request made by an information-seeker. The right to complain under Section 18 is not contingent or conditional on first exhausting the remedy of an appeal under Section 19. The scope and the ambit of the remedies conferred by Section 18 and Section 19 are independent of each other. They differ in their content and scope. Section 19 is, in fact, much wider in empowering the Commission, though powers of civil procedure code enjoyed under Section 18 are missing under Section 19 of the Act. An appeal under Section 19 would lie as a matter of right whereas proceedings under Section 18 are initiated only if the Commission is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to enquire into the matter. Exhausting the remedy of an appeal under Section 19 is not a precondition for filing a complaint for inquiry under Section 18. Under Section 18, it is enough that an information seeker has been refused access to any information or was not given a response to his request or has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under the Right to Information Act etc, for a complaint to lie direct to the Information Commission. 5.2 In the context of the present complaint, it is an admitted fact that only partial information had been supplied to the information seeker by the PIO and therefore, he was well within his right to approach the State Commission on the grounds given in Section 18(1), which he did by way of an application dated 6.10.2009 addressed to the Commission. This application was entertained as a complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act. The fact that he also moved the first appellate authority, subsequent to filing the complaint with the State Commission, is immaterial and would not debar the State Commission, on being satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter and to proceed under Section 18. In any case, the first appeal bearing no. 103 is not pending for adjudication. The first appellate authority, after issuing summon to the present complainant, rejected it ex-parte on 24.12.09. As on date, therefore, no appeal under Section 19 of the Act ibid is pending, either before the first appellate authority or before the State Commission and the only pending matter is the present Complaint under Section 18 of the Act ibid. 5.3 Keeping the facts and circumstances of the case in view and to ensure that the citizen gets due opportunity of being heard, the present complaint-petition of the information seeker is maintainable for adjudication on merits. This Commission has the requisite authority to proceed under Section 18 of the Act ibid, as only incomplete information was given to the information-seeker by the PIO. For these reasons, the Commission is fully satisfied that there are reasonable and valid grounds to inquire into the matter. Unquote 2. In item 6.1, it brings “answer scripts” under Sec 4(1)© and (d) of the RTI Act. Quote: In pursuance of this fundamental right, the RTI Act enjoins upon every public authority that citizens have a right to know what impacts them. Section 4 (1) © and (d) of the Act ibid, is reproduced below: “4. Obligations of Public Authorities.- (1) Every public authority shall- (c ) publish all relevant facts while formulating important policies or announcing the decisions which effect public; (d) provide reasons for its administrative or quasi judicial decisions to affected persons”. {Emphasis provided} Declaration of an examination result for entry to public service is an announcement which effects public within the meaning of Section 4 (1) © and therefore all relevant facts are required to be published, including answer scripts, which are the very basis and foundation of the decision to select some and reject other. It could also be validly argued that declaration of result of an examination for entry to public services is an administrative decision and furnishing the reasons for the decision to affected persons is an obligation cast under clause (d) of Section 4 (1) of the Act. The best ‘reason’ or explanation for this administrative decision (i.e selection of candidates) is the evaluated answer sheets, which speak for themselves about the performance of candidates concerned. The definition of information in Section 2 (f) would seem to endorse this view, for the information means, “any material in any form”. The material in this case is the answer sheet. Unquote 3. Item 9.3, where the Punjab SIC completely disagrees with the order of the full bench of the Central Info Commission. Quote: The Central Commission, in our humble view, has not gone by the law, but by a perceived un-workability of the statutorily mandated rights. Expediency could never be a ground to keep the rights of citizens in suspended animation. Once the Central Commission had come to the conclusion that answer sheets are ‘information’ and that these do not fall within the exemption clauses of Section 8 (1) of the Act ibid, the only inescapable and legally sustainable conclusion would have been to allow access to the answer sheets, no matter who conducts an examination and for what purpose. The three fold distinctions drawn by the Central Commission to differentiate between three types of institutions and also three different types of examinations is alien to RTI Act. The law recognizes only one distinction i.e. between an institution or a body which is a public authority within the meaning of Section 2 (h) and an institution or body which is not a public authority. If it is a public authority, as UPSC and Staff Selection Commission are, answer sheets of examinations conducted by these authorities would be ‘information’ ‘held by or under the control’ of the public authority concerned and shall, therefore, be open to access under the law. If an answer sheet of a departmental examination could be allowed to be accessed, there is no ground to hold back answer sheets for recruitment to public services, because UPSC or SSC are no lesser public authorities than, say, a departmental selection committee. Unquote 4. In Item 9.4 on “un-workability” of the examination process, if answer scripts are disclosed (also a argument used by CIC): Quote: Whether a system is workable or not is a matter of opinion and opinions could differ, but the provisions of law do not. However, for the sake of argument, and digressing from the law point, to our mind, discloser of evaluated answer sheets of a competitive examination for government services is a doable act, provided the will to do exists. Given the right intent, with modern information technology as a hand tool, and comparatively smaller number of competing candidates in a small state like ours, systems could be made operational within a short span of time. Unquote 5. Item 9.5 on fool proof arrangements by examination conducting bodies (also a argument used by CIC): Quote: As regards the averment that the institutions like UPSC / Universities have fool proof arrangements, we are not questioning the quality of their systems. We are only interpreting the provisions of RTI Act and its applicability to the examination systems. Quality of an examination system is not the issue; its transparency under RTI is. Unquote 6. Item 9.7 on “finality of results” (also a argument used by CIC): Quote: Lastly, the logic that discloser of answer sheets would lead to uncertainty and that there would be no finality to results, is also not acceptable. Right to seek discloser of an evaluated answer sheet under the RTI law does not extend to a right to seek re-evaluation of answer sheets. The law only requires discloser. What happens thereafter - whether answer sheets should be open to re-evaluation or not, would entirely depend upon the policy / rules / regulations of the concerned institutions. The RTI Act has nothing to do with it. Unquote Where does then the public interest lie – in opening the system to public gaze or in keeping it wrapped under the veil of vested interests? What has made the system un-workable, the culture of secrecy or transparency? When the disease is deep rooted, not the sugar coated palatable pills, but incisive surgery is the remedy. Deeper the malady, deeper would be the incision. Let us then not hesitate, under the garb of logistical constraints or illusory un-workability of the system or what is called ‘floodgate argument’, to perpetuate a regime long discarded by the RTI law. We may recall here the words of the DB of Calcutta High Court in the Calcutta University case (referred to at 10.2 above), “Inconvenience, un-workability, unfortunately, are not recognized grounds on which refusal could be based. Preposterous to assume that Parliament was not aware of the ground reality while enacting RTI Act.” 7. The decision goes on to conclude that this order is a “restricted order” because: Quote However, as the various educational bodies, including the eight Universities in the State and the School Education Board were not parties to the complaint-case, nor they had an opportunity to be heard, for the time being, therefore, we restrict our decision to examinations conducted for entrance to public services of the State, irrespective of whether such an examination is conducted by PPSC, Subordinate Services Selection Board or a departmental committee or through an authorized agency, like t he University Institute of Applied Management Sciences, Panjab University. Unquote. IMP DECI.doc
  6. My friend has applied for a competitive examination for admission into some course conducted by a Central Government financed educational institution, in which he has not been short listed for admission. The institution selects the candidates through open competitive examination observing the government reservation policy and finalise the admission process after medically examining them by its panel of doctors. I have asked for through RTI the following information: 1) The copies of the answer sheets of all the selected candidates category wise (Sc/St OBC etc.) 2) The copies of documents like x-ray reports, height weight, chest, eye sight status and the medical status pertaining to all the candidates who were called for medical examinations. 3) The merit list of selected candidates 4) The merit list of candidates who were called for Medical test. 5) The copies of the rules specifying the medical fitness. In its reply the department rejected to disclose to furnish the copies of answer sheets of all the candidates under section 8 (1) (e) and 8 1(j)( of rti act, but informed me that it is prepared to furnish the answer sheet of the candidate to the candidate itself. 2) The institution informed me the medical status of the candidate (like fit unfit etc.,) but rejected my request to disclose for details of medical status of all the candidates under section 8(1) (e) and (8 91) (j) and also mentioned that there were also female candidates who appeared in the medical test. 3) It furnished the merit list of short listed candidates 4) It also disclosed me the merit list of the candidates who were called for medical test. My question is, that the department right in denying the information pertaining to the answer sheets of all candidates and detailed medical status of all candidates, under section 8(1) (e) and 8 (1) (j) Sathish
  7. As reported by Noor Khan in samaylive.com on 30 April 2009: Answer sheet cannot be excluded from the purview of RTI :: Samay Live Answer sheet cannot be excluded from the purview of RTI New Delhi, Apr 30 : Students who fail in Chartered Accountant exams can find out their mistakes by going through their answer sheet as the Delhi High Court today directed the ICAI to provide a certified copy of the paper to students under the Right to Information Act. Justice S Ravinder Bhat said the answersheet cannot be excluded from the purview of Right to Information Act and the examination authority cannot deny the same to students under the Act. Observing that the Act confers positive power to citizens which should not be hindered by authorities, the court dismissed the plea of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India challenging CIC's order to provide certified copy of the answer sheet to a student who could not clear the exam. "ICAI is an institute. You should apply pragmatism and make example to others. You should start by yourself... Many institutes do that and allow students to inspect their copies," Justice Bhat said. The court also rejected ICAI' argument that students have no right to seek disclosure of their answer sheet and it does not come under the purview of the RTI Act. The Additional Solicitor General of India Parag Tripathi, appearing for ICAI, submitted that the Supreme court in its order of 2007 has rejected the candidates' right to demand answer sheets.
  8. As reported by IANS in newkerala.com on 27 May 2010: Answer-sheets covered under RTI: Punjab information panel .:. newkerala.com Online News - 116090 Answer-sheets covered under RTI: Punjab information panel Chandigarh, May 27 : In what could be a landmark decision, the Punjab Information Commission Thursday ruled that a candidate appearing in a competitive examination for employment in government service has the right to access evaluated answer scripts after declaration of results. Ruling that an answer-sheet is "information" within the meaning of Right to Information (RTI) Act and its disclosure is not prohibited under the transparency law, the commission even said this right extends to accessing not only their own answer-sheets but also those of other competing examinees. Speaking for the five-member full bench of the commission, Chief Information Commissioner Ramesh Inder Singh observed: "Post-declaration of the result, any disclosure will only lend transparency to the competition and thereby reaffirm faith in the fairness of the system, by placing the entire process in public domain". The commission was hearing an appeal by Surinder Kumar, an ex-servicemen, who had appeared in the competitive examination conducted for appointment to the post of inspector, excise and taxation, in Punjab government in November 2008 but was not selected. Dissatisfied with the result, he approached the public information officer (PIO) of the department to obtain copies of answer-sheets of the nine selected ex-servicemen candidates under RTI but was turned down, as the PIO contended answer-books are exempt from disclosure under Section 8 of the RTI Act, being "personal information of candidates and giving access to them will infringe on their privacy". Rejecting this argument, the commission observed: "An answer sheet is not a private parchment supplied by a third party. It is a public paper in the custody of a public authority." The commission even disagreed with the April 2007 order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) disallowing disclosure of answer sheets of examinations conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and Staff Selection Board. "The Central Commission, in our humble view, has not gone by the law, but by a perceived un-workability of the statutorily mandated rights. Expediency could never be a ground to keep the rights of citizens in suspended animation," it said. "Once the Central Commission had come to the conclusion that answer sheets are 'information' and that these do not fall within the exemption clauses of Section 8(1) of the Act ibid, the only inescapable and legally sustainable conclusion would have been to allow access to the answer sheets, no matter who conducts an examination and for what purpose." The state commission also rejected the argument that any large scale disclosure would introduce an element of uncertainty and make the system unworkable. "Rather than any possible harm or injury, disclosure would do only well. It would stir up the examiners, make the assessment fairer and free from lapses or whimsical marking." The commission, however, noted that its ruling, for the time being, would be applicable to all examinations conducted for appointment to government jobs in Punjab and not to examinations conducted by educational institutions like universities and school education boards since the latter were not a party in this case. Summoning the relevant answer sheets to be brought before it, it has also asked the PIO's response as to why a penalty should not be imposed on him for withholding the information from the petitioner.
  9. As reported by Jasneet Bindra in indianexpress.com on 11 May 2010: Disclose marks of candidates: CIC to PPSC Disclose marks of candidates: CIC to PPSC The Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC), Patiala, cannot deny information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act about marks obtained by candidates in written examination as well as interview. State Chief Information Commissioner R I Singh on Monday said nothing in the administrative realm was personal or private, and those who choose to enter public affairs must learn to live by public scrutiny. He also said that an answer-sheet was not a private parchment supplied by a third party. “It is a public paper in the custody of a public authority, which is the PPSC in this case,” he added. He stated this while hearing the case of complainant Rakesh Kumar of Amritsar, who was unsuccessful in the exam conducted by the PPSC to fill the posts of deputy superintendents of police (DSP). He had filed an application under the RTI Act with the public information officer (PIO) of the PPSC, seeking candidate-wise details of marks obtained in written exam as well as interview. The details of his marks were supplied to him, but he was denied information about the other candidates. The PPSC PIO said the information was third party in nature and there was no relationship to any public activity or interest. Aggrieved, Kumar moved the information commission.
  10. Atul Patankar

    You can now see HSC, SSC answersheets

    As reported by Prafulla Marpakwar at timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 19 July 2009 MUMBAI: Pune information commissioner Vijay Kuvalekar on Saturday said that answersheets of SSC and HSC students are not confidential. As such, if a student demands it, the board will have to grant inspection of the answersheet to him. Kuvalekar gave the landmark order while disposing of an application filed by HSC student Abhijit Joshi. Initially, Joshi had applied for the rechecking of his answersheets of physics, chemistry and mathematics papers. When board officials informed him there was no change in the marks, he submitted an application under the RTI Act for inspection of the answersheets. The HSC board rejected his application, saying, according to the existing board rules, the answersheets were confidential and it would not be possible to grant inspection. Joshi approached Pune information commissioner Vijay Kuvalekar, who after hearing the student and board officials, held that the answersheets were not confidential. Board officials submitted before Kuvalekar that according to the policy of the board, the answersheets were confidential and if they were to be shown to the student concerned, then a policy decision would have to be taken. Simultaneously, the rules will have to be changed accordingly. Kuvalekar observed that answersheets were not covered under Section 8 of the RTI Act. They were not confidential and students were eligible for the inspection of the same. Section 8 clearly states the type of information and documents, which will affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the nation, and those prohibited by the court or which will result in breach of privilege of the legislature or parliament. As answersheets are not covered under Section 8, they are not confidential. Kuvalekar asked the boards to amend their policy within a stipulated time so that students would be able to inspect their answersheets. Of course, Kuvalekar said that though the answersheets were not confidential, while allowing inspection of such documents, the boards should keep the names of examiners confidential. After Kuvalekar's order, the board officials allowed Abhijit Joshi to inspect the answersheets on Friday. According to reports, after inspection of the documents, Joshi found that the evaluation of physics and chemistry answersheets was in order, while there was some error in the mathematics answersheet. Source: You can now see HSC, SSC answersheets - Mumbai - City - NEWS - The Times of India
  11. As reported at arunachalnews.com on April 2, 2010 Itanagar, Apr 01: Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (APPSC) “irritated” by the decision of Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission (APSIC) after being directed to allow an applicant to peruse an answer script knocked the Gauhati High Court. But the Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission as it was devoid of merit and uphold the decision of APSIC. One Sange Norbu, an aspirant for the post of Inspector, Tax and Excise filed an RTI application under RTI Act 2005 to Public Information Officer, Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission on 15 Jan 2007 to allow him to peruse Mathematics answer script. Dissatisfied with the answered by the Public Service Commission and given the fact that in a similar case, Public Service Commission had allowed perusal of answer script, Norbu filed an appeal to the State Information Commission . The Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission rejected the contention of the Public Service Commission that disclosure of answer script of any competitive examination conducted will affect the impartial and autonomous status APPSC as the answer scripts are top secret documents. Information Commission had said that answerer scripts are not so secret to be covered under Official Secret Act. It said that once the results are out, answer scripts cease to be confidential and secret and public interest justify the disclosure of such information. Source: Your case is devoid of merit: Court tells APPSC
  12. As reported by Sanjeev Kumar Verma in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 20 March 2010: SIC denies examinee info about question setters - Patna - City - The Times of India SIC denies examinee info about question setters PATNA: In a landmark judgment, Bihar State Information Commission (SIC) on Friday said bodies conducting competitive and academic examinations are not obliged under the RTI Act to reveal the identity of either the question setters or those who prepared the model answers. State's chief information commissioner (CIC) Ashok Kumar Choudhary delivered this judgment while disposing of a petition filed by one Anil Kumar Singh on February 26 this year. Singh wrote the police SI exam conducted by the Bihar Staff Selection Commission (BSSC) in 2008. Through a petition, Singh sought details of the experts who prepared the question papers and model answers of certain subjects. He also sought details of the 160 students who couldn't make it even after revised results were out. Defending the BSSC refusal to oblige the petitioner, Choudhary in his 22-page judgment observed, "The relation of the question setters and the examination- conducting body is one of trust and confidence... Both the parties are under an obligation not to disclose each other's identity. With the introduction of objective-type, multiple-choice questions, the question setters are also asked to prepare the model answer for each question. So, the disclosure of the identity of the expert would mean disclosure of the identity of the question setters as both are same." The CIC, however, upheld the petitioner's right to procure information about the name and addresses of the experts who scrutinised the model question papers and model answers and their report bearing their signature and stamp. He also upheld the petitioner's right to have details of the 160 `failed' candidates. The SIC has directed the BSSC to supply the aforesaid information to the petitioner within a period of seven working days after getting a copy of the judgment and intimate the SIC about it.
  13. karira

    Tiff over Tripura exam scripts

    As reported in telegraphindia.com on 15 February 2010: The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Northeast | Tiff over Tripura exam scripts Tiff over Tripura exam scripts Agartala, Feb. 14: The Tripura Board of Secondary Education’s refusal to provide information in the form of evaluated answerscripts to candidates for Madhyamik and Higher Secondary students has triggered a major controversy. On February 6, state information commissioner B.K. Chakraborty passed an order directing the board authorities to show the evaluated answerscripts of Madhyamik examination of two students, in answer to an appeal filed by guardians Tapan Baidya of South Tripura’s Belonia subdivision and Prahlad Debnath of Agartala. The guardians demanded to see the answerscripts of their wards last year and filed an RTI application. After the board authorities refused to show the scripts, the guardians appealed to the state information commissioner. The board authorities have so far evaded the information commission’s directive. Sources in the board said the authorities were planning to move the high court. The president of the board, Amitava Debroy, said, “Altogether seven to eight similar cases were pending in the high court and I do not wish to make an observation on subjudice matters.” He said once the high court’s verdict was known, the board would comply with it. Debroy said, “There are other institutions that have not made available evaluated answerscripts, but I will make no further comment.” “The TBSE has been working on the clever strategy of tiring out the applicants, as the procedure in our judiciary is inordinately slow. The board authorities also bank on the fact that an information relevant today may not remain so after two years,” said advocate and rights activist Purushottam Roy Barman.
  14. As reported in thehindu.com on 04 February 2010: The Hindu : Andhra Pradesh / Hyderabad News : Students can request for answer sheets Students can request for answer sheets HYDERABAD: Disposing an RTI appeal by L. Srinivas , the Andhra Pradesh Chief Information Commissioner C. D. Arha ordered that a student must be provided copies of his examination answer scripts upon request, according to a press release here on Wednesday. Dr. Srinivas, a post graduate student of Osmania Medical College appeared for an examination in October/ November 2008. When he filed an application to the Public Information Officer (PIO)/ Joint Registrar of Dr. N.T. R. University of Health Sciences for copies of his answer scripts, the request was rejected. An appeal against the order to the Appellate Authority and Vice-Chancellor was also rejected. They upheld the PIO’s orders on the grounds that it was impracticable for the university to provide copies of answer scripts because they numbered nearly 8 lakh in all. Mr. Arha quashed the orders of both the PIO and the Appellate Authority. He said Dr. Srinivas had the right to a copy of his own answer script and to deny him that right was contrary to the provisions of the RTI Act.
  15. Recently my wife appeared for STET Haryana examination. Result for examination is out. She want to see her answersheet (omr), question paper and the solution key. I saw over HBSE (Haryana Board of School Education, Bhiwani) has an RTI branch. I tried calling them many times but no body picked the phone. I would like to know how I can request for above documents from HBSE under RTI Act. Thanks in advance for any suggestion!
  16. karira

    Court scan on exam answer

    As reported in telegraphindia.com on 20 November 2009: The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Metro | Court scan on exam answer Court scan on exam answer The high court on Thursday directed the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education to re-evaluate within two weeks an answer in the history paper of a Madhyamik examinee. The father of Pritam Das, a Sonarpur Sarada Vidyapith student who had cleared the board exam in first division this year, moved the court after being allowed to go through his son’s history and physical science answerscripts under the Right to Information Act. The petitioner alleged that in question 8b of physical science Pritam was not given 2 out of 2 despite answering it correctly. For questions 4a, 4b, 4c and 4e of the history paper the examinee was not allotted part marks and was instead given a consolidated mark. Following a court directive, the board submitted reports by head examiners stating the assessments were correct. Justice Dipankar Dutta on Thursday accepted the board’s contention that one mark was deducted in the physical science answer because the examinee did not write a unit. The head examiner’s report on the history answer, however, did not satisfy the judge. He directed the board to appoint a teacher to “re-examine” the four parts of the answer “without being influenced by the earlier assessment”. Pritam got 63 and 50 out of 90 in the written physical science and history tests, respectively. “The order is significant because this is the first time the court has asked for the re-evaluation of an answer in a particular paper,” said advocate Rabishankar Chatterjee.
  17. karira

    Answersheets accessible

    As reported by Shuchita Mehta of TNN in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 08 January 2008: Answersheets accessible-Chandigarh-Cities-The Times of India Answersheets accessible CHANDIGARH: Upon the heels of Central Information Commission ruling that answersheets could be available under the Right To Information Act, the Panjab University has made it even easier for students to access their papers. From the next academic session, PU will show checked answersheets of all examinations. “In an attempt to bring more transparency in the examination system, instructions have been issued to all heads of departments to disclose evaluated booklets to students,” said vice-chancellor RC Sobti. Under this, as students get the opportunity to see how they have been rated, they will write “satisfied”, if convinced, and submit the answersheet by signing on it, or else it will be reevaluated with a prescribed fee. Presently, answersheets are shown to students of University Institute of Engineering and technology, department of chemical engineering and technology and University Institute of Applied Management Sciences among some others. With this decision, students won’t have to seek details using RTI, as only recently, in a landmark judgment, the Central Information Commission had ruled that authorities must usher in transparency and reveal questionwise marks awarded to candidates under the Act. Following constant efforts of Panjab University Campus Students’ Council, which demanded to introduce this system in departments like University of Pharmaceutical Studies and Laws, PU finally decided to have an open transparent examination system. SOPU president Brinder Dhillon said, “This is a good step for the welfare of students and it will make examiners more accountable, besides allowing students to know where they went wrong and how they need to improve upon that.” Thanking their stars, Deepak Thakur, general secretary of PUCSC, said, “Now students won’t have to take the RTI route to get their hands on copies of their answersheets. The mechanism will also ensure better evaluation.”
  18. rahul.vatsa

    Want to see answer sheet

    Dear All, My sister had given Pre PHD entrance test in BIHAR UNIVERSITY but was not able to pass out where as according to her she had given the appropriate answers and she was fully prepared for it. So please suggest how can i view the answer sheet.
  19. As reported in indianexpress.com on 02 August 2009: Board asked to provide access to copies Board asked to provide access to copies The State Information Commission (SIC), in an order, has directed the Uttar Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad to evolve a system where the students and their parents can have access to the answersheets after declaration of results of the examination, under the RTI Act. The order will be effective from this year. The order was passed by Information Commissioner (IC) Sunil Kumar Choudhary after one Anurag Sharma, and a few others, had filed a complaint that the UP Board had refused them access to their answersheets as they had been destroyed. The argument put forth by the secretary of the UP Board, Prabha Tripathi, that it was not feasible to maintain the record of answersheets of lakhs of students, was rejected by the SIC. The Board cited a Supreme Court order of a similar case and said that according to the rules, few months after the declaration of result and re-evaluation, the answersheets can be incinerated and it was not possible to provide information related to 2008. Considering the circumstances, the SIC exempted the Board to provide information related to 2008 and before. It, however, directed the Board to evolve a system under which it could fix a time frame during which the students can seek information by paying a nominal charge. Asserting that the information comes under the RTI purview, SIC said the Supreme Court order cited by the Board was in different context and delivered before the RTI Act was enacted in 2005. On the Board’s plea that the students will come to know the name of the examiner, the IC said that it reserves the right to keep the name confidential. “Also, those seeking access to the answersheets would not automatically get the right to get their copies re-evaluated,” the IC said. The order would not be effective for the examinations conducted by the Public Service Commission or other bodies conducting competitive exams.
  20. bahl_ajay

    CA examinees can see answersheet

    As reported by Viju B of TNN in the Times of India, New Delhi on 18 Jul 2009 CIC TO RESCUE ‘CA examinees can see answersheet’ Mumbai: This news is bound to cheer all the chartered accountancy students who have been wanting to get a copy of their answersheets after they appeared for the exams. The Central Information Commission, (CIC), in a landmark order, has directed The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to provide a copy of the evaluated answersheet to Vikita V Soni, a candidate who had appeared for the final CA examination. In its order, the commission said that an examinee had the right to access the evaluated answersheets for “self-assessing her performance’’. The case came up for hearing before the commission after Soni, a Khetwadi resident, filed an RTI query in March seeking a copy of her evaluated answersheet. Soni said she was expecting her name in the toppers’ list, she was shocked to know that she had failed. Soni then approached Tarun Mitral Mandal, an NGO, to assist her in filing an RTI query. “She approached us and we helped her in filing the query,’’ said NGO convener Rajen Dharod. Though the query was filed in January, the public information officer of ICAI rejected the query stating, “According to institute rules, this query doesn’t come under RTI ambit.” Welcome - Times Of India ePaper
  21. As reported by Hemali Chappia of TNN in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 29 December 2008: Now, students can seek exam marks details under RTI-India-The Times of India Now, students can seek exam marks details under RTI MUMBAI: In a landmark judgment that will change how examinations are conducted in the country, the Central Information Commission has ruled that authorities must usher in transparency and reveal questionwise marks awarded to candidates, under the Right To Information Act. The ruling will bring cheer to India's large student population, which has been fighting for access to copies of answer sheets ever since the RTI Act was passed. In March 2006, Treesa Irish from Kerala became the first student to fight tooth and nail to be allowed to see her exam answer scripts. She lost the battle when a full bench of the Central Information Commission ruled that the data she had requested was of a personal nature, and that its disclosure had no relation to any public interest and would therefore be prohibited under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The CIC also held that the relationship between the exam-conducting authority and the examiner was fiduciary in nature, and therefore information must be kept confidential under section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. However, Irish was hardly alone. Students under several education boards across the country have sought copies of their answer booklets under the RTI Act. All failed in their quest, with public information officers conveniently referring to Irish's case as the precedent. That is, until Ajeet Kumar Pathak, a class XII student from Bihar, demanded that the CBSE board provide him details of questionwise marks awarded to him in the chemistry paper. Here too, the CBSE board stated, ``The larger public interest does not warrant disclosure of such information.'' Pathak then filed his first appeal, which was again defeated, with the authority ruling that ``no candidates shall have the right to obtain questionwise marks''. But in a dramatic twist, the CIC overturned those rulings. Information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi, who ruled on December 22 that questionwise marks awarded must be shared with the candidate, said, ``None of the exemption clauses in the RTI Act were applicable in this case.'' Gandhi said that this ruling was now ``in principle'' applicable to all authorities conducting examinations across the country. In Maharashtra too, several students have taken the RTI route to get their hands on copies of their answer sheets. Basanti Roy, divisional secretary of SSC board, said that to date, there has been no provision in the law to part with answer sheets, and that several students had to be turned down. ``But we will wait for orders to flow in from the state government on providing questionwise marks,'' Roy added. Currently, the Maharashtra State Board for Secondary and Higher Secondary Examination lets students demand verification, which allows for marks to be re-calculated by opening the answer booklets. Verification also helps ensure that all answers have been marked. However, there is no provision for reassessment, which requires the moderator to read through and reassess the content of the paper. NCERT joint director G Ravindra said that this ruling was in line with the National Curriculum Framework of 2005, which emphasized transparency in conducting examinations. ``NCF 2005 had suggested several exam reforms, including transparency and stress-free exams. However, NCERT is an advisory body, and it was upto boards to implement NCERT recommendations,'' added Ravindra. Karnataka was the only state in the country that decided to go ahead and hand over answer sheets to students. Educationist and former chairman of the Mumbai board J M Abhayankar said that while the CIC ruling was something to cheer about, boards must be proactive and provide copies of answer booklets. Abhyankar himself had presented a report to the state government on exam reforms in 2002, but it remains on paper. ``I had recommended that the Maharashtra board also give copies of answer booklets to students. But the state did not accept the recommendations under some pressure,'' he said. He added that providing copies of the answer scripts would ensure better evaluation.
  22. Hi everybody, I am a new member,and want help on following lines... I am a psu employee. A prestigious PSU which has 4 main unit and many small units all over India. As per a new promotion policy,wich is being is introduces 1st time,written exam (held by 3rd party) on company level and interviews on unit level were conducted. The results were declaired but no marks have been declaired nor any merit list is being displayed. If we want break up of our marks in written,interveiw ets how we should proceed.We should go through unit level or company level. prdprd
  23. I have asked for the answer script and answer key of a departmental examination conducted by Department Of Post. I found that some of the answer key provided for evaluation was wrong. As a result, even though i have writen the correct answer I did not get the mark. Can I get the information under RTI that whether mark can be given to me for the perticular answer for which answer key is wrong (The reason why i wish to get information under RTI - if I have to aproach CAT, I should exhaust the normal channel , and they may delay the answer in which case i may have to wait for 6 months. But if i am aproaching under RTI, I can get a reply within one month )
  24. din_rin

    RTI in Competitive Exams

    My question is : If this is possible to view the answer sheet OMR of any candidate with the help of RTI ? Please reply if anyone have the answer. Thanks Dinesh
  25. As reported by The Sangai express in e-pao.net on 05 January 2008: HC asks State to furnish answer scripts : 06th jan09 ~ E-Pao! Headlines HC asks State to furnish answer scripts Imphal, January 05 2008: In a significant verdict, the Imphal Bench of the Gauhati High Court has asked the State respondents to furnish the answer scripts of 136 candidates who have been selected for the post of Sub-Inspector in the State Police Department for rechecking before the Court. In his Imphal Bench sitting today, Justice TNK Singh passed the verdict following a writ petition field by one Thokchom Roson Singh (26) of Kongba Bazar. Advocate M Hemchandra Singh who is appearing on behalf of Roson said that the writ petition has been filed against alleged mark tampering, gross material irregularities, illegality, bianess, malafide, favourtism and nepotism in the selection process. Roson has filed the petition after going through his own answer sheet extracted from the Government though the Right to Information Act praying before the Court to quash the Government notification dated June 17, 2008 of selecting 137 candidates and 14 waiting list candidates for appointment as SIs and put on hold the issuance of appointment orders to them till the disposal of the writ petition, the Advocate informed. Accepting the petition, the Court has directed the State respondents to produce the answer scripts under seal cover so that an expert body can recheck them and that of the petitioner. Passing the verdict, the Court has also declared that the appointment order of the selected candidates for the post of SI shall be subjected to the outcome of the present writ petition. The State represented by the Chief Secretary, Principal Secretary (Home), Director General of Police along with the selected candidates and some others who are in the waiting list are the respondents in this case. While issuing the rule to the State making its returnable within four weeks, the Court has also directed that the appointment order of the last selected candidate (137th position) namely Pradeep Kangabam shall not be issued till the disposal of the writ position. Roson said that his answer sheet 'was tampered with and manipulated, marks were not given for questions he had answered correctly and correct answers were deliberately crossed as false apart from the fact that even if the marks were given they were inadequate'.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy