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. Can a non-existent professor evaluate student's answer script? as reported in Outlook India, NEW DELHI, NOV 11 (PTI) Can a "non-existent" professor evaluate the answersheet of a law student? This tricky question has been tossed up by a student in Supreme Court which on Tuesday issued a notice to Dr Hari Singh University in MP over her claim that she was wrongly declared failed in her paper's re-evaluation. The petitioner, Suman, a second-year girl student of J L Varma Law College, was declared failed in the "Legal Jurisprudence" subject by the university authorities for the academic year 2007-08. Suman, had applied for re-evaluation of her answersheet after she was declared failed in the subject on obtaining 32 marks out of 100. According to the petitioner as per the procedure, the university claimed to have got her script re-valued by two professors, one of whom is allegedly "non-existent" according to the response received by her to an RTI query. While one professor called R S Singh, principal of Morena Law College, awarded her 58 marks another "professor" P K Singh, Gwalior University, awarded her 33 marks in the re-valuation. The minimum pass mark was 34 marks. In her petition filed through counsel Manohar Lal Sharma, the student submitted that the university citing its rules said it would only award her 33 marks, as awarded by "professor" P K Singh, and disregarded her plea that the average of the marks given to her by the two professors should be considered for arriving at the final marks. The Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected her plea and the Supreme Court also dismissed her SLP. But Suman's lawyer, has claims that there is no "Professor P K Singh" in Gwalior University as claimed by the Dr Hari Singh University, Sagar. Sharma told the bench that he obtained the information by filing an RTI application filed in the Gwalior University which denied the existence of "Professor P K Singh." In an additional affidavit, the counsel also alleged that students were being deliberately failed by a section of the varsity officials to extract bribes from them. He alleged that in many cases, students who succumbed to the pressure for bribes were even awarded 40 marks in the so-called re-valuation exercise. outlookindia.com | wired
  2. BPSC asked to give break-up of marks as reported in The Hindu, Friday, Oct 31, 2008 Patna: In an order which could be handy for the students to assess themselves, the Patna High Court has upheld the order of the State Information Commission (SIC) directing the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) to disclose question-wise break-up of marks obtained by them. A single bench of Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi has dismissed the petition filed by BPSC challenging the order of SIC directing it to provide the detailed marks to the examinees. Dismissing the petition, Justice Tripathi on Thursday said that information and knowledge are critical for realising human aspiration. Only a knowledgeable society can assert its fundamental rights and demand quality life. The court said that the Right to Information Act was meant to facilitate transparency in every sphere of life. The Act has been put into effect with the objective of open and a participative government which shall fulfil the needs of the people as envisaged under the Constitution of India, Justice Tripathi observed in the recent judgement. The court did not find any fault in SIC’s direction to the BPSC to provide question-wise marks to the examinees of 46th Combined Competitive Examination. The court has some difficulty in accepting the stand of the petitioner (BPSC) that they are not duty bound to furnish the information demanded by respondent no. 3 (the examinee), he stated. The bench observed that the State Information Commission has not transgressed its power in directing the petitioner (BPSC) to furnish the information to the examinee. –PTI The Hindu : National : BPSC asked to give break-up of marks
  3. RTI endorses application for final nod as reported in The Statesman, Statesman News Service MALDA, Oct.24: The district RTI (Right to Information) cell today endorsed an application of an information seeker to the secretary of the state Information Commission for his final judgment. The decision was taken when the office of the district registrar refused to show answer scripts of a competitive examination for its departmental recruitment. A Scheduled Caste candidate, who had appeared for the written examination conducted by the district registrar office for the recruitment of 14 lower division clerks, applied to the Malda RTI cell to show his corrected answer script thus challenging the panel which was made by the authorities. On 18 September, Mr Bijoy Kumar Ram, a resident of Tulshihata in Harishchandrapur, submitted his application to see his answer script after being dissatisfied with the final panel published recently, in which his name had not featured. The nodal officer of the Malda RTI cell forwarded the application to the office of the district registrar and asked him to show the marked answer script to the applicant. However, the district registrar was reluctant to follow the RTI Act even for the second time, despite the approval of the officer in charge of the Malda RTI cell, Mr P C Sit. The additional district magistrate, Mr PC Sit, was also the chairman of the selection committee of the recruitment board of 14 LDCs for the office of the district registrar, who asked the district registrar to show the answer sheets. The nodal officer of the Malda RTI cell Mr Pratyarpan Singha Roy said: "According to the RTI Act nothing can be kept in secrecy but the district registrar had not complied with the instruction". Mr Ram, who had expected to obtain more than 51 percent marks, alleged that the office of the district registrar did not examine his answer script 'honestly'. "The district registrar, as information provider, will be liable to a penalty for failing to convey information within 30 days as per the RTI Act 2005," said a senior officer of the district administration. He added: "We will be waiting for the judgment of the State Information Commissioner". The Statesman
  4. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION BLOCK IV, OLD JNU CAMPUS, NEW DELHI 110067 F.No.PBA/06/103 September 22, 2006 Complaint No.113/ICPB/2006 In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 – Section 19. [Date of Hearing 18.9.2006] Appellant: Dr. (Mrs) Archana S. Gawada Public authority: Employees State Insurance Corporation, New Delhi. Shri C. Sethu Addl. Commissioner & CPIO, Director General, ESIC – Appellate Authority. Present: Shri C. Seth, Addl. Commissioner, ESIC Shri Arvind Kumar, Joint Director. Shri S. Thomas, Addl. Commissioner None from appellant. FACTS: By an application dated 5.5.2006, the complainant had requested for the following information pertaining to recruitment of IMO Gr.ll/Ayurvedic Physician and Dental Surgeon for which written examination was held on 29.06.2003 : Total number of candidates applied for the post of Ayurvedic physician, total number of candidates appeared, called for interview and finally selected; Supply of a copy of the evaluated answer sheets along with relevant question paper in respect of the applicant; Supply of copies of evaluated answer sheets along with question papers relating to the selected candidates. She had also enclosed a draft for Rs.100/- towards the application fee of Rs.10/- and Rs.90/- for the probable cost of providing the information. Her application was forwarded on 17.5.2006 to another CPIO and the appellant was advised to contact that CPIO as he was in charge of the information sought for. By a letter dated 9.6.2006, the CPIO informed the appellant that since she had not furnished her Roll No for the examination, her application could not be located and advised her to send a photo copy of the admit card. He had also returned the draft for Rs 100 requesting her to send Rs.10/-. In response, by a letter dated 19.6.2006, the appellant sent back the DD for Rs 100/ and contended that there was nothing wanting in the application and the public authority should have all records and as such the information sought should be furnished. Since she did not get any response, she filed this Complaint on 11.7.06. Comments were called for from the CPIO. By that time,by a communication dated 2.8.2006, the CPIO furnished the information sought in serial no 1 of the application and declined to furnish the information sought in serial no 2 and 3 applying the provisions of Section 8(1)(j). On receipt of this information,the complainant sent a communication to this Commission dated 21.8.2006, pointing out the inordinate delay in furnishing even the part information and contending thatthe CPIO could not have applied the provisions of Section 8 (1)(j) to furnish the remaining information. She has pointed out that to have transparency in examination matters, evaluated answer sheets should be made available to the candidates. In the comments from the CPIO dated 11.9.2006 and 13/9/2006, the CPIO has stated that in addition to the information furnished on item 1 of the application on 2.8.2006, th eanswer sheet of the complainant had also been furnished to her on 25.8.2006 and that in regard to the answer scripts of the successful candidates, the same could not be furnished in terms of Section 8(1)(j). In respect of the delay, he has submitted that it was due the failure of the complainant in furnishing her Roll No etc. While admitting the delay in furnishing the information and highly regretting for the delay, it is stated that it was on account of this case being the first application received in connection with recruitment process which is normally kept confidential. It is also stated that in collecting and furnishing the information, an expenditure of Rs 167.10 was incurred as against the deposit of Rs. 90/- by the complainant. The complaint was heard on 18.9.2006 with due notice to the complainant and the public authority. Complainant was not present. It was explained by the CPIO that the examination being of objective type, no manual evaluation of the answer sheets is made and the whole exercise is done by the computer which displays only the names of candidates securing marks above the cut off marks. Therefore, since the marking is not done manually, the answer sheet by itself will not display any marks. That is why, the copy of the answer sheet sent to the complaint does not exhibit any marks on the same. It was also submitted that answer sheets of the successful candidates cannot be furnished in terms of Section 8(1)(j). In so far as the delay is concerned, the CPIO expressed his deep regrets stating that since it was the first application under RTI and since, the recruitment process had always been kept confidential, he was not sure whether the information could be furnished or not. He sought for condonation of th edelay assuring the such delays would not occur in future. DECISION: This Commission has taken the view in similar cases of applications for copies of evaluated answer sheets, whether of the applicant himself/herself or that of others, that the same cannot be furnished in terms of Sections 8(1)(e) and (j). In Appeal No ICPB/A-3/CIC/2006, this Commission has decided as follows: “Therefore, we find that in case of evaluated answer papers, the information available with the public authority is in his fiduciary relationship, the disclosure of which is exempt under Section 8(1)(e). In addition, when a candidate seeks for a copy of evaluated answer paper, either of his/her own or others, it is purely a personal information, the disclosure of which has no relation to any public interest or activity, which of such a situation is covered under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act. Therefore, we hold that the CPIO was justified in rejecting the request of the appellant for a copy of the evaluated answer paper. We, as a Commission, are not satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of the information sought for by the appellant to direct the CPIO to comply with the request of the appellant and as matter of fact we are rather of the opinion that furnishing of copies of evaluated answer papers would be against public interest as has been rightly opined by the appellate authority that supply of a copy of the evaluated answer paper would compromise the fairness and impartiality of the selection process.” [Case No. ICPB/A-2/CIC/2006 (available in www. cic.gov.in)] Therefore, the CPIO had correctly applied provisions of Section 8(1)(j) to decline to furnish the copies of the answer sheets of the successful candidates. However, this Commission has also decided that as matter of course, marks obtained by the applicant and the selected candidates should be made available to the information seeker. Therefore, as directed during the hearing, the CPIO will furnish to the appellant the cut off marks prescribed, the marks obtained by the complainant and the successful candidates and also a copy of the key. This should be done within 15 days of this Decision. As far as the delay in providing the information is concerned, since the CPIO has explained that the present application was first of its kind seeking for information which had always been kept confidential, I am inclined to condone the delay. However, since delay in furnishing the information has been established, the amount of Rs.90/- deposited by the appellant shall be refunded to her. Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO. -sd- (Padma Balasubramanian) Information Commissioner
  5. In a recent order, CIC has made a distinction between: University Exams and Entrance Exams for Universities Applicant applied to Aligarh Muslim University for: “Photocopies from both sides of all he pages of the question paper given to me (Name: Asma Anjum, Roll No. 249946) in my entrance examination of M.B.B.S. / B.D.S. 2008 held on 26.5.08 and result already declared.” “Photocopies from both sides of all he pages of the question paper given to me (Name: Asma Anjum, Roll No. 249946) in my entrance examination of M.B.B.S. / B.D.S. 2008 held on 26.5.08 and result already declared.” “Copy of correct answers “key or its photocopy of the question paper given to me (Roll No. 249946) in my competitive examination for entrance in MBBS / BDS 2008 held on 26.5.2008.” AMU denied the information saying that the same cannot be disclosed without the approval of the Academic bodies and transferred the application under Sec 5 to the Registrar. Matter went to Second Appeal: CIC allowed disclosure arguing: 1. Disclosure of answer sheets, as in the present case (I think refers to OMR Sheets) is unlikely to render the "system unworkable" 2. Earlier decisions cited by the Respondent were for University Exams and NOT for Entrance Exams for Universities 3. The plea that the Academic Council has not decided as yet for disclosure, does not hold ground because the Academic Council is also under the RTI act The full decision can be viewed at: http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-23092008-03.pdf
  6. sidmis

    Right practice

    Right practice as reported Street Legal section, The Telegraph, September 24 , 2008 An individual who took the examination for recruitment as sub-inspector wanted to scrutinise his answer script later as he smelt corruption in the procedure. The Gauhati High Court upheld his right to see the script. The Manipur Police Department challenged the order saying that it would entitle all applicants to this right. The Gauhati High Court disagreed, saying that the right to know was a part of the right to freedom of speech and expression. The applicant did not have to give a reason for his request under the provisions of the Right to Information Act. The court also observed that this would ensure greater transparency and fairness. (State of Manipur vs Chief Information Commissioner) The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Opinion | Right practice
  7. My only boss while dosposing of my appeal to him has not answered or asked the CPIO to answer my queries but has advised me that I could have sought information directly ( though I had exhausted this channel ) and has told that There is no full time CPIO The information sought is voluminous ( though even informaton as to whe was it introduced question has NOT been answered ! ) He has asked me to get appointment with head clerk and peruse documents But according to me giving information is basic and he can not run away after telling me to pursue documents which is my optional right after i get answers. Any comments and suggestions
  8. Delhi student beaten by teacher for using RTI As reported in Thaiindian.com Using the Right to Information Act (RTI) to know his examination marks proved costly for an 18-year-old student of a government school when he was allegedly brutally beaten up by his teacher in Dilshad Garden area of north-east Delhi Thursday. Mohsin Ansari, a Class 9 student of the Government Boys Senior Secondary School in Dilshad Garden, was admitted to hospital after being allegedly beaten by his physical training teacher, Jai Singh Yadav. "Mohsin is being victimized for using the Right to Information Act. When he went to school today he was severely beaten up by his teacher," Mohsin's father, Mohammad Yusuf Ansari, told IANS. Mohsin was taken to the Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital from where he was discharged in the evening. "He suffered several injuries. We have informed the police about it. We will complain to the chief minister, the education minister and the Central Information Commission about it," Ansari said. Mohsin had used the RTI to get a copy of the answer sheet of his English subject examination and also wanted to see the answer sheets of other students of his class. Though he was given a copy of his paper, the authorities refused to show him the answer sheets of other students. He then approached the CIC, which directed the school authorities to show him the answer sheets of the other students. Though the CIC passed the orders in June, the school authorities refused to show him the answer sheets. "On Tuesday, when he reached school to inspect the answer sheets of other students, the school authorities threatened him and refused to show him any paper. They told him to go to the CIC again to get another order," Ansari said. The physical training teacher assaulted him in school Thursday. "Today while I was in the school toilet, my physical activity teacher Jai Singh Yadav came and started beating me indiscriminately. He threw me down the stairs and slapped me repeatedly," Mohsin told IANS. His parents alleged that the principal was present in the school when the incident took place but didn't intervene. When contacted by IANS, Principal Gokal Singh denied the allegation, and said, "I was not in school when the incident took place." Jai Singh Yadav, when asked if he had indeed beaten the student, said: "I didn't do anything at all." He even threatened the reporter with dire consequences for reporting the incident. Delhi student beaten by teacher for using RTI - Thaindian News
  9. rinith_anand


    is there a cic decision according to which answersheets can be disclosed???
  10. As reported in howrah.org on 16 July 2008: Officer fined for RTI Act violation - Howrah News Service - Latest news and headlines on Howrah and West Bengal Officer fined for RTI Act violation July 16: The Tripura Information Commission has imposed fine of Rs 10,000 on the secretary of the Tripura Board of Secondary Education for deliberately delay in showing the answer papers to an examinee, violating the instruction passed under the Right to Information Act. Mr Pratyush Deb, the secretary of the board, has been asked to deposit the amount in the government exchequer within one month to avoid further action.
  11. TBSE firm against TSIC order on showing answer sheets AS Reported in WebIndia123.Com Agartala | Friday, Jul 18 2008 IST The Tripura Board of Secondary Education (TBSE) today decided not to comply with the direction of Tripura State Information Commission (TSIC) pertaining to providing evaluated answer sheets to the students, seeking them under the Right to Information (RTI) Act 2005. TBSE president Subrata Sengupta told newspersons here that the board would file writ against the TSIC decision in the High Court. ''If required, the board will rather move the Supreme Court than supplying evaluated answer scripts to the students,'' Mr Sengupta said. TSIC had earlier slapped a penalty of Rs 10,000 to the secretary and the board's Public Information Officer (PIO) Pratyus Deb on July 15, for his refusal to supply answer sheets to one Somasree Choudhury of Agartala. It also directed him to provide the same within the next two months. Ms Choudhury, after securing third position in the higher secondary examination in 2007, applied to the TBSE under the RTI Act for the copies of the answer scripts and tabulation sheets of Bengali, Mathematics and Biology. On being refused, she moved the TSIC for justice and the commission afterwards directed the TBSE authority to furnish her with the information sought. It upheld that the evaluated answer sheets and tabulation sheets were linked with personal information of an individual and the student had the absolute right to inspect it. But, TBSE did not comply with the order. Finally, the commission, advocating fairness and transparency in an examination process, imposed penalty on the PIO and criticised the intention of the authority for negating the strict observance of the principle of natural justice. Mr Sengupta referred that Orissa High Court, Supreme Court and Central Information Commission (CIC) had put their views against providing evaluated answer sheets to the student in different cases earlier. ''If supplying such information becomes a practice, security of the examiners will be under threat,'' he felt. However, the TBSE president said if someone came with an order from the High Court, only then would the TBSE supply the information, but under the direction of TSIC. ''The board had decided not to pay the penalty too,'' he informed. Meanwhile, the guardians' forum of TBSE students demanded a CBI probe into the gross malpractice in the Higher Secondary and Madhyamik results this year, voicing for immediate dissolution of the board. -- (UNI) -- TBSE firm against TSIC order on showing answer sheets
  12. sidmis

    Petitions question act scope

    Petitions question act scope AS Reported by LEGAL REPORTER, Telegraph India, Thursday , July 10 , 2008 The high court is hearing two petitions raising the question whether the Right to Information (RTI) Act empowers students to see their answer scripts after evaluation. Calcutta University and the state board of secondary education have moved separate petitions challenging the scope of the RTI Act. The university has challenged an order of a trial bench of the court which forced it to show the B.Sc Part II mathematics answer script to the examiner, Pritam Rooz from Presidency College. This case will be heard next week by the division bench headed by Chief Justice S.S. Nijjar. The board has filed a petition before Justice Soumitra Pal, challenging the legality of an order of the state information officer asking the board to produce two answer scripts before the examinees under the RTI Act. The petition will be heard on July 16. Both petitioners have argued that the rules followed by their organisations do not leave any scope for producing answer scripts before the examinees. The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Metro | Petitions question act scope
  13. As reported by Raksha Shetty on CNN-IBN on January 16, 2008: Maharashtra refuses to answer RTI query on CM's fund Maharashtra refuses to answer RTI query on CM's fund Mumbai: Maharashtra Chief Minister's relief fund is under the scanner for refusing to give details about its finances, despite repeated RTI applications. This comes even when most other states are publishing details about their Relief Funds on their websites. Despite that, RTI applicant Shailesh Gandhi’s efforts to find out simple details – such as who are the beneficiaries of the Fund or even how much is there in it – have not come to fruition. On its part, the state has decided to throw its weight against Gandhi’s application. "The state of Maharashtra had no one but an Advocate-General to argue a case against a simple citizen like me," said Gandhi. The Chief Secretary was not available for comment but in a response to Gandhi’s RTI application, the State has stated that the Chief Minister’s fund is not answerable to the public but is a private trust, even though its trustees are salaried public servants and the fund is run on taxpayers’ money. Gandhi is indignant about that. “It's not Antulay Fund or Vilasrao Deshmukh fund. The very name signifies public authority,” he insists. “There is no need for secrecy. All the funds run by the Chief Minister and belong to the state government,” said BJP spokesperson Nitin Gadkari. Maharashtra’s tight-lipped stance is curious, particularly in the wake of other states such as Bihar, Rajasthan and Orissa divulging the same in detailed accounts on their websites.
  14. As reported by ENS in newindpress.com on 28 May 2008: KU says answersheets not with it - Newindpress.com KU says answersheets not with it T’PURAM: Making the controversy over the assistants’ appointments murkier, the Kerala University informed some candidates that the answer sheets of the examination were not with it. This has given rise to more suspicions about the recruitment process. This website's newspaper reported on Tuesday that one-third of the 200 candidates who were selected for appointment to the post of assistants in Kerala University are either close relatives or associates of CPM leaders. The University, while replying to various candidates who sought their answer sheets through RTI Act, had informed them that they would be provided with their answer sheets when the University gets them back. Two children of Sathyanathan, service consultant of AKPCTA, the pro- CPM private teachers organisation, niece and nephew of CPM Puthanthoppe local committee secretary Maryadasan and two sisters from Kadakkavoor, allegedly close relatives of a district-level leader of the CPM, were included in the ranklist. Reacting to this website's newspaper report on Tuesday, Annie Chacko, leader of Pro- CPM Kerala University Employees’ Union in the Kerala University said that she had not sought the help of anyone to include her daughter’s name in the ranklist. “My daughter is a first rank-holder in the MTM examinations and has enough qualifications to get the job through proper channel,” she said. Meanwhile, Pro-Congress Kerala University Staff Union has urged Governor and University Chancellor R L Bhatia and Education Minister M A Baby to inquire into the allegations against the ranklist. Staff union general secretary S Prasanan in a statement here on Tuesday urged an inquiry into the role of Vice-Chancellor M K Ramachandran Nair, Pro-Vice-Chancellor V Jayaprakash and syndicate members in the corruption behind the manipulation of the ranklist. Pro-CPM Kerala University Employees’ Union said in a statement that the pro-Congress union was behind the allegations. Daughters of two women activists of the Pro-Congress union, the daughter of a personal staff member of Opposition leader and an office-bearer of the NGO Association were also in the list, the statement said. Kerala University also denied the Express report through a statement which didn’t mention anything about the issues raised by this website's newspaper.
  15. As reported by SNS in thestatesman.net on 28 May 2008: The Statesman NBU Teachers Council hold seminar on RTI SILIGURI, May 28: “ The North Bengal University is determined to make the academic structure more transparent as far as the students’ right to information is concerned. We have already started the process of showing the answer scripts to the students and are seriously contemplating to make the education and examination structure more transparent”. This is what Mr Arunava Basumajumder, the vice chancellor of the NBU said today while inaugurating a seminar on the ‘Right to Information’ organised by the NBU Teachers’ Council. He further said that the extent of information to be parted with by the NBU administration should be pondered over deeply, for the issue involved was a serious one requiring some discrimination. “Imparting information to those demanding it is a good thing, but all information cannot be imparted,” the NBU vice chancellor observed. Mr Jyotish Basak, the secretary, NBUTC, said that his organisation was concerned more with the issue of right to information than with the Right to Information Act. “The Act by itself is important, yet in our view, several angles involved in the issue are more important,” Mr Basak said. Prof Raghunath Ghosh of the department of Arts, NBU said that the right to information nowadays has become intimately associated with the issue of social justice and it could no longer be ignored. According to Prof B N Chakravarty of the department of Science, some information must be kept aside where the issue of security was involved. Elaborating on the issue Dr Soumendranath Bera of the department of Journalism and Mass Communication, Calcutta University, said that right to information had become a sine qua non for a functioning democracy.
  16. hi, can anyone tell me that whether i can ask to my university for my recent exam answersheet to show me?i have given exam of ty bcom in m s university,vadodara,gujarat.If i can ask for my answersheet,is there any time limit within which i have to ask it for? plz reply. thank you very much
  17. NEWS: Calcutta high court on 28-3-08 granted the wish of a The student then asked the university to show his answer script under Right to Information Act. The university said the rules don’t permit this. he moved the high court against the university.
  18. I am placing here one refusal of PIO for providing information. I am seeking advise of forum and cases decided by CIC in support of views.
  19. yschandr

    Answer Sheet Xerox

    Dear All, One of my friend is doing her Part Time Correspondence Course in one of leading University in India and when the Results was declared everyone was surprised:o. The reason is, one person who has taken exams only for 1 hour in statistics paper, has cleared the exam, and moreover he is not good in Mathematics, even he has informed on several occassion. Plz let me know, whether is it possible to get the Xerox copy of his Answer Sheet. Plz confirm me. Regards, Chandrasekar
  20. I wanted to have copies of my answer book. Also I want to see the evaluated answer books of my friends. The CPIO has refused to give me the copies even though I had paid the amount. is he justified and can I appraoch CIC for this?
  21. harman singh

    view my answer book

    hi i am a student of mbbs&i have given my final year papers in january the result of which was declared on 9 feb. according to the result i have a score of 20 out of 60 which is the lowest in class in my medicine paper two. For passing i need a score of 30. l have submitted my form for revaluation and verification of the paper but the reval result comes after 2 months. But i am quite confident that i cannot secure so low marks as some of the weaker students have more marks than me. So i wanted to know that is there any provision by which i can see my specific answer book because i am not satisfied with the university officials. Also i have to start my internship before march 31 as i want to appear for my all india pg entrance which states that interns completing their internship before 31 march can apply. So is there any provision that i can view my answer book early than the normal time limit of 30 days as i am quite confident that i should pass.
  22. CIC rejects RTI plea to reveal answer sheets to examinees Staff Reporter | New Delhi Standing firm on its earlier decision to deny disclosure of answer sheets to examinees, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has turned down an RTI plea seeking copies of answer sheets of a professional examination. "While the RTI Act, no doubt, protects and promotes the rights of individuals to receive admissible information, the Commission cannot be totally blind to the fact that disclosure of information (answer sheets of mass examinations) can lead to a virtual collapse of a well-established system," Information Commissioner AN Tiwari said. The Commission was recently hearing an appeal of one Jitendra Kumar, who had sought copies of his answer sheets of an examination conducted by the Institute of Cost and Works Accountants of India (ICWAI) in 2001, declarsssing him unsuccessful. Kumar, in his RTI application, further referred to a Government inquiry of 1998, which had investigated into allegations of examination scam and malpractices within ICWAI. Arguing that there was an over-riding public interest in disclosure of answer sheets in light of the 'Kunal Banerjee Committee Report', the appellant contended that such disclosures were necessary to uphold the credibility of ICWAI's examination system. The Commission, however, declined to accede to his information request on grounds that providing copies of answer sheets would hamper confidentiality of the examining body. Commenting on the 1998 inquiry, which had probed into allegations of examination malpractices within ICWAI, the Commission observed, "a balanced view will have to be taken. While those who indulge in malpractices must be sternly dealt with, the acts of such malcontents alone should not be reason enough to impeach the whole system." Kumar, a resident of Delhi, had last year approached ICWAI's Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) seeking copies of his answer sheets of an ICWAI exam in June 2001. Alleging manipulations in his results, he also sought copy of the 1998 Government inquiry report on examination scam.
  23. How Secure Is The EVM? Poll Panel Has The Answer Friday 01st of June 2007 India has manufactured 1.3 million electronic voting machines (EVM) in a bid to make the electoral process of this vast democracy speedier and counting of votes more accurate. And it is tamper proof, both mechanically and electronically, says the Election Commission. 'The Bangalore-based M/s Bharat Electronics Ltd and the Hyderabad-headquartered M/s Electronics Corp of India Ltd have been authorised to manufacture and supply EVMs to us,' said an official of the Election Commission while replying to a query submitted under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. In response to the query from Harikumar P. of Kerala, the commission's information officer S.R. Kar also gave assurances about the integrated safety measures of the voting machines. 'The machine is both mechanically and electronically protected to prevent any tampering, manipulation or alternation of the programme code and polled data,' Kar said. Each EVM costs around Rs.8,000. According to Kar, the returning officer seals the machine before polling. A thread seal for the door of 'candidate set' compartment and separate seal for power pack compartment are implemented. It also includes a green paper and a thread seal for the result section, another for the bottom compartment and an outer paper seal for the result compartment. The micro controller used in the EVM has a one-time programme read only memory (OTPROM). Programme codes permanently fused in OPTROM and once written and fused cannot be read back or cannot be altered by anybody including the manufacturer, Kar added. The PCB (printed circuit board) consists of micro-controller integrated circuit device with the main programme codes permanently fused into the device manufactured. EVMs have been a contentious issue in some countries, with a debate over their suitability even in the US. Even when some countries have critiqued the Indian EVMs for not having a verifiable 'paper trail' (paper-based cross-checking mechanism) and a lack of public verifiability of its source code, others have appreciated the simplicity of design of the machines unlike their more complex counterparts elsewhere. In India, the cost of the 1989-90 models of EVM (excluding battery) was Rs.4,900 per machine (ex-factory price), transportation and transit-insurance extra. EVMs supplied in 2000-01 cost Rs.8,670 without batteries including excise, sales tax and freight. Expected cost of EVM for the current supply (in 2006-07) is Rs.8,670 each excluding excise, sales tax and freight. Of the 1.3 million deployed, a little over two-dozen faced problems, Kar said. 'The EVMs returned due to technical defect are replaced by the manufacturer. The number of EVMs abandoned are very few,' he said. Though there is no special handbook by the Election Commission regarding maintenance and usage of EVMs, a 43-page test report of the P.V. Indiresan Committee is the only document that has analysed the issue in India. Techies discussing this issue on the India-GII network in cyberspace, however, have voiced some concerns about the prices nearly doubling in a decade. How Secure Is The EVM? Poll Panel Has The Answer
  • Create New...

Important Information

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