Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'examination copies'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA 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
  • FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS's FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION's ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Topics
  • MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS's MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS Topics
  • INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES's INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • AAKANKSHA's AAKANKSHA Topics
  • RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE's RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • JVG DUPED CUST.'s JVG DUPED CUST. 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
  • WEWANTJUSTICE's WEWANTJUSTICE Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS's MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS 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
  • ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA's ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA 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
  • UN-DO CORRUPTION's UN-DO CORRUPTION 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
  • NATIONAL ISSUE's NATIONAL ISSUE 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
  • RTI BALLIA's RTI BALLIA 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
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT 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
  • PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION.'s PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION. 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
  • AMICE (INDIA)'s AMICE (INDIA) Topics
  • HELPING HAND !'s HELPING HAND ! 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
  • AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS's AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS 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
  • URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL's URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL Topics
  • RTI HELP INDIA's RTI HELP INDIA Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics

Categories

  • 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)
  • BSNL & MTNL
  • 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

Categories

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

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 12 results

  1. If a candidate seeks information under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, then payment has to be sought under the RTI Rules. The question before the Supreme Court was which Guidelines/Rules will govern the prescription of fee for copies of answer sheets and their inspection. The Court held that while the ICSI is governed by the Companies Secretaries Act, 1980 and the Examination Committee formed under the statute prescribes a certain fee, the RTI Rules also lay down a fee structure for procurement of answer sheets. The Court held, “In our opinion, the existence of these two avenues is not mutually exclusive and it is up to the candidate to choose either of the routes. Thus, if a candidate seeks information under the provisions of the Right to Information, then payment has to be sought under the Rules therein, however, if the information is sought under the Guidelines of the appellant, then the appellant is at liberty to charge the candidates as per its guidelines.” The decision was rendered by a Bench of Justices NV Ramana and S Abdul Nazeer, which made it clear that if there are other avenues to procure answer sheets, the applicant can choose which one to route her request through. The RTI Rules entitle a student to seek inspection and certified copies of their answer scripts. When this right is exercised, Rule 4 will govern the levy of the required charges. This Rule stipulates a fee of Rs. 2 for each page of the answer script. For inspection, no fee is prescribed for the first hour. For every subsequent hour of inspection, the fee is Rs. 5 per hour. The order came in an appeal filed by the Institute of Companies Secretaries of India (ICSI) against a decision of a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court. The respondent, Advocate Paras Jain, had sought from ICSI certified copies of answer sheets and their inspection under RTI. He was charged a fee for the same as per Guideline No. 3 notified by the Statutory Council of the ICSI. As per the ICSI Guidelines, the fee for the supply of certified copies was Rs. 500 per answer sheet, and the charge for inspection was Rs. 450 per answer book. Download the decision here.15222_2014_Order_11-Apr-2019.pdf
  2. The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has been charging exorbitant fees for providing copies of answer sheets to students in the face of a landmark Supreme Court (SC) judgment in 2011. Despite another order from the apex court hammering CBSE to respect the judgment and RTI rules in 2016, once again it has shown the audacity to continue fleecing students seeking answer sheets. The CBSE published a notification on 29 May 2018 on its website prescribing an exorbitant fee of Rs1,200 per subject for obtaining copies of the evaluated answer-sheets. In response to this notification, a contempt petition has been filed against its Chairman, in the Supreme Court last week. It may be recalled that, on 6 August 2016, the Supreme Court had directed the CBSE to ``scrupulously observe the directions of this court in civil appeal no 6454 of 2011 and the rules framed under the RTI Act 2005. The landmark 2011 judgment ordered that: ``Answer-sheet is an information and the examinees have the fundamental and legal right to access their evaluated answer-sheets under the Right to Information Act, 2005.(RTI Act).” The contempt petition has been filed by Whistle of Public Interest (WHIP), for the willful and deliberate attempt of CBSE to surpass and overrule the authority of the apex court of the country. This is the second time that WHIP has filed a contempt petition on this subject, the first time being in 2016. Kumar Sanu, one of the founder members of WHIP, says, “In 2016, it came to our knowledge that CBSE was charging an exorbitant fee of Rs1,200 for showing copies of answer-sheets and was blatantly denying access to evaluated answer-sheets, a right granted under the RTI Act. This was not only the violation of a fundamental right of lakhs of students every year but also a willful contempt of the Supreme Court of India. Hence we filed a contempt petition against the Chairman, CBSE.” Here is the sample RTI for examination copies.
  3. Sir/Mam, I am a 12th class student, CBSE board. I was shattered to see my marks in English which were just 76/100. After that I applied for photocopy of my answer book. After getting it issued, I got it checked by my school teacher(TGT) who after judiciously assessing all the answers concluded that this book is worth marks 95+. Thus, I applied for scrutiny of Marks. But even after scrutiny they allotted only 87/100 . This apparently shows how superficially the copies are checked even after scrutiny. Sir , I am fully confident that I can get 9-10 marks more. Could you please suggest me what to do next for claiming those marks becoz CBSE is not replying at all. Please help, I will ever remain grateful for your favour. Thankyou Sent from my Redmi 3S using RTI INDIA mobile app
  4. pravikumar123

    answer copy script

    recently I applied answer copy script then I found one mistake ....examiner not correction well.... almost I lost one year acadamic year. ...if I prove then can I ask the damege of time and money? Sent from my SM-A7000 using RTI INDIA mobile app
  5. Nehamalhotra1

    Revaluation or typing error

    Respected SirI am a student of CCS university. It is a very reputed university. My roll no is RK605854147 and my enrollment no is M16126394. Sir I am a LLB student of batch 2016-2017. When I checked my result I found 30 marks in my paper code 2002. And my exams was done very good. Sir I think there is some typing error or some other mistake. I got very good marks in others subjects also. Sir please help me out. CCS is one of the best university in the world and I prefer this university to all my friends and relatives to do courses. Sir please help me out. Sir please take an early step to resolve my problem. It is my humble request to you Truly Neha Malhotra Roll No-RK605854147 Enrollment No - M16126394 DELETED email - posted against forum rules
  6. RAJAMUTHYALA

    exam valuation paper

    sir please tell me the procedure to get my examination valuation paper from andhra university, visakhapatnam how much i need to pay how to apply,how to pay please give me a reply
  7. Dear members, My first post here, I will do the introductions later I need some assistance in filing an appeal to an RTI appellate authority. Some context: I am not satisfied with my scored achieved in the common admission test in November 2011, for which the results were published in Jan 2012. The purpose of filing this RTI is two-fold - Firstly, to determine exactly how well or badly I have done in the examination, and secondly, for some transparency in the entire process. Some background information: The Common Admission Test (CAT) is a prerequisite for entry to the Indian Institutes of Management and many other business schools in India. Since 2009, this examination has been computer based (though not computer adaptive). Many aspects of the examination (Including actual conduct of the examination) has been outsourced to Prometric, a multinational specializing in such tasks. There has been a total lack of transparency in the entire evaluation process. Firstly, the examination is held over several days. The examiners have refused to confirm that questions may repeat across multiple sessions/days. They have only imposed a non disclosure agreement on the candidates. However, you yourself may judge the effectiveness of this when there are in excess of 200,000 test takers. Secondly, the scoring. In the good old days of pencil and paper tests, a candidate recieved a certain number of marks (say 3) for correct answers, and some marks (say 1) were deducted for incorrect answers. In due course, the IIMs would release an answer key. The candidate could, thus, tally his answers with the key and check if the score is roughly equal to what it should be. If it isn't, the candidate can choose what to do about it. Nowadays, only section-wise scaled scores and the total score is provided. The exam conductors, Prometric, have repeatedly stated that , But they refuse to tell us what equivalence (formula) was used, and how they arrived at it. More importantly, a candidate has absolutely no idea of how many questions he got right and wrong. Steps taken: First, I e-mailed a candidate helpline address asking for information. I have attached it, with the reply I received. The reply which refused to answer the questions, but told me to contact catcentre@iimcal.ac.in. I contacted the aforesaid e-mail address, asking them how to file the RTI. There was no response. Thus, I decided to file an RTI application. Since IIM Calcutta was responsible for conducting the CAT this year, that is the place I chose to begin filing the application. A google search revealed this page. The proforma is given here. Even though they accept online applications, I sent it by courier. (Perhaps it should have been sent by speed post/registered post, but that is not the point of contention.) I have attached the RTI query as an attachment. Now some points: 1. The courier was accepted by IIM Calcutta on Feb 16. When no information was forthcoming, on March 30, I sent an e-mail reminder to the PIO. He replied that the query had been forwarded to the concerned department, and told me that a reminder would be sent to them. The mail containing refusal to supply the information came only on April 10. My first question: Can any action be taken against the people concerned for the delay in replying to the RTI? 2. The reply that came on April 10 by e-mail was as follows: Some points come to my mind: a) Is it possible that I mentioned the incorrect department in my RTI application? As an outsider, I do not have detailed information on the internal workings of the institute. Is it mandatory for the applicant to know the right department? Or is the PIO responsible for forwarding it to the right department? b) More likely, in this case, the issue is that Prometric, and the IIMs are playing pass the parcel. The IIMs may say, if probed, that the information is not with them, and is with Prometric. Prometric, not being a government entity, is not covered under the RTI act. This is conjencture on my part, but is a plausible conclusion. I have decided to file an appeal to the appellate authority(as I have nothing to lose), and would like the help of the community members in drafting it. They don't seem to have any specific format for this. I know that other people have filed similar RTIs, but am unable to get their names/contacts for obvious reasons. I would now like to share some online references regarding this matter. * In 2009, when the exam was first conducted online, the then convenor of the CAT Committee had advised the candidates to file an RTI application - Want your CAT score re-evaluated? File RTI - Times Of India * This mentions some general advice, which I've roughly followed : Not Satisfied With CAT Scores - What To Do After CAT? * A directive from the Central Information Commission stating that 'Answer keys must be shared under RTI': Answer keys must be shared under RTI - Times Of India * A news report saying that it is unlikely that the IIMs would reveal information, but also Prometric's willingness to share information in response to RTIs : CAT aspirants' RTI efforts may go waste - Economic Times. * An article mentioning some RTIs filed: 4 RTI appeals filed over CAT scoring - Times Of India * A thread on this forum on a related matter - The awarding of the tender to Prometric : http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/32954-iim-holds-back-information-rti-applicant.html Also, the first appeal can be filed online. Is there any point in mentioning any of the above references, particularly quoting the director of the CAT committee, and the CIC directive? Should I mention the conversation with the Prometric folks? RTI_doc_copy.docx prometric_conv.txt
  8. 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.
  9. Hello Everybody, Thanks a lot for providing this forum as a platform to know about our rights. I am an engineering Student from Jadavpur University,Kolkata.I want to seek the Judgment copy of Pritam Rooz case in which the Calcutta High Court Has directed the University authorties to show the answer scripts. Please if somebody can guide me on how to fill the Application for viewing the Semester exam answer scripts. Where am I going to get the RTI application form in the Jadavpur University?? And will the filling of the form along with the judgment copy be sufficient?? Please Help,its really urgent
  10. vikasgarg2711

    private scools

    What can i do against a private school if one of my friend has been failed in 11th class though her exams were good. i think there must be partiality in checking the exam coppys ,and she is asked to repeate 11th standard.she has been getting distinction till 10th standard.she has also not been shown her test copys.
  11. 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
  12. 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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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