Central Information Commission opens up UPSC finally: A landmark judgement
BANGALORE: In a landmark decision, the Karnataka Information Commission (KIC) has ruled that evaluated answer scripts should be made available to anybody who wishes to see them and cannot be kept confidential for the benefit of the examiners.
The commission has ordered the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) to make available the answerscripts free of cost to applicant E Ramamurthy, who sought copies of four answer scripts of the Gazetted Probationers Examinations, 1998.
State chief information commissioner K K Misra and state information officer K A Thippeswamy have rejected the KPSC's plea, which said that answer scripts cannot be made public as they are exempted under Sec 8 (i) (e) and 8 (i) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
More importantly, it has rejected the Central Information Commission's decision under Section 8 (i) (j) saying that seeking evaluated answer papers either his/her own or others is purely personal and has no relationship to any public interest or activity. "This view does not appear correct to this commission.
Although the applicant is not to be asked the purpose for seeking information, in the present case, providing the information would ensure the impartiality, objectivity, and fairness of the evaluation by examiners appointed by public services commissions whose purpose incidentally is of utmost concern to the people," it stated.
the KIC has held.
1. Can a government department refuse to accept two or more my identifying certificates on the grounds that "one identification has the middle name just initialized and the other has the middle name in the expanded form"? [could be a legal question actually]. This has happened even when the father's name(second level of identification) and date of birth(third level of identification) matches in both. This is specially in relation to the PAN card department about not accepting my certificates as valid to make changes in PAN card.
2. How to frame RTI and to whom to frame RTI for this? A lot of us have middle names. Sometimes we initialize it, sometimes we expand it. Does just using the initials(in name or middle name) make us unidentifiable even when other layers of identification are provided? For instance, our former President was called S.Radhakrishnan and sometimes he expanded and sometimes he didn't. But that didn't make him ineligible for consideration of both names.
3. Can I file RTI with Supreme Court asking for documents which show that just because a person's middle name(or name) is initialized doesn't make him ambiguous or unidentifiable, provided other layers of identification are provided.
4. This can be a landmark RTI if we have a reply from, say, Supreme Court and can be used to quote in future RTIs. I'm sure people who have legal background have the answer already. Please share your views.