The Hindu : National : "Examinees not entitled to answer paper copies"

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Feb 10, 2006

National

National

"Examinees not entitled to answer paper copies"

Siddharth Narrain

Confidentiality needed in the manner and method of evaluation: information panel

NEW DELHI : In a decision that will have a considerable impact on the extent of the application of the Right to Information Act (RTI), the Central Information Commission has held that examinees are not entitled to a copy of their evaluated answer papers under the Act.

The Central Information Commissioners deciding the case, Padma Balasubramanian and O.P. Kejariwal, held that when answer papers are evaluated the authority conducting the examination and the examiners evaluating the answer papers stand in a fiduciary relationship with each other, thus requiring confidentiality in the manner and method of evaluation. They held that the RTI Act renders information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship is exempt from the Act unless the Central Information Commission is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information.

The matter came up before the Central Information Commission on appeal against the refusal of the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Kerala Postal Circle, to furnish a copy of an evaluated answer sheet of the applicant, Treesa Irish, a post woman in Ernakulam North Post Office. Ms. Irish had appeared for a departmental examination on April 24, 2005 for promotion. When she found that no one from the division was successful in the examination, she asked for a copy of the mark sheet. When her request was denied she filed a case before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT). While this case was going on, she was given a copy of the mark sheet that showed she had secured 37 marks in Paper III of the examination, three marks short of the required score.

When she applied to the CPIO for a photocopy of her evaluated answer sheet the CPIO rejected the request on the ground that no "public interest" was involved in her case. Ms. Irish then appealed to the First Appellate Authority.

The Authority, while concurring with the decision of the CPIO, said the disclosure would compromise the fairness and impartiality of the selection process.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail