Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr.Amit Godara vs Department Of School Education And ... on 5 April, 2011

                                 1


             Central Information Commission
Room No.296, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama 
                     Place, New Delhi­110066
     Telefax:011­26180532 & 011­26107254 website­cic.gov.in

            Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2010/001757  

 Appellant /Complainant      :          Sh. Amit Godara, 
Sriganga Nagar
Public Authority             :        Central Board of 
Secondary Education, 
                             Delhi ( Shri G.L. Mittal, 
CPIO)

Date of Hearing              :        5 April 2011
Date of Decision             :        5 April 2011
Facts:­ 

1. The applicant submitted RTI application dated 11  June 2010 before the CPIO, CBSE, Delhi seeking a copy  of his OMR answer sheet along with model answer sheet  (key) for the  AIEEE exam 2010. The CPI by the order  dated   11   June   2010   denied   disclosure   of   information  on the grounds that disclosure of information did not  serve any larger public interest and also stated that  the   AIEEE   answer   sheets   are   machine   graded   with  extreme   care   and   repeatedly   scrutinised   and   that  there is no provision for rechecking/re­evaluation of  the answer sheets. In denying disclosure, the CPI of  relied on Commission's order dated 23 April 2007.

2. The   applicant   preferred   appeal   dated   24   June  2010   before   the   first   appellate   authority   who  disposed  of the  matter  vide  order  dated  8 July  2010  by upholding the order of the CPIO.

3. Not   being   satisfied   by   the   above   orders   the  applicant moved the Commission in second appeal. The  matter   was     heard   today.   Respondent   was   present   in  person   as   above.   Appellant   did   not   appear   and  telephoned   the   Commission   to   decide   the   matter   on  merit.

Decision notice Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2010/001757   2

 4. After   hearing   both   parties,   Commission   notes  that respondent has confirmed that evaluation of the  0MR answer sheets is carried out through computerized  process and not manually. It is also established   as  per the decision of the CIC in Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs  Harish Chander that where OMR sheets are used, as in  the present case, the disclosure of evaluated answer  sheet   was   "unlikely   to   render   the   system   unworkable  and as such the evaluated answer sheets in such cases  will be disclosed and made available under the Right  to   Information   Act   unless   providing   such   answer  sheets would involve an infringement of copyright as  provided for under section 9 of the RTI Act".  

5. Here,     reference   is   made   to    judgement  of     S.  Muralidhar,   J   in   W.P   (C)   751   of   2011   and   CM   Appl  1598/2011 filed in Delhi High Court  which upheld the  order of the Central information Commission dated 23  December 2010   in which Commission directed   CPIO of  the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi to provide  the   mark   sheet   to   the   appellant.   Through   its   order  the Court  has ruled that  "the evaluation of the ORS   is   carried   out   through   computerized   process   and   not   manually,   the   question   of   there   being   a   fiduciary   relationship between the IIT and the evaluators does   not arise..... and no prejudice can be caused to the   IIT   by   providing   a   candidate   a   photocopy   of   the   concerned   0RS.   This   is   not   information   being   sought   by   a   third   party   but   by   the   candidate   himself   or  herself. The disclosure of such photocopy of the 0RS   will   not   compromise   the   identity   of   the   evaluator,   since   the   evaluation   is   done   through   a   computerized   process."

6. The   Court   also   dismissed   the   argument   that   if  the impugned orders of the CIC are sustained it would  open   a   "floodgate"   of   such   applications   by   other  candidates   as   a   result   of   which   the   entire   JEE   and  GATE   would   "collapse"   on   the   grounds   that   the  apprehension is exaggerated.

7. In   keeping   with   the   spirit   and   tone   of   the  aforementioned   judgment,   Commission   directs   the   CPIO  to provide a copy of the OMR answer sheet and model  Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2010/001757   3 answer key as sought by the appellant within one week  of receipt of the order. 

9. Commission   invites   attention   of   the   Chairman,  CBSE to the fact that in the new milieu which favours  transparency   in   actions   of   public   authorities,   the  board  should   revisit  this  issue  in the  light  of the  fact that the IIT's and two universities - Rajasthan  and   Himachal   Pradesh   -   have   taken   decision   to   place  on   their   websites   the   OMR   answer   sheets   of   the  candidates   along   with   the   model   answer   sheet   in   the  interest   of   fairness   and   transparency   in   the  examination system. 

(Smt. Deepak Sandhu) Information Commissioner (DS) Authenticated true copy:

(T. K. Mohapatra) Under Secretary & Dy. Registrar Tel No. 011­26105027 Copy to:­
1. Shri Amit Godara S/o Sh. Dayaram Godara Civil Nayayadheesh, Srikaranpur, Dist: Sriganga Nagar­335073
2. The CPIO Central Board of Secondary Education PS­1­2, Institutional Area I.P. Extension, Patparganj,  Delhi­110092. 
3. The Appellate Authority Central Board of Secondary Education PS­1­2, Institutional Area I.P. Extension, Patparganj,  Delhi­110092. 
 
4. The Chairman Central Board of Secondary Education PS­1­2, Institutional Area,  I.P. Extension, Patparganj, Delhi­110092   Appeal : No. CIC/DS/A/2010/001757