Central Information Commission
Mr. Alok Kumar Agrahari vs Union Public Service Commission on 29 July, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000327/SG/13737
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000327/SG
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant: : Mr. Alok Kumar Agrahari
House No. (New/Old): 684/575
Gangu Adhyaksh's New Lodge (Room No.- 6)
Near Ram Vatika, Colonelganj
Allahabad (U.P.) Pin -211002
Respondent: : Dr. Kulbir Singh
PIO & Joint Director,
Union Public Service Commission,
Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi- 110069
RTI application: 26/04/2010
PIO reply: 25/05/2010
First appeal 23/06/2010
FAA order 06/08/2010
Second appeal 02/11/2010
Information sought:
It is to bring to your kind notice that most unfortunately 1 have been disqualified in English (compulsory) paper [ 70/ 300 marks] -of Civil Services (Main) Examination -- 2009. Kindly provide me following information regarding English (compulsory) paper:
1. Minimum qualifying marks.
2. How many candidates who have appeared in Civil Services (Main) Examination 2009 with English medium have been disqualified in English (compulsory) paper?
3. On how much marks my answer-book evaluated (i.e. how much marks I have attempted)
4.. Is scaling and moderation done?
5. If scaling and moderation done then what is my raw marks (i.e. marks before scaling and moderation).
6. How many précis sheets used by me.
7 Enclosed précis sheets are or someone else's (by tallying handwriting with answer-book, as according to examination instruction no roll no. is to be written on précis sheets and might be - detached inadvertently while handling the answer book).
8. No. of Answer sheets used by me and their serial no. (supplied by UPSC on cover page).
9. Photocopy of attendance sheet (which have details of the serial no. of various answer sheets used by me along with the signatures).
10. Serial wise detail of Question no. attempted by me. For example if I had attempted Question no. 5 firstly, Question no. 1 secondly, Question no. 2 thirdly, Question no. 3 fourthly and Question no. 4 in last then serial wise detail would be 5,1,2,3 and 4.
11. Question-wise (and if possible, even sub-question wise, if any) distribution of awarded raw marks.
12. Photocopy of my complete answer book.
PIO's reply:
1. Information exempt under Section 8 (1) (d), since it would hurt the competitive interests of other candidates.
2. Numbers of candidates were 6276 and the failed candidates were 53.
3. Every paper has been marked as per the marks mentioned in the question paper, the maximum is 300 marks.
4. And 5:Supreme Court has held ' moderation when employed by the examining authority becomes part of the process of evaluation and marks awarded become the final marks of the candidate."
Hence raw marks do not subsist at the end of the process. 6, 8 and 10. This information is not maintained and collating it would divert the resources.
7. A judgmental view is being sought. Your answer book including précis sheets are intact.
9. Exemption claimed under Section 8 (1) (j) and 8 (1) (e).
11. Supreme Court judgment has held that until the final outcome the marks are only an intermediate stage.
12. Copy of answer sheet does not have to be given as has been held by the full bench order of the CIC.
Grounds for First appeal:
Denial of information not correct.
FAA order:
Upheld the PIO's decision.
Grounds for Second appeal:
Denial of information not justified. CIC should order UPSC not to destroy the answer sheets.
Relevant Facts Emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Alok Kumar Agrahari on video conference from NIC-Allahabad Studio; Respondent: Dr. Kulbir Singh, PIO & Joint Director and Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate;
The Appellant has been given certain information earlier based on the records and the PIO is now directed to give the information to the Appellant on query 4, 8 & 9. If any of the records have been weeded out as per the weeding out policy the PIO will state this and send a copy of the weeding out schedule alongwith a copy of register of destruction of records.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant before 10 August 2011.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 29 July 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision mention the complete decision number) (NB)