Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

R Pradeepkumar vs Ut Of Puducherry on 4 February, 2026

                                    के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                           Central Information Commission
                                बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                            Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                              नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/UTPON/A/2024/626735

R Pradeepkumar                                              ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                     VERSUS
                                      बनाम
CPIO: Department of
Personnel & Administrative,                              ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Puducheery

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 08.01.2024              FA     : 15.03.2024           SA     : 22.06.2024

CPIO : 16.02.2024             FAO : 02.04.2024              Hearing : 19.01.2026


Date of Decision: 30.01.2026
                                        CORAM:
                                   Hon'ble Commissioner
                                      Shri P R Ramesh
                                       ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.01.2024 seeking information on the following points:

"I, R.Pradeepkumar, very humbly submit that, the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Personnel Wing), Puducherry (Referred as DP&AR(P) vide I.D.Note / Memorandum No.A-34012/1/2023/DP& AR(Exam) dated. 16.02.2023 notified the Limited Department Competitive Examination for Promotion to the Post of Assistant. Subsequently the said exam was held on 06.08.2023. I appeared for both the paper - I and paper - II of the said exam and my hall ticket number is 300-P. Subsequently the DP&AR(P) vide Notification No. A-

34012/1/2023/DP&AR(Exam) dated. 28.11.2023 notified the provisional select list pertaining to the said exam and my name is not found in the said provisional select list. In this regard, I kindly request to supply me the following information pertaining to the said examination

1. Certified Copy of My Answer Sheet(s)/booklet pertaining to Paper - I held in morning session on 06.08.2023

2. Certified Copy of My Answer Sheet(s)/booklet pertaining to Paper - II held in afternoon session on 06.08.2023.."

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 16.02.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-

Reply :- In respect of information sought for at sl. no. 1 & 2, The Honorable Supreme Court in its judgment dated 20th February, 2018 in CA Nos. 6159-6162 of 2013 and 5924/2013 (Union Public Service Commission versus Angesh Kumar & Ors with Joint Director and CPIO and Anr. versus T.R.Rajesh) held that the evaluated Conventional answer sheets are exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act, 2005. The same has been upheld by the CIC in its decision No.CIC/UPSCM/A/2022/658967 dated 04.07.2023. As such the requisite information could not be provided. However, the applicant can view his marks in the recruitment website link https://recruitment.py.gov.in/DepartmentalExam/ViewMark by following the steps mentioned in the notice available in the website link https://recruitment.py.gov.in/ Administration/Files/RenderFile/19.

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.03.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 02.04.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 22.06.2024.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Not present Respondent: Shri Segar, Superintendent- participated in the hearing.

6. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the Appellant has sought copy of answer sheet. He relied upon the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CA. No. 6159-6162/2013, titled as UPSC vs Angesh Kumar, dated 20.02.2018. A written submission dated 13.01.2026 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:

"..6. It is humbly submitted that with respect to information sought for at sl.no.1 & 2 regarding copy of his own answer sheet. It is submitted that the Honorable Supreme Court in its judgment dated 20th February 2018 in CA Nos. 6159-6162 of 2013 and 5924/2013 (Union Public Service Commission versus Angesh Kumar & Ors with Joint Director and CPIO and Anr. versus T.R.Rajesh) held that the evaluated Conventional answer sheets are exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the Hon'ble CIC in its decision No. CIC/UPSCM/A/2022/658967 dated 04.07.2023, has also adjourned sine die the matter regarding decision of sharing answer scripts (descriptive) citing the stay order of Delhi High Court in W.P(C) 17101/2022 & CM APPL.54278/2022 dated 04.08.2023 in the matter of UPSC Vs. Ms. Kavitha Panicker & Anr.

7. Further, it is submitted that in a similar case of Thiru. K. Praveen Kumar vs PIO, Exam Cell, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Puducherry, wherein, the Appellant has sought for copy of his evaluated answer scripts. The Hon'ble Commission vide decision dated 29.09.2025 (File No. CIC/UTPON/A/2024/630950) (copy enclosed) has ordered as follows:-

As regards copies of evaluated answer scripts, the issue remains sub judice before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court (UPSC v. Kavitha Panicker & Anr., W.P.(C) 17101/2022) and is presently stayed. Hence, no positive direction can be issued at this stage for supply of evaluated answer scripts.

7. In view of the above facts, the Second Appeal is liable to be dismissed. It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble Commission may be pleased to dismiss the Second Appeal and render justice..."

Decision:

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of records, observes that the Appellant has sought copy of his answer sheet of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination held on 06.08.2023. It observed that Hon'ble Supreme Court in CA. No. 6159-6162/2013, titled as UPSC vs Angesh Kumar, dated 20.02.2018 has dealt in detail with the issue of disclosure of evaluated conventional answer sheets. It is further noted that as regards disclosure of copies of evaluated answer scripts, the issue remains sub-judice before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court (UPSC v. Kavitha Panicker & Anr., W.P.(C) 17101/2022) and is presently stayed.

Accordingly, it would not be judicious to give any direction for disclosure of answer script of the Appellant at this stage.

8. However, it is observed that disclosure of marks of the Appellant in Paper-I and Paper-II with a detailed breakup of each section would not affect the confidentiality of the examination that had already been concluded. Commission is of the considered opinion that withholding such information unnecessarily allows doubts, which is not very healthy in promoting transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and public recruitment processes. It is worthwhile to highlight decision of Hon'ble Bombay Hight Court in Shri Onkar Dattatray Kalmankar Vs. PIO, Registrar, Page 4 of 6 District and Sessions Court, Pune & Ors., W.P. No. 9648 of 2021, decided on 11.11.2024 wherein the court held that disclosing a candidate's own marks and other candidates marks i.e. performance-related data enhances accountability and does not amount to an invasion of privacy. The aforementioned decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 2783/2025, dated 07.02.2025.

9. The Commission concurs with aforementioned view of court and holds that such disclosure of marks of candidates aligns with the objective of the RTI Act, which is to promote transparency in public recruitment. Accordingly, the PIO is directed to furnish to the Appellant certified information regarding the marks awarded to him in Paper I and Paper II, with a detailed break up of each section, if available, as it relates solely to his own examination record.

10. The above directions shall be compiled within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. A compliance report in this be filed with the Commission within a week thereafter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

(P R Ramesh) (पी. आर. रमेश) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy Vivek Agarwal (िववेक अ वाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26107048 Page 5 of 6 Addresses of the parties:

1 The CPIO Superintendent-(Examination Cell), Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms (Personnel Wing), Goubert Avenue, White Town, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry-605001.

2 R Pradeepkumar Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)