Central Information Commission
Pankaj Ranjan vs Central Board Of Secondary Education on 31 July, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/CBSED/A/2024/658045
Pankaj Ranjan ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Central Board Of
Secondary Education, Patna ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 27.09.2024 FA : 26.11.2024 SA : Nil
CPIO : 24.10.2024 FAO : 19.12.2024 Hearing : 22.07.2025
Date of Decision: 30.07.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 27.09.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1. I want photocopy of total pages of re-evaluated copy Subject code - 087 (Social Science) including map of VAIBHAV PANKAJ, who appeared in Secondary School Examination-2024 with ROLL NO-22171451 SCHOOL-
SARSWATI VIDYA MANDIR BIHAR (65030).
Marksheet is enclosed
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 24.10.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-
Page 1 of 4"This is with reference to the information asked regarding the photocopy of the re- evaluated copy, it is to inform you that the photocopies of the Re-evaluated answer book cannot be provided as per the instruction of Re-evaluation Circular No. CBSE/Coord/Veri/Class - X/2024 dated 13.05.2024. It has been notified that the Result of the re-evaluation will be final and no appeal of review against the re- evaluation will be entertained. Hence, a Photocopy of the Re-evaluated Answer Book cannot be provided."
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.11.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 19.12.2024 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 Nil.
5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Navneeta Sharma, Under Secretary, attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The appellant inter alia submitted that the respondent had not provided the accurate information sought in the application. The photocopy of subject-code including the map was provided, however, the answer book of his son for subject code 087 (Social Science) was not provided, so far.
7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the candidate has applied for Photocopy of Answer book wherein the photocopy of Answer book for subject code 087 (Social Science) was provided through the verification portal but inadvertently the map was not provided. The CPIO further stated that the subject expert has Re-evaluated the Answer book and no mistake was detected after the Re-evaluation. However, the re-evaluated answer book cannot be provided as per the instruction mentioned on Board's circular no. CBSE/Coord/Veri/Class-X/2024 dated 13.05.2024 which states result of the re-evaluation will be final and no appeal or review against the re-evaluation would be entertained. The decision of the Board on the marks awarded Page 2 of 4 shall be final and binding on the candidates. She further stated that photocopy of subject code 087 (Social Science) including the map was again furnished along with their written submissions.
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the reply given by the respondent was contrary to the provisions of the RTI Act. The CPIO has relied upon the CBSE's circular which bars them from disclosure of answer books to the candidates. However, the respondent has not invoked any exemption laid down under the provisions of Section 8 or 9 of the RTI Act. In addition to the above omission by the CPIO in terms of exemption clauses of the Act, it is also crucial to note that the applicability of Section 22 has an overriding effect on the internal circulars issued by the respondent authority. Section 22 of the RTI Act is extracted below for the reference of both parties:
"22. Act to have overriding effect.
The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act."
Therefore, the CPIO's decision for denial of answer book's photocopy, sought under the RTI Act, is unsustainable in the eyes of law and is overruled. The respondent is directed to disclose the information to the appellant, after redacting the personal details of examiners as per Section 10 of the RTI Act, free of cost, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, under due intimation to the Commission. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 30.07.2025 Page 3 of 4 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ. पी. पोख रयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1 The CPIO Central Board Of Secondary Education, CPIO, Regional Office-Patna, Ambika Complex, Behind Sbi Colony, Near Brahmsthan, Sheikhpura, Bailey Road, Patna, Bihar-800014 2 Pankaj Ranjan Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)