Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

iv). The system of declaring subject wise marks had thus been replaced by subject wise grades and grade point;

v). the purpose of introducing the grading system was to take away the frightening judgmental quality of marks, to lead to a stress free and joyful learning environment and was intended to minimize mis-classification of students on the basis of marks, to eliminate unhealthy cut-throat competition and to reduce societal pressure etc. The order denying information as to marks was thus upheld.

7. It was the argument of the appellant before the learned Single Judge also that disclosure of the marks would dilute and defeat the grading system. The learned Single Judge however held that since the respondent was seeking disclosure of marks, only of his daughter and further since his daughter who has since attained majority had also consented to the same and since the respondent was not seeking disclosure of marks obtained by other students and further since the appellant was possessed of the information sought, it was required to disclose the same. It was further observed that a student is entitled to know the marks secured by him / her.

11. What we find to have prevailed with the CIC and the learned Single Judge is that, despite introduction of grading system, marks existed with the appellant; it was held that once the information sought was available, there could be no denial thereof. What also prevailed was that the respondent was seeking marks only of his ward and not of other students and thus there could be no objection to disclosure thereof. The CIC also observed that the information sought was not exempt.

14. No doubt, as the CIC also has observed, none of the clauses of Section 8, if literally interpreted, are attracted. However while interpreting a statutory provision, we cannot shut our eyes to hard realities, to what was sought to be achieved thereby and cannot in a pedantic manner allow the literal interpretation to run amock and create a situation not intended by the statute. Moreover, a reading of the provisions of the RTI Act in the manner done by the CIC and the learned Single Judge would bring it in conflict with other laws and notwithstanding the overriding effect given thereto by Section 22 thereof, the first attempt has to be to harmonise its provisions with other laws. Once a purposive interpretation is given to Section 8, it will be found that information forbidden to be published [Section 8(1)(b)] and information available in fiduciary relationship [Section 8(1)(e)] is exempt. In our opinion, even though there is no express order of any court of law forbidding publication of marks [as is the want of Section 8(1)(b)] but the effect of bringing the regime of grades in place of marks and of dismissal of challenge thereto, is to forbid publication/disclosure of marks. Similarly, in the evaluation process prescribed by appellant, for guidance of its examiners, marks are only to arrive at a grade, perhaps as aforesaid to acquaint the examiners with the grading system and as a transitory stage in the shift from marks to grades.