8. On the contentions urged, the following questions arise for our
consideration :
(i) Whether an examinee's right to information under the RTI Act
includes a right to inspect his evaluated answer books in a public
examination or taking certified copies thereof?
(ii)
Whether the decisions of this court in Maharashtra State Board ofSecondary Education
[1984 (4) SCC 27] and other cases referred toabove, in any way affect or interfere with the right of an examinee
seeking inspection of his answer books or seeking certified copies
thereof?
(iii) Whether an examining body holds the evaluated answer books "in a
fiduciary relationship" and consequently has no obligation to give
inspection of the evaluated answer books under section 8 (1)(e) of
RTI Act?
(iv) If the examinee is entitled to inspection of the evaluated answer books
or seek certified copies thereof, whether such right is subject to any
limitations, conditions or safeguards?
Re : Question (iv)
28. When an examining body engages the services of an examiner to
evaluate the answer-books, the examining body expects the examiner not to
disclose the information regarding evaluation to anyone other than the
examining body. Similarly the examiner also expects that his name and
particulars would not be disclosed to the candidates whose answer-books are
evaluated by him. In the event of such information being made known, a
disgruntled examinee who is not satisfied with the evaluation of the answer
books, may act to the prejudice of the examiner by attempting to endanger
his physical safety. Further, any apprehension on the part of the examiner
that there may be danger to his physical safety, if his identity becomes
known to the examinees, may come in the way of effective discharge of his
duties. The above applies not only to the examiner, but also to the
scrutiniser, co-ordinator, and head-examiner who deal with the answer book.
The answer book usually contains not only the signature and code number of
the examiner, but also the signatures and code number of the scrutiniser/coordinator/
head examiner. The information as to the names or particulars of
the examiners/co-ordinators/scrutinisers/head examiners are therefore
exempted from disclosure under section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act, on the ground
that if such information is disclosed, it may endanger their physical safety.
Therefore, if the examinees are to be given access to evaluated answerbooks
either by permitting inspection or by granting certified copies, such
access will have to be given only to that part of the answer-book which does
not contain any information or signature of the examiners/coordinators/
scrutinisers/head examiners, exempted from disclosure under
section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act. Those portions of the answer-books which
contain information regarding the examiners/co-ordinators/scrutinisers/head
examiners or which may disclose their identity with reference to signature or
initials, shall have to be removed, covered, or otherwise severed from the
non-exempted part of the answer-books, under section 10 of RTI Act.
Para---36 is excellent in support of section-4 compliance devoting 2-full pages supporting section-4
36. Section 19(8) of RTI Act has entrusted the Central/State Information
Commissions, with the power to require any public authority to take any
such steps as may be necessary to secure the compliance with the provisions
of the Act. Apart from the generality of the said power, clause (a) of section
19(8) refers to six specific powers, to implement the provision of the Act.
Sub-clause (i) empowers a Commission to require the public authority to
provide access to information if so requested in a particular 'form' (that is
either as a document, micro film, compact disc, pendrive, etc.). This is to
secure compliance with section 7(9) of the Act. Sub-clause (ii) empowers a
Commission to require the public authority to appoint a Central Public
Information Officer or State Public Information Officer. This is to secure
compliance with section 5 of the Act. Sub-clause (iii) empowers the
Commission to require a public authority to publish certain information or
categories of information. This is to secure compliance with section 4(1) and
(2) of RTI Act. Sub-clause (iv) empowers a Commission to require a public
authority to make necessary changes to its practices relating to the
maintenance, management and destruction of the records. This is to secure
compliance with clause (a) of section 4(1) of the Act. Sub-clause (v)
empowers a Commission to require the public authority to increase the
training for its officials on the right to information. This is to secure
compliance with sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Act. Sub-clause (vi) empowers a
Commission to require the public authority to provide annual reports in
regard to the compliance with clause (b) of section 4(1). This is to ensure
compliance with the provisions of clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act. The
power under section 19(8) of the Act however does not extend to requiring a
public authority to take any steps which are not required or contemplated to
secure compliance with the provisions of the Act or to issue directions
beyond the provisions of the Act. The power under section 19(8) of the Act
is intended to be used by the Commissions to ensure compliance with the
Act, in particular ensure that every public authority maintains its records
duly catalogued and indexed in the manner and in the form which facilitates
the right to information and ensure that the records are computerized, as
required under clause (a) of section 4(1) of the Act; and to ensure that the
information enumerated in clauses (b) and (c) of sections 4(1) of the Act are
published and disseminated, and are periodically updated as provided in sub-
sections (3) and (4) of section 4 of the Act. If the 'information' enumerated
in clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act are effectively disseminated (by
publications in print and on websites and other effective means), apart from
providing transparency and accountability, citizens will be able to access
relevant information and avoid unnecessary applications for information
under the Act.
So this decision seem to strengthen RTI act in view of providing answer copy and section-4 compliance.Please suggest.
with regards
manoj k.kamra
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: RTI Prekshak <rtiprekshak@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 09:30:40 +0530
Subject: The Supreme Court decision on answer papers
To: "C J Karira" <cjkarira@gmail.com>
There is considerable elation over the Supreme Court's decision on the
answer papers. Is there anything to celebrate?
The Supreme Court judgement is attached for convenience
*The following obiters may create a lot of damage and encourage
arbitrariness in denial of information*
No comments:
Post a Comment