Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/X/09/00143
Dated March 18, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Mr.P.Srikrishna
Name of the Public Authority : BSNL, Hyderabad
Background
1. The applicant filed an RTI application dt.8.8.08 with the CPIO, BSNL,
Hyderabad. He requested for the copy of the answer sheet along with key of
the JAO Part I exam held on 25.3.03 relating to English Paper (Paper I). The
CPIO replied on 28.8.08 denying the information u/s 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act.
He stated that disclosure of evaluated answer sheets would render the system
of conduction of examinations unworkable in practice. Also the disclosure will
endanger the life or physical safety of the persons associated with the
examination process. The applicant filed an appeal dt.15.9.08 with the
Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority replied on 7.10.08 as follows:
i) Most of the examinations are descriptive in nature giving scope for
variations in the allocation of marks. The disclosure of answer sheets will
result in challenging of such variations in the Hon’ble Court of Law. Due to
these reasons, officers are not willing to volunteer as examiners. Since, it is
not possible to isolate the identity of the examiner from the answer sheets,
they are feeling insecure about their life or career due to apprehensions of
litigations raised in the evaluation of answer sheets. Moreover, when the
evaluated answer sheets are challenged in courts, the entire recruitment
process comes to a halt until a decision is given by the court. This results in
deficiency of manpower which subsequently hampers the developmental
activities of the organization.
ii) There is apprehension that once the evaluated answer sheets are
supplied to the applicant, it will result in setting a trend for seeking answer
sheets. Due to the fact that recruitment/conduction of examinations is not
the primary function of organizations like BSNL whose main work is provision
of telecom services, customer care etc and as there are no full fledged
examination units, the process becomes unworkable. Moreover, almost all
the failed candidates will request for supply of their answer sheets
irrespective of their performance in the examinations. The applicant filed a
second appeal dt.15.12.08 before CIC.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the
hearing for March 18, 2009.
3. Both the Appellant and the Respondents were absent at the hearing.
Decision
4. With reference to the CIC order dated 23.04.2007 while disposing off the
Complaint No. CIC/WB/C2006/00223; Appeal Nos. CIC/WB/A/2006/00469;
00394; Appeal Nos. CIC/OK/A/2006/00266/00058/00066/00315 it has been
clearly laid down that: “….. Insofar as examinations conducted by other public
authorities, the main function of which is not of conducting examinations, but
only for filling up of posts either by promotion or by recruitment, be it limited or
public, the rationale of the judgments of the Supreme Court may not be
applicable in their totality, as in arriving at their conclusions, the above
judgments took into consideration various facts like the large number of
candidates, the method and criteria of selection of examiners, existence of a
fool-proof system with proper checks and balances etc. Therefore, in respect of
these examinations, the disclosure of the answer sheets shall be the general
rule but each case may have to be examined individually to see as to whether
disclosure of evaluated answer sheets would render the system unworkable in
practice. If that be so, the disclosure of the evaluated answer sheets could be
denied but not otherwise. However, while doing so the concerned authority
should ensure that the name and identity of the examiner, supervisor or any
other person associated with the process of examination is in no way disclosed
so as to endanger the life or physical safety of such person. If it is not possible
to do so in such cases, the authority concerned may decline the disclosure of
the evaluated answer sheets u/s 8 (1) (g)…..”
Accordingly, the Commission directs the CPIO to provide a certified copy of
the answer sheet after severing under Section 10(1), the identity of the
examiner which is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1) (g). The
information to be provided within 15 days of receipt of this Order.
5. The appeal is disposed off.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(K.G.Nair)
Designated Officer
Cc:
1. Mr.P.Sri Krishna
D.No.27-17-2A
Peddibhotla Vari Street
Governorpet
Vijayawada 520 002
2. The ACPIO &
Asst. General Manager (Legal)
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
O/o Chief General Manager Telecom
AP Circle
Hyderabad 500 001
3. The Appellate Authority &
Chief General Manager Telecom
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
O/o Chief General Manager Telecom
AP Circle
Hyderabad 500 001
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC