Times of India: Chandigarh: Tuesday,
October 25, 2016.
The Punjab
and Haryana high court has held that Army cannot deprive job aspirants of
copies of their written exam answersheet and the merit list under the Right to
Information (RTI) Act.
Citing
various Supreme Court judgments, Justice G S Sandhawalia of the HC observed,
"Request of the information seeker about the information of his answer
sheets and details of the interview marks can be and should be provided to him.
It is not something which a public authority keeps it under a fiduciary
capacity."
HC was also
of the view that even disclosing marks and answersheets to candidates would
ensure that they were given marks according to their performance in the exam.
Justice
Sandhawalia passed these orders while disposing of a petition filed by Kuldeep
Singh, a resident of Kultaran village of Kaithal district in Haryana. The
matter was heard on October 4 and the judgement released on Monday.
The
petitioner had appeared in an examination for the post of soldier (clerk) in
the Army conducted by its zonal recruiting office, Ambala. On October 27, 2014,
he had sought directions to provide complete information including the
certified copy of his evaluated answer sheet, answer key and the complete merit
list related to the selection of the aforesaid trade.
On October
31, 2014, the evaluated answersheet as well as the merit list was denied on the
ground that it could not be provided under Section 8 (1) (d). Though answer key
was provided to the petitioner. Aggrieved over the denial of information, the
petitioner had approached the high court.
The
petitioner's counsel Pradeep Rapria argued that perusal of Section 8 (1) (d)
would go on to show that it pertains to information including commercial
confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property etc. which is not the case
in the present circumstances.
The HC held
that it was a matter of record that the petitioner had been fighting for his
right since the last two years and the information was denied on
technicalities.
The
information was being sought on account of the fact that the petitioner had not
made the cut in the recruitment process and, therefore, any further delay in
the facts and circumstances would seriously prejudice him as such and he might
become overage for further selection. "Accordingly, the necessary
information be supplied to the petitioner within a period of 30 days from the
receipt of the certified copy of this order," the HC observed.
.JPG)
.JPG)
