Bar
& Bench: Chennai: Thursday, September 12, 2019.
The
Tamil Nadu Dr Ambedkar Law University (TNDALU) has been asked to withdraw its
challenge to a recent State Information Commission direction to provide
students examination answer scripts at a nominal fee under the Right to
Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
A
notice to this effect has been sent by Whistle for Public Interest (WHIP), an
organisation that works with the aim of ensuring implementation of the RTI Act.
Last
December, the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission had ruled in favour of a
student from TNDALU who had sought for his November 2017 examination answer
scripts from the University under the RTI Act.
The
University had initially directed him to send an application to its Controller
of Examinations, following which he would have to pay Rs 500 for answer script
copies for each subject. The student had successfully challenged this direction
before the Information Commission.
The
University, however, took the matter to the Madras High Court, arguing that the
Rs 500 fee for obtaining the answer script had been prescribed on practical
considerations. In this regard, the TNDALU petition states,
"The
purpose for fixing Rs 500/- per paper is not for the sale purpose of collecting
funds for the university but to avoid opening of the floodgates for thousands
of students who write examinations to apply and obtain the answer scripts which
is highly impossible for the petitioner university to furnish answer scripts to
all the students and for free of cost. Such a process would end in much
hardship and administrative difficulties and inconvenience for the Controller
of Examinations of the petitioner university.
Hence
the amount of Rs 500/- has been fixed for the students…to obtain the answer
scripts who genuinely require a scrutiny of valutation of the answer
scripts."
Therefore,
TNDALU had prayed for the Court to set aside the Information Commission order
and allow it to continue with its internal system of provision of answer
scripts, including the payment of Rs 500 per paper. The matter had come up
before Justice P Audikesavalu. It has been posted to be taken up next in
October.
However,
WHIP has now requested that the University withdraw its petition in the High
Court, lest it risk contempt proceedings. As highlighted in the representation
dated September 10,
"...every
public Authority including The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University is
required to allow its candidates to inspect and to obtain their answer scripts
post examination as information as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and
its rules…"
Notably,
the Supreme Court's judgment in CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & ors has been
cited, wherein it was laid down that an answer book is also information under
the RTI Act. The representation points out that this law was also endorsed in
subsequent cases.
The
WHIP letter further cites Rule 4 of the RTI Rules, which states that only a Rs
10 payment is required for an RTI application, whereas Rs 2 per page is the fee
prescribed for obtaining the documents.
"We
are astonished to learn about your utter disregard of the above law by denying
the information of answer scripts to the students and compel them to seek their
evaluated answer scripts from controller of examination of the University as
per its internal guidelines/rules/regulations which require students to pay Rs.
500/- for obtaining the evaluated answer script of a subject. This unfair practice
of the university denies candidates access to their answer scripts, especially
the ones who cannot afford such an exorbitant fee leading to denial of
information and justice…. It is ironical that a law university which is
responsible to educate students to fight against injustice has been
unfortunately doing injustice with its own students."
The
letter signs off by cautioning,
"If
the university either fails to provide information of Answer scripts as
information under the RTI Act or compels any student to follow the University’s
Internal Guidelines/ Regulations, in both such circumstances, all responsible
officers including the Vice-Chancellor, Registrar-in-charge, Controller of
Examination and Public Information Officer shall be deemed to have done wilful
act of Contempt of Court and necessary legal action against such officers shall
be taken accordingly.
We
sincerely hope the leading Educational Institution of law shall scrupulously
observe the settled legal position and shall follow & respect the rule of
law."
A
copy of the representation has also been marked to the President of India and
the Tamil Nadu Law Minister, CV Shanmugham.
.JPG)
.JPG)
