Times of India: Bhopal: Sunday, 31 July 2022.
A division bench of MP high court reserved its judgement on a petition contending that answer-sheets of written exams conducted by the MP high court for recruitment to the post of civil judge class II and additional district and sessions judge (ADJ) should be allowed to be accessed by anyone under Right to Information Act (RTI) rather than restricting the right to only a candidate to see his own answer-sheet, if he so desires.
The petition filed by Advocates' Union for Democracy & Social Justice said that in the interest of transparency and fairness, there should be provision to access the answer-sheets of any candidate under the RTI. The petition said that on several reserved posts in the twin recruitment exams, selection has not been made, which may create a doubt over fairness of the selection process. The petition also challenged the necessity to obtain at least 20 out of 50 marks in the interview for selection in the exams. Following arguments from both sides, the division bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Vinayak Shah reserved judgement over the petition. Advocates Rameshwar P Singh and Vinayak Shah appeared in the court on behalf of the petitioner.
A division bench of MP high court reserved its judgement on a petition contending that answer-sheets of written exams conducted by the MP high court for recruitment to the post of civil judge class II and additional district and sessions judge (ADJ) should be allowed to be accessed by anyone under Right to Information Act (RTI) rather than restricting the right to only a candidate to see his own answer-sheet, if he so desires.
The petition filed by Advocates' Union for Democracy & Social Justice said that in the interest of transparency and fairness, there should be provision to access the answer-sheets of any candidate under the RTI. The petition said that on several reserved posts in the twin recruitment exams, selection has not been made, which may create a doubt over fairness of the selection process. The petition also challenged the necessity to obtain at least 20 out of 50 marks in the interview for selection in the exams. Following arguments from both sides, the division bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Vinayak Shah reserved judgement over the petition. Advocates Rameshwar P Singh and Vinayak Shah appeared in the court on behalf of the petitioner.
.JPG)
.JPG)
