Moneylife: Pune: Friday, March 28, 2025.
The central information commission (CIC) has raised serious concerns over the lack of transparency in the re-evaluation process of the assistant personnel officer (APO) examination, directing the National Academy of Indian Railways (NAIR) to implement measures that would ensure fairness and accountability.
.png)
In a stern order on 21 March
2025, central information commissioner (CIC) Vinod Kumar Tiwari criticised
NAIR, which is responsible for setting the initial answer key; it also
evaluates objections and makes revisions at the whims and fancies of the evaluator-in-charge,
which he termed as arbitrary and opaque.
In his order, CIC Tiwari observed that the present arrangement undermines the integrity of the selection process. He elaborated that it gives unchecked power to the question paper setter-cum-evaluator, who can alter answers, delete questions, or reject objections without external scrutiny or documented justification. Mr Tiwari noted that such one-sided discretion could unfairly be advantageous to some candidates while disadvantageous to others.
The RTI applicant was a victim of this lop-sided process. He is M Ramudu, a candidate who appeared for the APO exam under the 30% limited departmental competitive examination (LDCE) quota (wherein employees are eligible to appear for this exam, which is otherwise a public competitive examination). Mr Ramudu appeared for the exam on 25 June 2023. Later, he sought specific information regarding multiple question and answer options, which are available to the evaluator and are public information.
Mr Ramudu sought copies of documents supporting the correct answers to questions 3, 7, 20, 28, 68, 77, 153, and 165, as well as option IDs (a unique identifier assigned to each answer option (A, B, C and D) for a specific question) for questions 11, 28, 80, 112, 269, 307, 610, and 658. As argued by Mr Ramudu through a submission to the CIC, the exam was conducted as a centralised computer-based test (CBT) with multiple-choice questions (MCQs).
As per the procedure, candidates can raise concerns regarding the answer key as an objection tracker window was opened on the NAIR website from 28 June 2023 (10:00 hrs) to 30 June 2023 (17:00 hrs). Candidates were able to download their response sheets, review the provisional answer key, and submit objections regarding any discrepancies.
However, Mr Ramudu rued that the question paper setter-cum-evaluator had the sole authority to change an option if a valid objection was raised; he can delete a question due to ambiguity, give multiple correct answers, or incorrect options and; maintain the original answer if no merit was found in the objections. The final answer key was then published, with no further opportunity for candidates to challenge or seek clarifications.
The CPIO, Prof (RM) of NAIR, said during the second appeal hearing that he does not have the information sought by the appellant in their RTI application, as the paper setter is engaged by the Railway board. NAIR’s role is limited to conducting the examination and providing logistical support. He reiterated that it had stuck to the post-examination protocols, and the opportunity for candidates to review and challenge the provisional answer key through the objection tracker window was available from 28 June 2023 to 30 June 2023. He also informed the CIC that the designated question paper setter-cum-evaluator was responsible for reviewing objections, validating correct answers, and making necessary corrections before finalising the answer key, which had already been published.
CIC Tiwari slammed the CPIO, observing that the lack of an independent appeals mechanism needs to be addressed, and stated that any changes in answer keys should be supported by credible documents such as published books or manuals. Presently, CIC Tiwari stated that it is an uneven playing field, raising doubts about fairness and objectivity.
To rectify these concerns, CIC Tiwari issued an advisory under section 25(5) of the RTI Act to the director general of NAIR, recommending the establishment of a transparent, multi-tiered evaluation system. His key recommendations are as follows:
The ball is now in NAIR’s court to take the necessary steps and restore confidence in the public recruitment process.
The central information commission (CIC) has raised serious concerns over the lack of transparency in the re-evaluation process of the assistant personnel officer (APO) examination, directing the National Academy of Indian Railways (NAIR) to implement measures that would ensure fairness and accountability.
.png)
In his order, CIC Tiwari observed that the present arrangement undermines the integrity of the selection process. He elaborated that it gives unchecked power to the question paper setter-cum-evaluator, who can alter answers, delete questions, or reject objections without external scrutiny or documented justification. Mr Tiwari noted that such one-sided discretion could unfairly be advantageous to some candidates while disadvantageous to others.
The RTI applicant was a victim of this lop-sided process. He is M Ramudu, a candidate who appeared for the APO exam under the 30% limited departmental competitive examination (LDCE) quota (wherein employees are eligible to appear for this exam, which is otherwise a public competitive examination). Mr Ramudu appeared for the exam on 25 June 2023. Later, he sought specific information regarding multiple question and answer options, which are available to the evaluator and are public information.
Mr Ramudu sought copies of documents supporting the correct answers to questions 3, 7, 20, 28, 68, 77, 153, and 165, as well as option IDs (a unique identifier assigned to each answer option (A, B, C and D) for a specific question) for questions 11, 28, 80, 112, 269, 307, 610, and 658. As argued by Mr Ramudu through a submission to the CIC, the exam was conducted as a centralised computer-based test (CBT) with multiple-choice questions (MCQs).
As per the procedure, candidates can raise concerns regarding the answer key as an objection tracker window was opened on the NAIR website from 28 June 2023 (10:00 hrs) to 30 June 2023 (17:00 hrs). Candidates were able to download their response sheets, review the provisional answer key, and submit objections regarding any discrepancies.
However, Mr Ramudu rued that the question paper setter-cum-evaluator had the sole authority to change an option if a valid objection was raised; he can delete a question due to ambiguity, give multiple correct answers, or incorrect options and; maintain the original answer if no merit was found in the objections. The final answer key was then published, with no further opportunity for candidates to challenge or seek clarifications.
The CPIO, Prof (RM) of NAIR, said during the second appeal hearing that he does not have the information sought by the appellant in their RTI application, as the paper setter is engaged by the Railway board. NAIR’s role is limited to conducting the examination and providing logistical support. He reiterated that it had stuck to the post-examination protocols, and the opportunity for candidates to review and challenge the provisional answer key through the objection tracker window was available from 28 June 2023 to 30 June 2023. He also informed the CIC that the designated question paper setter-cum-evaluator was responsible for reviewing objections, validating correct answers, and making necessary corrections before finalising the answer key, which had already been published.
CIC Tiwari slammed the CPIO, observing that the lack of an independent appeals mechanism needs to be addressed, and stated that any changes in answer keys should be supported by credible documents such as published books or manuals. Presently, CIC Tiwari stated that it is an uneven playing field, raising doubts about fairness and objectivity.
To rectify these concerns, CIC Tiwari issued an advisory under section 25(5) of the RTI Act to the director general of NAIR, recommending the establishment of a transparent, multi-tiered evaluation system. His key recommendations are as follows:
- Separating the authorities responsible for setting the initial answer key and reviewing objections.
- Mandating documentary evidence for any changes made in the answer key.
- Introducing a formal appeals mechanism for candidates to challenge revised answers.
The ball is now in NAIR’s court to take the necessary steps and restore confidence in the public recruitment process.
.JPG)
.JPG)
