Synopsis

Shri Sukhen Das, S/o Shri Subrata Das of Bijni town of Chirang district submitted an appeal petition before the State Chief Information Commissioner against the decision of the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council dated 30-11-06. He stated in his petition that he sought for copies of the answer-scripts in English, Chemistry and Mathematics of Higher Secondary Examination, 2006 which he appeared under roll 0215 No.20084. But the Controller of Examinations, Assam Higher Secondary Education Council, informed him vide letter dated 30-11-06 that the answer-scripts or copies thereof which are confidential documents are not permissible to be provided to anyone except under orders of the Court of Law. He was also informed that the answerscripts are kept only for a limited period of time after declaration of result and then disposed off.

Submission by the parties

The Deputy Controller of Examination, submitted that he along with the Asstt. Secy. of the Council had been authorized by the Chairman & the Controller of Examination to represent them in the case as they were busy in some important office works of the Council. He submitted that as per recommendations of the Examination Committee dated 24-11-86, the answer-scripts are to be destroyed after a period of 4(four) months except in respect of those answer-scripts that are under re-evaluation as per the request of the examinees. He further submitted that about 9 lakhs candidates appear Council Examination annually and it would be a huge task to furnish copies of the answer-scripts to the candidates applying for it. He, however, revealed that only about 20,000 candidates apply every year for re-evaluation, and their answer-scripts are preserved with a view to complying with the direction of the Courts of Law on later dates.

According to him when a case is filed in the Hon'ble High Court, a direction is usually received for producing the answer-scripts for examination by the Court. Copies of the answer scripts are not given to the High Court or any candidate as they are considered highly confidential documents till their disposal. He further stated that the Council get the answer-scripts of the subjects re-examined as prayed for by the candidates as per the present policy of the Council, without providing them to the examinees.

The appellant submitted that he wanted copies of the answer-scripts for his personal satisfaction as he was sure to get better marks in these subjects. The candidate when asked by the Commission, submitted that he wouId like to get photocopies of the scripts and he would not be satisfied merely by seeing them.

Decision of the Commission

The Commission carefully considered the submissions of the parties. The examinees have the right to know the process of evaluation of their answer-script as they are the affected parties. The right to information as defined under Section 2 (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 is applicable in so far as the right of the examinees to obtain certified/photostat copies of the answer-script is concerned. The. difficulties presented by the representatives of AHSEC are matters of administrative concern which in no way stand to negate the right of the appellant to access to information. It is also observed that the process of furnishing photocopies of the answer-scripts will not adversely impact on the resources of the Council because by their own admission it was revealed that taking photocopy in the market costs only Rupee one per page whereas appellant would be required to pay Rupees two per page. It may not also be the case that all those 20,000 or odd students who apply for re-evaluation would demand copies of answer-scripts. It will be reasonable to expect not more than 50% of the examinees who want reevaluation would seek copies of the answer-scripts.

The Commission keeping in view the interest of transparency and accountability in the conduct of public examination and in larger public interest deemed it appropriate to admit the appeal and accordingly ordered under Section 19(8)(a) of the RTI Act that the AHSEC, Guwahati shall provide the answer-scripts in English, Chemistry and Mathematics as sought by the appellant within 15 days from the date of this order.

The appellant will be liable to pay the required charges per page as calculated and intimated to him by the AHSEC.

The Commission also directed the Chairman of the Council to designate State Public Information Officer in the Council under Section 5(1) and first Appellate Authority under Section 19 (1) of the R TI Act within 15 days of the date of this order.