RTI Case study (2)

The respondent (Mr A) who was unsuccessful candidates in the public Services (Preliminary)
Examination, 2010 have approached the High Court for a direction to the Union Public Service
Commission (UPSC) to disclose the details of marks (raw and scaled) awarded to him in the
(Prelims) Examination 2010. The information in the form of cut-off marks for every subject,
scaling methodology, model answers and complete result of all candidates were also sought.
UPSC in the case has argued that the High Court has not correctly appreciated the scheme of the
Right to Information Act, 2005 (the Act) and the binding decisions of this Court. It was inter alia
contended that though Sections 3 and 6 of the Act confer right to information (apart from
statutory obligation to provide specified information under Section 4), Sections 8, 9 and 11
provide for exemption from giving of information as stipulated therein.
On the bases of the above mentioned facts decide the case.

ANSWER
The information seek by the applicant under The RTI Act does not involves the Public Interest,
and would deficit the resources both in financial and human and would overburden the
Department. Also it is not possible to pre analyze the contradiction with several other public
interest and to ensure the exemptions. Therefore, the highest courts while interpreting the Acts
and case in hand makes Judgment held Precedent for similar happenings or contradiction.
Section 8, 9 and 11 of the RTI Act which is contended by the UPSC lays down about the
exemption from disclosure of information to any citizen.
Here in this case if any information related to UPSC in the form of cut-off marks for every
subject, scaling methodology, model answers and complete result of all candidates disclosed to
the public it may cause problem to the person who have checked the copies of the student and it
may also cause the disclosure of the identity of the other persons as well.
In the Case of UPSC etc V. ANGESH KUMAR & Ors, SC, 2018,
The two judge bench of the Supreme Court made observation that:
1. That weighing the need for transparency and accountability on the one hand and
requirement of optimum use of fiscal resources and confidentiality of sensitive
information on the other, information sought with regard to marks in Civil Services
Exam cannot be directed to be furnished mechanically.
2. That furnishing raw marks will cause problems which would not be in public interest.
However, if a case is made out where the Court finds that public interest requires
furnishing of information, the Court is certainly entitled to so require in a given fact
situation.
It was noted that disclosure of marks could have some severe negative impact on the evaluation
process and not only the prestige, but the very integrity of the system could be compromised.
So, it is decided that the raw marks of the Civil services are no longer liable to be disclosed
unless a larger bench overrules this order.