Instructions to examiners can be made public post exam: SC
The court also held ICAI to be a public entity, under the
constitutional definition of “state” and, therefore, said it could not
take shelter in the exemptions under the RTI ActNikhil Kanekal
New Delhi: The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday ruled that
instructions issued to examiners in competitive examinations by the
agency conducting the exam could be disclosed under the right to
information (RTI) law, once the test is held.
The court pronounced the decision in the case between the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) and a candidate who had failed
in one of the rounds of the chartered accountancy tests.
It reasoned that question papers, model answer sheets and instructions
issued to those correcting exam papers, whether written or oral, could
be construed as intellectual property that should not be made public
before a test is administered. But this right lapses once the
examination is held, said the court.
“The RTI Act does not bar or prohibit the disclosure of question
papers, model answers (solutions to questions) and instructions, if
any, given to the examiners and moderators after the examination and
after the evaluation of answer scripts is completed,” said a bench
comprising justices R.V. Raveendran and A.K. Patnaik. But the court
clarified that any instructions issued to examiners and moderators,
which came under the information held in a ‘fiduciary relationship’,
would be exempt from disclosure as there would be an expectation of
confidentiality.
The court also held ICAI to be a public entity, under the
constitutional definition of “state” and, therefore, said it could not
take shelter in the exemptions under the RTI Act.
It also observed that “public authorities owe a duty to disseminate
the information widely suo moto to the public so as to make it easily
accessible to the public”.
The court also noted that an object of “democracy is to bring about
transparency of information to contain corruption and bring about
accountability. But achieving this object does not mean that other
equally important public interests, including efficient functioning of
the governments and public authorities, optimum use of limited fiscal
resources, preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information,
etc., are to be ignored or sacrificed.”
The court also held ICAI to be a public entity, under the
constitutional definition of “state” and, therefore, said it could not
take shelter in the exemptions under the RTI ActNikhil Kanekal
New Delhi: The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday ruled that
instructions issued to examiners in competitive examinations by the
agency conducting the exam could be disclosed under the right to
information (RTI) law, once the test is held.
The court pronounced the decision in the case between the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) and a candidate who had failed
in one of the rounds of the chartered accountancy tests.
It reasoned that question papers, model answer sheets and instructions
issued to those correcting exam papers, whether written or oral, could
be construed as intellectual property that should not be made public
before a test is administered. But this right lapses once the
examination is held, said the court.
“The RTI Act does not bar or prohibit the disclosure of question
papers, model answers (solutions to questions) and instructions, if
any, given to the examiners and moderators after the examination and
after the evaluation of answer scripts is completed,” said a bench
comprising justices R.V. Raveendran and A.K. Patnaik. But the court
clarified that any instructions issued to examiners and moderators,
which came under the information held in a ‘fiduciary relationship’,
would be exempt from disclosure as there would be an expectation of
confidentiality.
The court also held ICAI to be a public entity, under the
constitutional definition of “state” and, therefore, said it could not
take shelter in the exemptions under the RTI Act.
It also observed that “public authorities owe a duty to disseminate
the information widely suo moto to the public so as to make it easily
accessible to the public”.
The court also noted that an object of “democracy is to bring about
transparency of information to contain corruption and bring about
accountability. But achieving this object does not mean that other
equally important public interests, including efficient functioning of
the governments and public authorities, optimum use of limited fiscal
resources, preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information,
etc., are to be ignored or sacrificed.”
No comments:
Post a Comment