AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
11/04.08.2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1/ State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3/ Jharkhand State Information Commission.
The appearance is already made on behalf of the respondent no.4 who is the information seeker, and on repeated calls, nobody has responded on behalf of the respondent no.4, as the matter is of the year 2014, and in that view of the matter, this writ petition is being disposed of in absence of the learned counsel for the respondent no.4 as after filing the Vakalatnama he has not appeared.
This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 27.12.2013 and 26.05.2014 passed in Appeal Case no.2239 of 2012 by the Jharkhand State Information Commission, Ranchi, whereby a direction has been issued to the Assistant Public Information Officer, Jharkhand Academic Council to supply photocopy of the answer sheet of Zoology to the applicant and by the order dated 26.05.2014 the Jharkhand State Information Commission has directed the Public Information Officer either to bring the stay order from the Hon’ble High Court or to supply the answer sheet to the respondent no.4 by 14.07.2014 failing which a cost of Rs.25,000/- shall be imposed under Section 20(1) of the Right To Information (RTI) Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.4 made an application to the Public Information Officer, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi on 12.05.2012 to supply the photocopy of the answer sheet of Zoology of the examination held for appointment of Teacher. She submits that the Public Information Officer by letter dated 09.7.2012 has intimated the respondent no.4 that the answer sheet as sought cannot be given to the applicant and thereafter the respondent no.4 being dissatisfied filed the first appeal before the first appellate authority of the Jharkhand Academic Council and by order dated 28.7.2012, the appellate authority has directed the respondent no.4 to inspect the answer sheet of Zoology and thereafter she got her answer sheet and question booklet inspected which is apparent from Annexure-3. She submits that in spite of that, the respondent no.4 has filed the appeal before the Jharkhand State Information Commission, Ranchi which is numbered as Appeal Case No.2339 of 2012 and the Jharkhand Academic Council has also been informed that the information has already been provided and in spite of that, the appellate authority by order dated 27.12.2013 has directed to provide the answer sheet of Zoology and thereafter the writ petition has been filed.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that there is no provision for providing the answer sheet, however, the provision is there to inspect the answer sheet and the offer was already provided to the respondent no.4 and she has chosen to inspect the answer sheet. She refers to the sections 8 and 9 of R.T.I. Act and submits that the information sought relates to third party information and in view of that, the same was not provided and so far as the answer sheet is concerned, in terms of the regulation, only inspection can be made. She submits that the order is passed which is not in accordance with the law.
Learned counsel for the respondent State submits that this is a dispute between the petitioner and the Jharkhand State Information Commission and the respondent no.4.
Mr. Piprawal, learned counsel for the respondent Jharkhand State Information Commission supports the order and submits that rightly the order has been passed and there is no illegality. He next submits that if the information sought under the Act and the same has not been provided to the information seeker, such order has been rightly passed. He next submits in view of that, this writ petition may kindly be dismissed.
There is provision of only inspecting the answer sheets. In this regard, reference may be made to the case of Union Public Service Commission & Ors. Vs. Angesh Kumar & Ors. reported in 2018(4) SCC 530, where in paras-9,10 and 11, the Hon’ble Supreme court has held as under:-
“9.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, we are of the view that information sought with regard to marks in Civil Services Exam cannot be directed to be furnished mechanically. Situation of exams of other academic bodies may stand on different footing. Furnishing raw marks will cause problems as pleaded by the UPSC as quoted above which will 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. If rules or practice so require, certainly such rule or practice can be enforced. In the present case, direction has been issued without considering these parameters.
10.In view of the above, the impugned order(s) is set aside and the writ petitions filed by the writ petitioners are dismissed. This order will not debar the respondents from making out a case on the above parameters and approach the appropriate forum, if so advised.
11.The appeals are accordingly disposed of. Civil Appeal No. 5924 of 2013.”
In light of the regulation of the Council, only the answer sheets can be inspected and that offer was already provided to the respondent No. 4 and in spite of that the order has been passed by the Jharkhand State Information Commissioner, which is not justified in the eyes of law.
In view of the above facts, reasons and analysis, it transpires that the said order is not in accordance with law and also contrary to the Regulation of the Council, as such, the order dated 27.12.2013, passed in Appeal Case No. 2239 of 2012 by the Jharkhand State Information Commission, Ranchi, whereby, direction has been issued to the Assistant Public Information Officer, Jharkhand Academic Council to supply the information under Column-2 by way of speed post or registered post to the respondent No. 4, is hereby, set aside.
This petition is allowed in the above terms and disposed of.