The Appellant filed an RTI application seeking some information on the date 1.10.2019. The CPIO replied on 30.10.2019. The appellant was dissatisfied with the information received, the grounds of the second appeal was that the CPIO did not provide the desired information under section 8(1) (d) of the RTI Act. The appellant asked for documents of her examination of CA final group 2 old scheme held from 7th to 13th June 2019. During the course of the hearing, the appellant was not present and the CPIO was present through phone call.
The submissions were made by both appellant and respondent. As the Appellant was not present during the hearing, she was contacted but she denied attending the hearing as she was at work. She further told the court that the arguments submitted by her in the second memorial should be taken into consideration while deciding the cases. The commission upheld her request and the cases were taken up according to the submissions filed by her. In her memo, she stated that she was not satisfied with the reply given by the CPIO and how the information was denied under section 8 (1) (d) of the RTI Act. According to her, the question paper contained 30% of the multiple-choice questions so the students should have the right to access the copies of MCQs paper booklet and the copies of the answer keys to the MCQs after the exam was completed. Additionally, the respondent stated that this plea was certainly disallowing the norms made for candidates and could also affect the candidates appearing the very next year.
The court observed that the main question here was whether the question paper containing multiple-choice questions and their answer keys could be disclosed under the RTI Act. The FAA notified the commission that the question paper was framed by the experts and the institute had limited question banks and therefore exclusion under section 8 (1) (d) of the RTI Act was claimed by the FAA. The commission further agreed with the order of the FAA because of the nature of the examination which specifically aims towards testing the memory of the candidate and their ability to apply their minds in the true sense. The disclosure of any information related to this can lead to failure of the qualities of the CA practising in this country. Furthermore, the court was completely satisfied with the nature of the examination. The seat limits and certain criteria couldn’t be put in jeopardy.
The commission considered the order passed by the FAA and the reply of the CPIO. The criteria of examination cannot be questioned because it was duly designed for the welfare of the appearing candidates. The process of evaluation and selection was completely based on this so the court didn’t find any point of intervention and so the appeal was disposed of.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.