Back
CIC directs DoPT to disclose of recommended candidates from 2018 to 2023
In a significant ruling for transparency in India's civil services examination, the (CIC) has directed the (DoPT) to disclose detailed of all recommended candidates from the 2018 to 2023 examinations. Information Commissioner Jaya Varma Sinha, presiding over the final hearing on , also issued an under urging the government to reinstate the pre-2018 practice of publishing such data.
The Transparency Tussle
The case originated from an RTI application filed by Aniket Kumar Gupta on
, seeking comprehensive annual breakdowns of marks obtained by recommended candidates in each General Studies paper, optional subject, and personality test from 2014 to 2023. The CPIO of
responded on
, stating the information was
"not available in compiled form"
and directing the applicant to the DoPT website where aggregate marks were already published. Dissatisfied, Gupta filed a first appeal and subsequently a second appeal before the CIC.
The core grievance: prior to 2018, and DoPT publicly disclosed the subject-wise marks of successful candidates. From 2018 onwards, only aggregate written marks and interview scores were published, leaving aspirants without official data to evaluate optional subject performance.
A Plea for Informed Choices
Gupta argued that the lack of detailed data created a vacuum exploited by coaching institutes, which used exaggerated claims about optional subject scoring to lure students. He submitted that candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds were particularly vulnerable, forced to rely on unverifiable advertisements rather than official statistics.
"The present RTI directly involves
as it affects thousands of
aspirants nationwide,"
his written submissions stated, emphasising that withholding
prevented
"informed decisions about optional subjects in a high-stakes national exam."
The appellant further contended that the success rate data available in
's annual reports was insufficient.
"The success rate does not reveal how a particular optional subject itself performed in terms of actual marks awarded,"
he argued, noting that a candidate might qualify despite average optional marks due to strong general studies performance.
The Missing Paper Trail
Both
and DoPT defended the discontinuation, citing privacy concerns and the personal nature of detailed marks. The CPIO of DoPT, Awanish Kumar Mishra, expressed apprehension that
"
of data may lead to misuse by coaching institutes which may commercially exploit the disclosed data to promote their courses."
However, during hearings, a critical contradiction emerged. The CPIO of
confirmed that no mandate was given to DoPT to discontinue publication. More damningly, despite being given multiple opportunities, DoPT failed to produce any
,
, or policy document recording the decision to stop publishing
. In its final written submission dated
, DoPT admitted:
"The record verification has not yielded any
,
,
or other
specifically recording the
or reasons for discontinuation of the aforesaid practice."
A Win for Aspirants
The Commission found the absence of any documented policy decisive. It observed that since aggregate marks and names are already public, withholding the
is "
." Commissioner Sinha noted a critical procedural detail:
"
is drawn up by
, subject to the condition that each selected candidate has scored at least 10% marks in each of the 7 competitive written papers viz. Essay, GS-I, GS-II, GS-III, GS-IV, Optional-I and Optional-II."
Since this minimum applies individually to each paper,
is essential to verify fairness.
"
of marks obtained by recommended candidates in different optional subjects will additionally allow the students/aspirants to make an informed choice regarding different optional subjects,"
the decision stated, emphasising that students would no longer depend on unreliable sources.
The Final Order
The CIC directed DoPT to provide a revised reply sharing detailed break-up marks for each General Studies paper, optional subject paper, and personality test for the Civil Services Examinations of 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 within three weeks. The First Appellate Authority of DoPT is to ensure compliance. Additionally, the Commission issued an
under
recommending
of the practice of publishing detailed marks, noting that its discontinuation
"was done without any
on record."
The ruling is a major victory for transparency in India's most competitive examination, promising to empower millions of aspirants with reliable data and curb misinformation spread by coaching centres.
