SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 3296

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
HASANUJ JAMAN BARBHUIYA – Appellant
Versus
Assam University – Respondent
CIC/ASUVR/A/2025/116276



##PAGE1##

के (cid:574)ीय सूचना आयोग

Central Information Commission

बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:330), मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka

नई िद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067

File No: CIC/UODEL/A/2025/622918

Deepak Kapoor .….अपीलकता(cid:330)/Appellant

VERSUS

बनाम

The CPIO

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI,

RTI CELL, DELHI -110007 ….(cid:366)ितवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing : 05.03.2026

Date of Decision : 05.03.2026

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Sudha Rani Relangi

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 17.03.2025

CPIO replied on : 15.04.2025

First appeal filed on : 15.04.2025

First Appellate Authority’s order : 09.05.2025

2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 21.05.2025

Information sought:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.03.2025 seeking the

following information:

“1. please provide the result vide advertisement Estab.IV/297/2023

dated 09.08.2023 for the post of Deputy Registrar

2. please provide the marks list of written test for the post of DR against

the advt Estab.IV/297/2023 dated 09.08.2023.

3. please provide the marks list of interview for the post of DR against

the advt Estab.IV/297/2023 dated 09.08.2023..

Page 1 of 7

1 / 8

##PAGE2##

4. please provide the minutes of selection committee for the post of DR

against the advt Estab.IV/297/2023 dated 09.08.2023.

5. please provide the list of waitlisted candidates for the post of DR

against the advt Estab.IV/297/2023 dated 09.08.2023.”

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 15.04.2025 stating as

under:

“The information sought by the applicant was endorsed to the Assistant

Registrar (Recruitment) of the University, who is the deemed PIO under

section 5(4) & 5(5) of the Act.

Any relevant input is yet to be received from the Assistant Registrar

(Recruitment), the concerned deemed PIO as per section 5(4) of the RTI

Act. The matter is being pursued further with the Deputy Registrar

(Recruitment). The applicant may contact the Deputy Registrar

(Recruitment)/Section Officer (R&P) on telephone nos. 011-

27662021/011-27001164 (email id - ar_rec@admin.du.ac.in) in this

regard.”

3. Aggrieved by the decision of the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal

dated 15.04.2025. The FAA vide its order dated 09.05.2025, upheld the reply of

CPIO.

4. Challenging the FAA’s order, Appellant is before the Commission with

the instant Second Appeal on the following grounds-

“B. Grounds for Second Appeal:

1. Misinterpretation of Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, 2023:

& on 21.04.202o Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act cannot override the mandate

of the RTI Act, 2005. The Right to Information is a fundamental right under

Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and requires Parliament’s approval and

President’s ascent for any amendment in view any other act’s overriding

effect.

o The RTI Act is a special legislation that allows disclosure of personal

information if there is a larger public interest, which has been upheld in a

number of judgements. Moreover, the RTI Act has not been repealed or

explicitly overridden by the DPDP Act.

o Section 22 of the RTI Act clearly states that its provisions shall have

overriding effect over any other law in force, including the DPDP Act.

2. Judicial Precedent on Disclosure of Marks:

o In CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497, the Hon’ble Supreme

Court held that evaluated answer sheets, marks obtained, and other selection

Page 2 of 7

2 / 8

##PAGE3##

data in public examinations and recruitments cannot be classified as personal

information when larger public interest is involved.

o Similarly, in UPSC v. Angesh Kumar, Civil Appeal No. 6159 of 2013, the Apex

Court reiterated that in recruitment to public posts, the disclosure of marks to

candidates and public is permissible.

3. Public Interest and Transparency in Public Recruitment:

o Information such as marks of written test and interview, waitlist details, and

Selection Committee names is central to ensuring transparency and fairness in

public recruitment processes. Moreover, the fact that the Appellant himself

was a candidate in the recruitment process.

o The information sought d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top