के (cid:574)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग१,मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067 ि(cid:554)तीय अपील संূा / Second Appeal No. CIC/UTPON/A/2024/631395 R Sivakumar … अपीलकता१/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO: Department of Personnel & Administrative …ঋितवादीगण/Respondents Reforms (Govt. of Puducherry), Puducherry Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 21.03.2024 FA : 24.05.2024 SA : Nil.

CPIO : 25.04.2024 FAO : 20.06.2024 Hearing : 13.02.2026 Date of Decision: 13.02.2026 CORAM:

Hon’ble Commissioner Shri P R Ramesh O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.03.2024 seeking information on the following points:

1) Copy of all pages of My Answer Sheet/booklet (evaluated) pertaining to Paper - I held in morning session on 06.08.2023

2) Copy of all pages of My Answer Sheet/booklet (evaluated) pertaining to Paper - II held in afternoon session on 06.08.2023.

3) Marks Secured by each of the Selected Candidates in Paper - I and Paper - 2.

4) Statement of Marks / Merit List.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 25.04.2024. and the same is reproduced as under:-

Reply :- In respect of information sought for at sl. no. 1 & 2, it is stated that the Honorable Supreme Court in its judgment dated 20th February 2018 in CA Nos. 6159-6162 of 2013 and 5924/2013 (Union Public Service Commission versus Angesh Kumar & Ors with Joint Director and CPIO and Anr. versus T.R.Rajesh) held that the evaluated Conventional answer sheets are exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the Honorable CIC in its decision No. CIC/UPSCM/A/2022/658967 dated 04.07.2023, has also adjourned sine die the matter regarding decision of sharing evaluated conventional answer scripts citing the stay order of Delhi High Court in W.P(C) 17101/2022 & CM APPL.54278/2022 dated 04.08.2023 in the matter of UPSC Vs. Ms. Kavitha Panicker & Anr. Hence, the information sought for could not be furnished. However, the applicant can view his marks in the recruitment website link https://recruitment.py.gov.in/DepartmentalExam/ViewMark by following the steps mentioned in the notice available in the website link https://recruitment.py.gov.in/Administration/Files/RenderFile/19..

In respect of information sought for at sl.no. 3 & 4, it is stated that as per the CIC decision CIC/UPSCM/A/2017/122611 dated 19.07.2018 in Shri Vinay Arora Vs UPSC, information sought for regarding marks of other candidates appeared in the exam are exempted from disclosure under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI, Act, 2005.

Hence, the same could not be provided.

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 24.05.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 20.06.2024 observed as under :-

Reply:- In the case of Thiru Salinkumar.B Vs the PIO, Exam Cell decided on 22.02.2024, the FAA, the undersigned decided a similar case, in which also the applicant therein sought the copy of his answer sheet of the same LDCE for Assistant held on 06.08.2023. The undersigned, relying upon the decision of the CIC in Muslim TR VS CPIO, UPSC dated 04.07.2023, concluded that in view of the decision of the CIC in the said case adjourning the matter sine die, it would not be appropriate to issue any positive direction to CPIO to supply the required evaluated papers.

7. The FAA does not see any new ground to decide this case otherwise as it is a similar case quoted above. In both the cases the applicant want to have the copy of their answer sheets of the LDCE for Assistant held on 06.08.2023 and hence the earlier decision of the FAA dated 22.02.2024 is squarely applicable to this case also.

8. Accordingly, it is ordered that the reply of the PIO dated 25.04.2024 in respect of Query (i) & (ii) is upheld and a positive direction cannot be issued to the PIO to supply the evaluated papers in view of the decision of the CIC in Muslim T.R Vs CPIO, UPSC dated 04