Back
Next 
Court Decision
2024-11-12
Subject: Administrative Law - Right to Information
In a significant ruling by the Bombay High Court, the case of Shri Onkar Dattatray Kalmankar vs. Public Information Officer addressed the issue of transparency in the recruitment process for the post of Junior Clerk at the Pune District Court. The petitioner, a 33-year-old student, sought information regarding his performance and that of other candidates in the recruitment process after he was not selected despite participating in the tests and interviews.
The petitioner argued that he was entitled to know not only his marks but also those of other candidates to assess his relative performance. He contended that the refusal to disclose this information was unjustified and contrary to the principles of transparency upheld by the Right to Information Act, 2005. Conversely, the respondents, represented by the Public Information Officer and the District Judge, maintained that the information was confidential under the Maharashtra District Courts Right to Information (Revised Rules), 2009, and that disclosing such marks would violate the privacy of the candidates.
The court analyzed the arguments presented by both sides, emphasizing the importance of transparency in public recruitment processes. It noted that the selection process was a public activity and that the marks obtained by candidates could not be classified as personal information exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The court highlighted that withholding such information could lead to doubts about the integrity of the recruitment process, which is detrimental to public trust.
The judges referenced previous rulings that supported the notion that transparency in public examinations is crucial for accountability. They concluded that the marks obtained by candidates in a public recruitment process should be disclosed to promote confidence in the system.
The Bombay High Court partly allowed the petition, setting aside the previous orders that denied the petitioner access to the marks of all candidates from 1 to 363 in the recruitment process. The court directed the concerned authorities to furnish this information within six weeks, reinforcing the principle that transparency is essential in public recruitment processes. This ruling is expected to enhance public confidence in the integrity of government recruitment practices.
No Imminent Threat of Infringement Bars Ex-Parte Injunction in Trademark Suit: Belagavi Principal District Court
12 Feb 2026
Centre Justifies Wangchuk Detention as Ladakh Violence Halting Measure
12 Feb 2026
Court Rejects Selective Arbitration Under Section 21
12 Feb 2026
Family Judge Exposes Weaponized Litigation in Custody Dispute
14 Feb 2026
Centre Notifies Two High Court Chief Justice Appointments
16 Feb 2026
Deep Chandra Joshi Appointed Acting NCLT President
16 Feb 2026
Debunking the Myth That Indians Lack Privacy Concepts
16 Feb 2026
Whose View Is It Anyway? Juniors Uncredited
16 Feb 2026
Private Property Disputes Not Human Rights Violations; HRC Lacks Jurisdiction Under PHRA: Gujarat HC
16 Feb 2026
Disclosure of marks in public recruitment processes under RTI promotes transparency and accountability, outweighing privacy concerns, reinforcing public trust in selection integrity.
The RTI Act's personal information exemption does not apply where public interest justifies disclosure of examination marks for transparency and fairness.
The selection process for recruitment must comply strictly with the criteria published in the advertisement; changes are impermissible unless explicitly allowed.
Writ petitions must include necessary parties; failure to do so renders the petition non-maintainable, regardless of the merits of the case.
Right to Information Act entitles individuals to access examination marks, yet alternative remedies must be exhausted first.
The disclosure of answer sheets in the context of examinations is subject to public interest, as established by relevant judgments.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
