CIC Directs DoPT to Justify Withholding of Subject-wise Marks in Civil Services Examination
In a significant development concerning transparency in the Civil Services Examination, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) to provide a comprehensive explanation for the discontinuation of publishing subject-wise marks of recommended candidates. The case arose from an RTI appeal filed by Aniket Kumar Gupta, who challenged the Union Public Service Commission's (UPSC) decision to stop disclosing detailed marks post-2017, a move that he argued reduced transparency and fostered misinformation in the coaching industry.
The Commission, led by Information Commissioner Anandi Ramalingam, scrutinized the reasons provided by both UPSC and DoPT for withholding the bifurcated marks. The appellant contended that the absence of detailed marks negatively impacted aspirants' ability to make informed decisions regarding optional subjects, thereby promoting an exploitative environment by coaching institutes.
During the proceedings, the UPSC maintained that the subject-wise marks constitute personal information and their disclosure could lead to misuse. However, the CIC noted inconsistencies in the rationale, especially since aggregate marks and other candidate details are already in the public domain. The CIC observed that the decision to withhold detailed marks was not backed by substantial records or circulars, highlighting a lack of clarity and consistency between the stances of UPSC and DoPT.
Emphasizing the importance of transparency, the CIC has asked the DoPT to furnish detailed written submissions, supported by relevant records, explaining the rationale behind the discontinuation. The Commission also questioned why the practice should not be reinstated, considering its significance for public interest and transparency in the recruitment process.
The case underscores the ongoing debate between privacy concerns and the need for transparency in public examinations. The CIC's directive reflects the necessity for government bodies to ensure their practices align with the principles of openness and accountability, especially in processes as critical as the Civil Services Examination.
Bottom line:-
Right to Information Act, 2005 - The discontinuation of publishing bifurcated marks of recommended candidates in Civil Services Examinations was challenged on grounds of public interest and transparency. Appellant argued that withholding such information adversely affects aspirants' decision-making and promotes misinformation from coaching institutes.
Statutory provision(s): Right to Information Act, 2005 Sections 8(2), 3, 5, 18, 19
