Allahabad High Court Rules on Confidentiality of Public Exam Marks

The Allahabad High Court has clarified that the marks obtained in public examinations are not considered confidential information. As a result, consent from the candidate is not required when an applicant seeks this information under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

A division bench consisting of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi addressed a writ petition filed by the Union of India through GM, Diesel Locomotive. They stated, "Marks obtained by a candidate, if information regarding that is sought by another candidate, are not confidential private information requiring consent under Section 8 of the RTI Act, 2005."

The court acknowledged that while an outsider may invoke confidentiality, the situation changes when another candidate requests the information. However, when it comes to photocopies of answer sheets, the court noted that it could involve disclosing more sensitive information such as examiner signatures, which may not be appropriate.

This ruling arose from a 2008 case where Santosh Kumar requested marks information for himself and two other candidates under the RTI Act. Initially, the marks were withheld, but the Central Information Commission later ordered that the answer sheets be provided.

The General Manager of Diesel Locomotive Works subsequently challenged this decision, arguing that revealing answer sheets could lead to privacy infringements. The court maintained that while public interest could override privacy concerns, personal information unrelated to public activity should not be disclosed.

Ultimately, the court ruled that while the marks could be disclosed, there was no obligation to provide photocopies of the answer sheets due to the additional sensitive information they might reveal.

This ruling emphasizes the balance between transparency in public examinations and the need to protect certain private information.