The Central Information Commission held that records of examination evaluation fall within the definition of 'information' under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. A Public Information Officer cannot refuse existing records just because they relate to the evaluation process. Any claim of confidentiality must be specifically justified.
Students and job candidates can use RTI to seek their evaluated answer sheets and related records. File online at rtionline.gov.in for central bodies, with a ₹10 fee (no fee for BPL applicants).
The Right to Information Act, 2005 defines 'information' in Section 2(f) very widely, covering any material held in any form, including records, documents, opinions, advice and data. Section 2(j) gives the right to inspect records and obtain certified copies. A public authority can refuse only on grounds listed in Sections 8 and 9, such as information held in a fiduciary relationship or personal information with no public interest. In CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011), the Supreme Court held that evaluated answer books are information that a candidate can access.
In practice, the application goes to the Public Information Officer, who must reply within 30 days. If the reply is refused, incomplete or late, a first appeal lies to the First Appellate Authority within the same organisation, and then a second appeal or complaint to the Central or State Information Commission. Refusals must give specific reasons, not a general statement that records are confidential.
Generally yes. The Supreme Court and Information Commissions have treated evaluated answer books as information under the RTI Act. Some details, such as the identity of the examiner, may be withheld under exemptions. The public authority can charge the prescribed copying fee and must give specific reasons if it refuses any part.
No. RTI gives you access to information, not a revaluation. Seeing the answer sheet may show totalling errors or unmarked answers, which you can then raise through the exam body's own re-checking or revaluation process, or before a court if the process is unfair. The RTI Act itself does not change results.
A bare claim of confidentiality is not enough. The PIO must show which exemption in Section 8 applies and why. You can challenge an unreasoned refusal through a first appeal and then a second appeal to the Information Commission, which can order disclosure and, in some cases, impose a penalty on the PIO.
Talk to a verified advocate who handles these cases.
Find an advocate Help CenterThis is a news summary for general information, not legal advice. Read the full judgment or consult an advocate before relying on it.
Free, enrolment-checked profile. Client requests in your practice area, no commission on your fees, a free case diary and your court group. Apply in about 10 minutes.