Supreme
Court : Now, you can use RTI to re-evaluate answer-sheets
The Supreme Court on
Tuesday ruled that students aggrieved with their examination scores - class X
and XII, entrance exam for professional courses as well as job recruitment
tests - can now take a look at how they were evaluated by moving an application
under the Right to Information Act.
So far, only re-tabulation of marks was possible. Now, the court has provided
for re-evaluation of answer-sheets, which will include whether examiner missed
out awarding marks for answers to some of the questions.
Passing the path-breaking order that will be lapped up by students, but may
cause consternation among the teaching fraternity, a bench of Justices R V
Raveendran and A K Patnaik dismissed a bunch of appeals filed by the Central Board of
Secondary Education, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, Institute of
Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), University of
Calcutta, West Bengal Central School Services Commission and Assam Public
Services Commission.
The petitioners had challenged rulings by different information commissioners
under the RTI Actdirecting
them to show the answer-sheets to the students.
The basic contention of all these education boards, Calcutta
University and ICAI was that there was a fiduciary relationship
between the examiner and the board, and hence it was not proper to show the
answer-sheet to the student. CBSE had claimed exemption from the ambit of RTI
Act.
The classic among the cases dealt by the apex court was that of a Kolkata
student Pritam Rooj, who had scored 91.6% in the Class X examination and 80.8%
at the higher secondary (Class XII) examination.
But his performance dipped unexpectedly in the mathematics honours course,
which he studied in Presidency College under the Calcutta University. In 2005,
he got a mere 52% in his Part-I examination and an identical percentage the
following year in Part-II, with just 28 out of 100 in the fifth paper.
Rooj applied for re-evaluation of the paper, and was awarded four additional
marks by the university. But, that did not give him a first division and ruined
his dream of studying in the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
On August 14, 2007, Rooj filed an RTI query seeking a copy of his answer-sheet
from the university. But, the principal information officer said no inspection
of answer-sheet was permitted under the RTI Act.
He moved the Calcutta High
Court and got a favourable order. Similar orders had come in
from the high courts of Gauhati in Assam and other places. The apex court had
joined them together and heard arguments.
(
TOI )
SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA
Top of Form
Case Status Status : PENDING
This Case is converted to : Appeal Civil 6454 OF 2011
Status of : Appeal Civil 6454 OF 2011
CENTRLAL BOARD OF SEC.EDUCATION & ANR. .Vs. ADITYA BANDOPADHYAY & ORS.
Pet. Adv. : MR. TARA CHANDRA SHARMA
Subject Category : ACADEMIC MATTERS - MATTERS RELATING TO WITH-HOLDING/CANCELLATION OF RESULTS, EVALUATION OF MARKS, EXPULSION OF STUDENTS
Last Listed on :09/08/2011
Source | http://supremecourtofindia.
Court : Now, you can use RTI to re-evaluate answer-sheets
The Supreme Court on
Tuesday ruled that students aggrieved with their examination scores - class X
and XII, entrance exam for professional courses as well as job recruitment
tests - can now take a look at how they were evaluated by moving an application
under the Right to Information Act.
So far, only re-tabulation of marks was possible. Now, the court has provided
for re-evaluation of answer-sheets, which will include whether examiner missed
out awarding marks for answers to some of the questions.
Passing the path-breaking order that will be lapped up by students, but may
cause consternation among the teaching fraternity, a bench of Justices R V
Raveendran and A K Patnaik dismissed a bunch of appeals filed by the Central Board of
Secondary Education, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education, Institute of
Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), University of
Calcutta, West Bengal Central School Services Commission and Assam Public
Services Commission.
The petitioners had challenged rulings by different information commissioners
under the RTI Actdirecting
them to show the answer-sheets to the students.
The basic contention of all these education boards, Calcutta
University and ICAI was that there was a fiduciary relationship
between the examiner and the board, and hence it was not proper to show the
answer-sheet to the student. CBSE had claimed exemption from the ambit of RTI
Act.
The classic among the cases dealt by the apex court was that of a Kolkata
student Pritam Rooj, who had scored 91.6% in the Class X examination and 80.8%
at the higher secondary (Class XII) examination.
But his performance dipped unexpectedly in the mathematics honours course,
which he studied in Presidency College under the Calcutta University. In 2005,
he got a mere 52% in his Part-I examination and an identical percentage the
following year in Part-II, with just 28 out of 100 in the fifth paper.
Rooj applied for re-evaluation of the paper, and was awarded four additional
marks by the university. But, that did not give him a first division and ruined
his dream of studying in the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
On August 14, 2007, Rooj filed an RTI query seeking a copy of his answer-sheet
from the university. But, the principal information officer said no inspection
of answer-sheet was permitted under the RTI Act.
He moved the Calcutta High
Court and got a favourable order. Similar orders had come in
from the high courts of Gauhati in Assam and other places. The apex court had
joined them together and heard arguments.
(
TOI )
SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA
Top of Form
Case Status Status : PENDING
This Case is converted to : Appeal Civil 6454 OF 2011
Status of : Appeal Civil 6454 OF 2011
CENTRLAL BOARD OF SEC.EDUCATION & ANR. .Vs. ADITYA BANDOPADHYAY & ORS.
Pet. Adv. : MR. TARA CHANDRA SHARMA
Subject Category : ACADEMIC MATTERS - MATTERS RELATING TO WITH-HOLDING/CANCELLATION OF RESULTS, EVALUATION OF MARKS, EXPULSION OF STUDENTS
Last Listed on :09/08/2011
Source | http://supremecourtofindia.
No comments:
Post a Comment