Many Indian citizens participate in various training programs, courses, and selections conducted bodies and their associated institutions. Often, the grading or selection process can feel subjective or unfair, leaving individuals questioning the outcome. This is where the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, comes into play, empowering citizens to seek transparency and accountability. However, it’s crucial to understand the scope and limitations of RTI. This article delves into a case where an RTI applicant sought to alter his course grading, and the Central Information Commission’s (CIC) decision provides valuable insights for all RTI seekers.
Background: What Information Was Sought
The case involves an appellant who completed a four-week Company Commanders Course at a military training institution. He felt that his performance warranted an ‘A’ grade, but he was awarded a ‘B’ grade. Believing he deserved a higher grading, he filed an application under the RTI Act. His primary requests were to understand the basis of his grading and, implicitly, to have his grade adjusted to ‘A’. He specifically sought a breakdown of the marks that contributed to his final grade.
How the Public Authority Responded
The Public Information Officer (PIO) of the institution responded that an ‘A’ grading was awarded to trainees who achieved an overall percentage of 70% or above. According to the PIO, the appellant’s overall percentage did not meet this threshold, hence the ‘B’ grading. The PIO also indicated that a breakdown of marks had already been provided to the appellant, and they were willing to provide it again if necessary, along with the marks awarded experts.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
During the Central Information Commission (CIC) hearing, the appellant reiterated his claim that his overall aggregate percentage was 69.75%. He argued that this figure should have been rounded up to 70%, which would have qualified him for an ‘A’ grade. The institution, represented respondent, countered this that there is no provision or system for rounding off the percentage of marks obtained . They maintained that the appellant’s grading was accurate based on the established criteria. The core of the dispute revolved around the interpretation of the grading system and the possibility of adjusting the final percentage.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The Central Information Commission, in its decision, made a crucial observation. The Commission stated that it could not delve into the merits of the appellant’s claim regarding his grading or question the validity of the underlying Army Order that governed the grading system. Essentially, the CIC clarified that its role under the RTI Act is to ensure access to information and transparency, not to re-evaluate academic or training assessments or to alter official decisions based on subjective interpretations of fairness. However, the Commission did direct the PIO to provide a copy of the break-up of marks awarded to the appellant experts. This ensured that the appellant received all the factual information he was entitled to, even if his request for a grade change could not be fulfilled through RTI.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: RTI is for Information, Not Re-evaluation: The primary purpose of the RTI Act is to provide citizens with access to factual information held authorities. It is not a platform to challenge the merits of decisions, re-evaluate assessments, or demand a change in outcomes like grades or selections. The CIC cannot act as an appellate authority for academic or training evaluations.
- Lesson 2: Understand the Scope of PIO’s Authority: Public Information Officers (PIOs) are mandated to provide information as per the RTI Act. They are not empowered to alter official records, change grades, or override established rules and regulations. Their duty is to disclose what exists and is permissible under the law.
- Lesson 3: Focus on Factual Information: When filing an RTI application, focus on seeking specific, factual information. For instance, requesting a breakdown of marks, the criteria for grading, or official policies related to the process is appropriate. Avoid framing questions that implicitly or explicitly demand a change in an outcome.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which government department or institution conducted the course or training.
- Draft Your RTI Application Clearly: State your request for information in simple, precise language. Mention the course name, dates, and your details.
- Specify the Information Sought: Clearly ask for documents such as the grading criteria, the break-up of marks awarded evaluators, and any official policy documents related to the grading.
- Submit and Pay the Fee: Submit the application to the concerned PIO and pay the requisite fee (usually Rs. 10). Keep a copy of your application and the receipt.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Under the Right to Information Act, 2005, please provide a detailed break-up of the marks awarded to me for the [Name of Course] conducted from [Start Date] to [End Date] at [Institution Name, if known, otherwise state ‘your institution’]. Please also provide a copy of the official grading criteria and the policy document, if any, regarding the rounding off of aggregate percentages for determining final grades.
Conclusion
This case underscores an important principle of the RTI Act: it is a powerful tool for transparency, but it has its boundaries. While you cannot use RTI to force a change in your course grading, you can certainly use it to obtain all the factual information that led to that grading. Understanding these limitations will help you craft effective RTI applications and manage your expectations, ensuring you utilize this vital law to its fullest potential for seeking accountability and information from public authorities across India.
