Tests for court clerk posts are public process; candidates' marks not pvt info under RTI, rules Bombay HC

Representational pic

The Bombay High Court (HC) on Monday said the recruitment process for public posts must be transparent, and the marks obtained by candidates were not private information. According to news agency PTI, the court also ruled that the disclosure of marks would not amount to any unwarranted invasion of privacy.

A division bench of Justices MS Sonak and Jitendra Jain said withholding such information allows doubts to linger, which is not healthy in promoting transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and recruitment processes.

According to PTI, the bench passed the order on a plea filed by an applicant named Onkar Kalmankar, who sought details of the marks obtained by candidates who took the tests in 2018 for the post of junior clerk in the Pune district court. Kalmankar was one of the candidates who did not get selected for the post on the grounds that he had not cleared the interview.

The Bombay HC directed the authorities concerned to furnish information on the marks obtained by the selected candidates in the written test, Marathi and English typing test and interview within six weeks.

The bench, in its order, said the case pertains to the selection process for the post of junior clerk in the district court in Pune, for which applications were invited through a public advertisement.

"In that sense, this public process must be transparent. The marks obtained by the candidates in such a selection process cannot ordinarily be held to be personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest," the Bombay HC ruled, while noting that provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act have exempted only such personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest.

"Given that such selection processes must be transparent and above board, it would be in the public interest to disclose such information rather than withhold it and allow any doubts about the process to linger," the court said.

According to PTI, the bench further said in the context of public examination for selection to a public post that it was doubtful if the disclosure of marks obtained by the candidates would amount to any "unwarranted invasion of privacy".

Kalmankar had initially sought information under the RTI Act from the public information officer and the state information commissioner, but his request was denied, following which he approached the Bombay HC.

(With PTI inputs)