CBSE v. Central Information Commission

CBSE directed to disclose scheme of moderation and grace marking used in examinations. Moderation & grace-marking schemes are 'information' under §2(f); not exempt.

Moderation & grace-marking schemes are 'information' under §2(f); not exempt as fiduciary.

CBSE directed to disclose scheme of moderation and grace marking used in examinations.

Moderation schemes and grace-marking policies used to normalise examination results are 'information' held by the examining body and are disclosable. The fiduciary exemption does not extend to post-examination normalisation policy.

CBSE, moderation, grace marking, Delhi HC, §2(f)

• CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (SC 2011)

These rulings have the closest editorial ratio to this case — computed by tf-idf cosine similarity over ratio, keywords and Act sections. Useful starting points if you are researching the same point of law.

• ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya (SC 2011)
• CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (SC 2011)
• UPSC v. Angesh Kumar (SC 2018)
• Open-evaluation regime post-Aditya Bandopadhyay — CIC directives (CIC 2012)
• Reserve Bank of India v. Jayantilal N. Mistry (SC 2015)

• All High Court of Delhi rulings in the corpus
• All RTI cases turning on §2
• All RTI cases turning on §8
• Full case-law search
• Case-Law Database — overview
• PIO RTI Reply Guide
• The RTI Act, 2005 — annotated
• External reported text →

Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.