Right to Information Wiki
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.

no way to compare when less than two revisions

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.


—cases:central-board-secondary-education-v-central-information-commission-2011-delhi-hc [2026/05/03 08:32] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 1: Line 1:
 +{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(CBSE v. Central Information Commission,High Court of Delhi RTI,RTI §2,RTI §8,CBSE,moderation,grace marking,Delhi HC,§2(f))&metatag-description=(CBSE directed to disclose scheme of moderation and grace marking used in examinations. Moderation & grace-marking schemes are 'information' under §2(f); not exempt.)}}
 +
 +====== CBSE v. Central Information Commission ======
 +
 +<WRAP center round info 95%>
 +**High Court of Delhi** · 2011-01-01 · Citation awaited
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +
 +
 +**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.//
 +
 +===== Case details =====
 +
 +^ Court | High Court of Delhi |
 +^ Decided | 2011-01-01 |
 +^ Citation | Citation awaited |
 +^ Bench | Vipin Sanghi |
 +^ Petitioner | CBSE |
 +^ Respondent | Central Information Commission & Anr. |
 +^ RTI Act sections | §2(f) |
 +^ Outcome | Rejected |
 +
 +===== Outcome =====
 +
 +CBSE directed to disclose scheme of moderation and grace marking used in examinations.
 +
 +===== Ratio decidendi =====
 +
 +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.
 +
 +===== Keywords =====
 +
 +CBSE, moderation, grace marking, Delhi HC, §2(f)
 +
 +===== This case cites =====
 +
 +  * [[/important-decisions/cbse-and-anr-vs-aditya-bandopadhyay|CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay]] (SC 2011)
 +
 +===== Similar cases in the corpus =====
 +
 +//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.//
 +
 +  * [[/important-decisions/icai-vs-shaunak-h-satya|ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya]] (SC 2011)
 +  * [[/important-decisions/cbse-and-anr-vs-aditya-bandopadhyay|CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay]] (SC 2011)
 +  * [[/cases/upsc-v-angesh-kumar-2018-sc|UPSC v. Angesh Kumar]] (SC 2018)
 +  * [[/cases/cbse-v-paresh-ghadge-cic|Open-evaluation regime post-Aditya Bandopadhyay — CIC directives]] (CIC 2012)
 +  * [[/important-decisions/rbi-vs-jayantilal-mistry|Reserve Bank of India v. Jayantilal N. Mistry]] (SC 2015)
 +
 +===== Related =====
 +
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?court=HC-DEL|All High Court of Delhi rulings in the corpus]]
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?section=2|All RTI cases turning on §2]]
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?section=8|All RTI cases turning on §8]]
 +  * [[:cases:search|Full case-law search]]
 +  * [[:cases|Case-Law Database — overview]]
 +  * [[:pio-rti-reply-guide|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
 +  * [[:act|The RTI Act, 2005 — annotated]]
 +  * [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1432849/|External reported text →]]
 +
 +<WRAP center round alert 95%>
 +**Editorial summary, not a certified report.** The ratio here is an editorial compression. Before citing this ruling in a PIO order, FAA speaking order, or any appellate filing, **verify against the full reported decision**. RTI Wiki is not a legal service.
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +
 +
 +//Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.//
 +
 +{{tag>case-law court-hc-del section-2 section-8}}