Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| — | rti-for-university-result-rechecking [2026/07/06 07:52] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{htmlmetatags> | ||
| + | ====== University result rechecking and revaluation — RTI ====== | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP info> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== The story most citizens recognise ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Anjali R., a final-year B.Com student at a state university in northern Karnataka, opened her declared result on a Friday evening and found that she had failed **Financial Accounting** by exactly **four marks**. The paper had gone well; she had scored above 60 in every other subject. She paid the university' | ||
| + | |||
| + | Six weeks later the revaluation portal simply said: **" | ||
| + | |||
| + | This is the wall almost every university student hits. The revaluation process is opaque by design — the applicant pays, waits, and receives a one-line verdict. What most students do not know is that the **Right to Information Act, 2005** breaks that wall. The Supreme Court has held, in case after case, that your evaluated answer book is " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== What university rechecking and revaluation actually is ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | " | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Rechecking** (sometimes called " | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Revaluation** (or " | ||
| + | |||
| + | The statutory regulator for higher education in India is the **University Grants Commission (UGC)**, established under the UGC Act, 1956, under the Ministry of Education, Department of Higher Education. The UGC is itself a public authority under the RTI Act, and Sections 12(h) and 12(i) of the UGC Act impose a duty on it to collect and make available information on university education and to require universities to furnish information. State public universities are also answerable to their State' | ||
| + | |||
| + | A university — whether established by a Central Act, a Provincial Act, a State Act, or declared a deemed university under Section 3 of the UGC Act, 1956 — is a **" | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP tip> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== How the revaluation flow works — so you know what to ask for ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | To ask a sharp question, you need to know how a revaluation application travels through the university. A typical state university flow looks like this: | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **Step 1 — Application and fee.** You submit an online or offline revaluation form after the result is declared, within a window of about 7 to 15 days, paying the per-paper fee set by the university. | ||
| + | - **Step 2 — Script retrieval.** The exam section pulls your evaluated answer book from storage. Answer books are usually retained for a limited period under the university' | ||
| + | - **Step 3 — Second evaluation.** The script is sent to a fresh evaluator who marks it independently, | ||
| + | - **Step 4 — Moderation.** A moderation committee compares the two sets of marks, applies the university' | ||
| + | - **Step 5 — Result update.** If marks change, a revised grade is issued; if not, the portal simply says "no change." | ||
| + | |||
| + | Each of these steps generates a record — a receipt, an evaluator assignment sheet, a moderation note, a marks-revision log, a committee minute. Those records are exactly what the RTI Act gives you the right to inspect and copy. The Supreme Court has been clear: the answer book itself, and the records around it, are " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== The 2026 update you must know about ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The legal position has been settled for years, but enforcement is still catching up. The two cases every student should know: | ||
| + | |||
| + | **CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, | ||
| + | |||
| + | **ICSI v. Paras Jain, (2019) Civil Appeal No. 5665/2014, decided 11 April 2019** (Ramana and Nazeer JJ) settled the fee question: when a candidate seeks answer sheets under the RTI Act, the examining body can charge **only the RTI-prescribed fee** — Rs.10 application plus Rs.2 per page for copies — not the university' | ||
| + | |||
| + | After CBSE tried to resist, the Supreme Court issued a **contempt order on 16 August 2016** in **Kumar Shanu v. YSK Seshu Kumar, Chairman CBSE**, directing CBSE to " | ||
| + | |||
| + | What this means in 2026: the law is unambiguous. The right is to **inspect and obtain a certified copy** of your evaluated answer book at the RTI rate, and to receive the **moderation criteria** and the **marks-revision statistics** for your course. What RTI does **not** give you is a fresh re-evaluation or a direction to change marks — the Supreme Court in Aditya Bandopadhyay expressly noted that " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Step-by-step: | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Step 1 — Identify the public authority and the PIO.** Your university is the public authority. The correct PIO for exam-related queries is the **Central Public Information Officer, Office of the Controller of Examinations** of the university (not the college, not the Vice-Chancellor' | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Step 2 — Prepare your particulars.** Have these ready before you write: full name, roll number, registration/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Step 3 — Draft your questions.** Ask for specific, dated records. Five strong sample questions: | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **Status and outcome:** " | ||
| + | - **Answer book inspection and copy:** " | ||
| + | - **Moderation criteria:** " | ||
| + | - **Marks-revision statistics: | ||
| + | - **Grievance committee minutes:** " | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Step 4 — Pay the correct fee.** For a central university, the fee is **Rs.10** under the RTI Rules, 2012, payable by Indian Postal Order, court-fee stamp, cash against receipt, or online through the Central portal. For copies, the rate is **Rs.2 per page**; inspection of records is free for the first hour and Rs.5 for each subsequent hour. **BPL applicants are exempt** from the application fee on production of proof. For a state university, most states also prescribe Rs.10 — but confirm your state' | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Step 5 — Submit and keep proof.** File by hand at the Controller' | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Step 6 — Wait 30 days.** The CPIO must reply within **30 days** under **Section 7(1)** of the RTI Act (48 hours where life or liberty is involved, which exam queries are not). If the answer book is due for destruction under the university' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Documents to attach ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - A photocopy of your **admit card / hall ticket** showing your roll number. | ||
| + | - A photocopy of the **result printout** or grade sheet for the relevant semester. | ||
| + | - The **revaluation application acknowledgement** and fee receipt issued by the university. | ||
| + | - Proof of **BPL status** if you are claiming the fee exemption. | ||
| + | - For online filing on the Central portal, a scanned copy of any one of the above if the portal asks for an attachment. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Common mistakes to avoid ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **Filing at the college instead of the university' | ||
| + | - **Asking for " | ||
| + | - **Paying the university' | ||
| + | - **Demanding examiner names.** Examiner identities are protected under **Section 8(1)(g)** read with **Section 10** and must be severed. Ask for the **pattern and qualifications** of evaluators (first/ | ||
| + | - **Forgetting to cite roll number, subject code and revaluation application number.** Without these, the application is " | ||
| + | - **Relying on the old view that answer books cannot be inspected.** The 1984 decision in Paritosh B. Sheth, (1984) 4 SCC 27, no longer bars inspection under the RTI Act — it was overtaken by Aditya Bandopadhyay in 2011. If the PIO cites it, point to Section 22. | ||
| + | - **Waiting too long.** The right to access your answer book lasts only as long as the university retains it under its own record-retention policy. File within weeks of the "no change" | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== The escalation ladder if the Controller does not reply ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **First appeal:** If no reply comes within 30 days, or the reply is evasive, file a **First Appeal under Section 19(1)** with the **First Appellate Authority** — usually the Registrar or the Vice-Chancellor' | ||
| + | - **Second appeal:** If the FAA also fails you, file a **Second Appeal under Section 19(3)** with the **Central Information Commission** (for a central/ | ||
| + | - **Penalty: | ||
| + | - **Complaint under Section 18:** If the PIO never replied at all or refused to accept the application, | ||
| + | |||
| + | Use the **First Appeal tool** at https:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Real-life example ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center round box> | ||
| + | **Anjali R., Dharwad district, Karnataka — March to August 2025.** | ||
| + | |||
| + | Anjali, a final-year B.Com student at a state university, failed Financial Accounting by four marks. She paid Rs.400 for revaluation on 28 March 2025. On 9 May 2025 the portal showed "No change," | ||
| + | |||
| + | On 14 May 2025 she filed an RTI to the CPIO, Office of the Controller of Examinations, | ||
| + | |||
| + | The CPIO replied on 10 June 2025 (within 30 days), offering inspection of the answer book but refusing the certified copy at Rs.2 per page, claiming the university' | ||
| + | |||
| + | The copy showed that the second examiner had not awarded marks for two 5-mark questions she had answered. With that evidence she filed a writ petition before the High Court. The Court directed the university to re-evaluate those two answers. Her revised marks: **58/60 on the paper — a pass**. | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Total cost of the RTI leg:** Rs.10 application + Rs.76 copy = **Rs.86**. Time from filing RTI to receiving the copy: about 7 weeks. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Sample RTI letter ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | < | ||
| + | To: The Central Public Information Officer | ||
| + | Office of the Controller of Examinations | ||
| + | [Name of University], | ||
| + | |||
| + | Subject: Application under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 — | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | Sir/Madam, | ||
| + | |||
| + | I, [full name], roll number [number], registration number [number], | ||
| + | student of [course], semester [number], hereby request the following | ||
| + | information under Section 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, | ||
| + | read with Section 2(f), Section 7(1) and Section 10: | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1. The status and outcome of my revaluation application No. [number] | ||
| + | dated [date] for subject code [code] ([subject name]), including | ||
| + | the date received, date disposed, original marks, and revised marks. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 2. Permission to inspect, and a certified copy at Rs.2 per page of, | ||
| + | my evaluated answer book for subject code [code], in terms of | ||
| + | CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, | ||
| + | Jain, (2019). The names/ | ||
| + | under Section 10 read with Section 8(1)(g). | ||
| + | |||
| + | 3. The moderation/ | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | 8 SCC 781. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 4. Anonymised, aggregate marks-revision statistics for subject code | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | 5. Minutes, if any, of the Examination Grievance Redressal Committee | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | The application fee of Rs.10 is paid by [Indian Postal Order No. / | ||
| + | court-fee stamp / cash receipt / online transaction ID]. I belong to | ||
| + | the Below Poverty Line category and enclose proof of BPL status | ||
| + | [if applicable — delete if not]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If the information is partly exempt, please furnish the severable | ||
| + | portion under Section 10. If this office does not hold the records, | ||
| + | please transfer the application under Section 6(3) within five days. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Place: [city] | ||
| + | [signature] | ||
| + | [name, contact] | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Frequently asked questions ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Can I get my answer book under RTI, or only the marks? ==== | ||
| + | Yes. The Supreme Court in CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== How much does a copy of the answer book cost? ==== | ||
| + | Under the RTI Rules, 2012, the application fee is Rs.10 and copies are charged at Rs.2 per page. The Supreme Court in ICSI v. Paras Jain, (2019) confirmed that when you seek answer sheets under the RTI Act, the examining body can charge only the RTI-prescribed fee — not its own Rs.500 or Rs.750 " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Do I file at my college or at the university? ==== | ||
| + | At the university — specifically at the **CPIO, Office of the Controller of Examinations**. The college does not hold evaluated answer books or revaluation records. The Central Information Commission in Mansi Sharma v. University of Delhi (2018) treated the Assistant Controller (Revaluation) as part of the public authority. Filing at the college only triggers a transfer under Section 6(3) and costs you days. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Can I ask for the examiner' | ||
| + | No, and you should not. Examiner identities are protected under Section 8(1)(g) read with Section 10 of the RTI Act and must be severed from any disclosure. The Supreme Court in both Aditya Bandopadhyay and ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya treated examiner identity as exempt. Ask instead for the **pattern of evaluation** (first examiner, second examiner, moderator) and the **moderation criteria** — those are disclosable. Asking for names gives the PIO a lawful ground to refuse part of your request. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What if the university says its own rules prohibit showing the answer book? ==== | ||
| + | That defence no longer holds. Section 22 of the RTI Act gives it overriding effect over inconsistent university bye-laws, and the Supreme Court in Aditya Bandopadhyay said so expressly. If the PIO cites the older 1984 decision in Paritosh B. Sheth, point out that it was overtaken by Aditya Bandopadhyay in 2011. Cite both cases in your application to pre-empt the refusal. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Is there a time limit to access my answer book? ==== | ||
| + | Yes. The right exists only for as long as the university retains the answer book under its own record-retention policy — often three to six months after the result is declared, sometimes up to a year. RTI does not oblige the university to keep records longer than its own policy. File within weeks of receiving the "no change" | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Will the RTI itself change my marks? ==== | ||
| + | No. The Supreme Court in Aditya Bandopadhyay expressly noted that " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What if the PIO simply does not reply? ==== | ||
| + | File a First Appeal under Section 19(1) within 30 days of the deadline with the First Appellate Authority (usually the Registrar). If the FAA also fails, file a Second Appeal under Section 19(3) with the Central Information Commission (for central/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Do deemed universities come under the RTI Act? ==== | ||
| + | Yes. A deemed university declared under Section 3 of the UGC Act, 1956 is a " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Sources ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - Right to Information Act, 2005 — full text: [cic.gov.in](https:// | ||
| + | - CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, | ||
| + | - ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya, (2011) 8 SCC 781 (2 September 2011): [indiankanoon.org](https:// | ||
| + | - ICSI v. Paras Jain, (2019) Civil Appeal No. 5665/2014 (11 April 2019): [indiankanoon.org](https:// | ||
| + | - Kumar Shanu v. YSK Seshu Kumar, Chairman CBSE, contempt order (16 August 2016): [indiankanoon.org](https:// | ||
| + | - Abner Ingty v. CPIO, Delhi University, CIC/ | ||
| + | - Mansi Sharma v. University of Delhi, CIC/ | ||
| + | - UGC Act, 1956: [ugc.gov.in](https:// | ||
| + | - Central RTI online portal: [rtionline.gov.in](https:// | ||
| + | - Central Information Commission: [cic.gov.in](https:// | ||
| + | - RTI Rules, 2012 (fee and copy charges): [niti.gov.in](https:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Related on RTI Wiki ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - [[rti-for-answer-sheet-inspection|RTI to inspect your answer sheet]] | ||
| + | - [[rti-for-answer-sheet-evaluation|RTI for answer sheet evaluation]] | ||
| + | - [[rti-for-cbse-re-evaluation-records-2026|RTI for CBSE re-evaluation records 2026]] | ||
| + | - [[rti-for-exam-result-delay|RTI for exam result delay]] | ||
| + | - [[rti-for-degree-verification|RTI for degree verification]] | ||
| + | - [[rti-for-college-affiliation|RTI for college affiliation]] | ||
| + | - [[rti-for-beginners|RTI for beginners — citizen primer]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | //Last reviewed: 4 July 2026.// | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{tag> | ||