A 15-year-old UP Board student received his class 10 answer sheets after a nine-month struggle using the Right To Information (RTI) Act. State Information Commissioner Mohammad Nadeem ordered the Public Information Officer (PIO) to release the documents, warning of punitive action for the delay. The PIO’s conduct was censured as irresponsible towards a student.
Student Seeks Answer Sheets
Shashi Shekhar Dubey, who passed his class 10 exams in 2025, felt his marks in subjects other than mathematics were lower than expected. He scored 100 in Mathematics, 92 in Hindi, 90 in Science, 87 in Social Science, 84 in Drawing, and 73 in English.
Dubey filed an RTI application on May 24, 2025 . He requested certified photocopies of his evaluated answer sheets for Hindi, English, Mathematics, Science, Social Science, and Drawing from the Secondary Education Council, Uttar Pradesh.
Nine-Month Delay and Appeals
When he did not receive the copies within the standard timeframe, Dubey filed a first appeal on June 24, 2025 . He then pursued a second appeal with the state information commission.
The PIO claimed Dubey was notified to review his answer sheets on July 26 and summoned to the Board office on August 22 but did not appear. Dubey contested this, stating the Board was attempting to avoid providing the actual evaluated copies. He also claimed the Board incorrectly stated no rule existed for providing answer sheet copies, only review.
Information Commission Intervenes
During a hearing on December 4, a UP Board representative stated that provisions for providing evaluated answer sheets were previously available but no longer existed. Commissioner Nadeem demanded proof of this new rule, threatening further action.
On February 2, 2026 , the PIO submitted a statement admitting the delay. Certified copies of all six evaluated answer sheets were finally provided to Dubey.
Revaluation Demand and Commission’s Stance
After reviewing his copies, Dubey requested a revaluation of his answer sheets. The Information Commission ruled that directing revaluation or mark increases falls outside its jurisdiction. The commission advised Dubey to pursue other legal avenues for revaluation.
Commissioner Nadeem stated the Secondary Education Council’s actions were evasive and insensitive. He noted that contradictory responses undermined the spirit of the RTI Act.
Key Actions Taken:
- May 24, 2025: Initial RTI application filed.
- June 24, 2025: First appeal filed due to no response.
- February 2, 2026: Answer sheets finally provided after commission intervention.