Lucknow, February 9 A 15-year-old class 11 student received photocopies of his class 10 answer sheets from the education department after a nine-month struggle through the Right to Information Act.
State Information Commissioner Mohammad Nadeem, in his order, warned the public information commissioner (PIO) of punitive action under Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005.
In his February 4 order, Nadeem suggested a censure for the PIO's conduct "as a constant reminder and to prevent the repetition of such irresponsible behaviour towards any other student in the future."
Shashi Shekhar Dubey, a resident of Jhansi, passed his class 10 exam from the UP Board in 2025. He scored 100 out of 100 in Mathematics, 92 in Hindi, 90 in Science, 87 in Social Science, 84 in Drawing, and 73 in English.
He felt that he should have received higher marks in subjects other than Mathematics and filed an RTI application seeking copies of his answer sheets.
Dubey first submitted an application to the Public Information Officer, Secondary Education Council, Uttar Pradesh, on May 24, 2025, requesting certified photocopies of the evaluated answer sheets for Hindi, English, Mathematics, Science, Social Science, and Drawing.
When he did not receive the copies within the stipulated time, he filed a first appeal on June 24, 2025, and subsequently, a second appeal before the state information commission.
The latest appeal was heard by a bench headed by Information Commissioner Mohammad Nadeem on three different dates.
The PIO informed the commission through written submissions dated September 18 and November 13 that the appellant was sent a letter on July 26 and summoned to the Board office on August 22 to review the answer sheets, but he did not appear.
Dubey told the commission that the UP Board was misrepresenting facts and that he was being called to review the answer sheets only to avoid providing him with the evaluated answer sheets.
He also stated that the Board was falsely claiming that there was no rule to provide copies of the answer sheets, and that only review was permitted.
During the hearing on December 4, Manoj Kumar, the Principal Assistant ('pradhan sahayak') representing the UP Board, stated that the provision for providing evaluated answer sheets existed earlier, but not anymore.
Nadeem directed the PIO to submit a copy of any such new rule at the next hearing, failing which punitive action would be considered.
On February 2, 2026, the PIO regretted the delay and submitted a written statement informing that certified copies of the evaluated answer sheets for all six subjects had been provided to the appellant.
Dubey assessed his copies and demanded a revaluation.
However, the bench wrote that directing the revaluation of answer sheets or increasing marks does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Information Commission and suggested pursuing other legal remedies.
"The Commission deems it necessary to record that the conduct of the Secondary Education Council, Uttar Pradesh, in this case, was not only evasive but also demonstrated gross insensitivity towards a minor and meritorious student," Nadeem wrote.
He said that contradictory and confusing answers, such as "there is no rule to provide them," and "scrutiny is underway," were completely contrary to the spirit of the Right to Information Act.