Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 274 (JHR)

Archana Kumari v. Union of India

2023-03-01

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2023
JUDGMENT : The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent-UPSC to provide copy of question paper as well as evaluated answer sheet to the petitioner with respect to the Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination – 2015 held by the Union Public Service Commission on 23.08.2015. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner appeared in the aforesaid examination, however, she was declared unsuccessful in the same. Thereafter, she represented the respondent authorities to provide a copy of her evaluated answer sheet, however, the same was not provided. She also filed an application under Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2005”), for providing her the evaluated answer sheet, however, the same was not furnished to her by the Central Public Information Officer, UPSC, New Delhi. The petitioner also preferred first appeal under the provisions of the Act, 2005, however, the answer sheet was not made available to her. 3. Mr. Faizur Rahman, learned counsel for the respondent-UPSC, submits that the petitioner filed an application under the Act, 2005 to the Central Public Information Officer, UPSC, New Delhi on 05.06.2017 seeking evaluated copy of the answer sheet of the said examination. She was, however, informed by the Central Public Information Officer vide letter dated 10.07.2017 that the retention period of answer sheets of the Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination – 2015 had already lapsed and were accordingly destroyed and, therefore, the same cannot be made available to her. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the content of the writ petition, the reason assigned by the Central Public Information Officer, UPSC, New Delhi vide letter dated 10.07.2017 that the evaluated answer sheets of the Civil Services (Preliminary) Examination – 2015 were already destroyed on the date of filing of application under the Act, 2005 by the petitioner on 05.06.2017, appears to be justified. The petitioner has failed to explain an inordinate delay of about two years in making such application before the Central Public Information Officer, UPSC, New Delhi. The present writ petition has also been filed after unexplained delay of about three years from issuance of the said letter. 5. Hence, I see no reason to entertain the present writ petition. The same is accordingly dismissed.