RTI Applicant Entitled To Recruitment Exam Merit List, Marks Subject To No Social Media Publication: Sikkim High Court
The Sikkim High Court directed the Sikkim Public Service Commission (SPSC) to furnish a consolidated merit list and interview marks of candidates who appeared in the Sikkim Services (Combined Recruitment) Examination, 2022, while recording an undertaking from the RTI applicant that the information would not be published on any social media platform.Recording the SPSC's willingness to comply...
The Sikkim High Court directed the Sikkim Public Service Commission (SPSC) to furnish a consolidated merit list and interview marks of candidates who appeared in the Sikkim Services (Combined Recruitment) Examination, 2022, while recording an undertaking from the RTI applicant that the information would not be published on any social media platform.
Recording the SPSC's willingness to comply with the Information Commission's disclosure order, Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai “directed the State Public Information Officer to furnish the information sought by the RTI applicant and warned that 'necessary steps will follow' if the applicant breached his undertaking not to publish the information on social media."
Background:
The dispute arose from an RTI application filed on February 18, 2025 seeking information regarding candidates who had cleared the Sikkim Services (Combined Recruitment) Mains Examination, 2022 for recruitment to the posts of Accounts Officer, Under Secretary and Deputy Superintendent of Police.
The applicant sought details including the list of successful candidates, their roll numbers and marks, as well as information relating to candidates belonging to the Persons with Disabilities (PWD) category.
After receiving only partial information, the applicant approached the First Appellate Authority within the SPSC. The authority directed disclosure only in respect of a candidate who had consented under Section 11(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, while holding that marks of candidates who had declined consent could not be disclosed in view of the exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act.
Dissatisfied with the decision, the applicant filed a second appeal before the Sikkim Information Commission, contending that information relating to a public examination did not infringe the privacy of any individual and was not protected by the exemptions contained in Sections 8 or 9 of the RTI Act.
Accepting the appeal, the Information Commission directed the SPSC to provide the consolidated merit list of all candidates who had appeared in the interview/viva-voce along with their marks and to submit a compliance report.
The petitioner contended that he had advised the Commission to comply with the Information Commission's directions and that the SPSC was willing to furnish the consolidated merit list and marks. However, it sought an assurance that the applicant would not publish the information on social media platforms.
Case Name: Sikkim Public Service Commission V/s Sikkim Information Commission & another
Case No.: WP ( C) No.57 OF 2025
Date of Decision: 15.05.2026