Mumbai: In a recent ruling reinforcing transparency and candidate rights in competitive examinations, the Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) to provide the assessed copy of the answer sheet to a candidate who was denied the same under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The division bench comprising Justice M.S. Karnik and Justice N.R. Borkar passed the order while hearing a petition filed by advocate Adnan Z. Mookhtiar, who had appeared for the Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class Preliminary Examination - 2022, conducted by the MPSC.
While the petitioner had cleared both the preliminary and main written examinations, and had even appeared for the interview round, he was denied access to his own answer sheets under the RTI Act on the grounds that the final selection list had not been declared.
Court Upholds Candidate’s Right to Transparency in Exams
The Court observed that MPSC’s own guidelines allow for disclosure of answer sheets under the RTI Act, and nowhere restrict such disclosure until the final results are declared. “The limited relief which the Petitioner seeks is that the answer sheet should be made available to him,” the bench noted in its order, adding: “The standard instructions issued by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission provide that the answer sheet can be made available to the concerned candidate under the Right to Information Act, 2005, and do not specify that the copy of the answer sheet will be made available only upon completion of the examination process.” The court has thus directed MPSC to hand over the assessed copy of Advocate Adnan’s answer sheets within one week.
Candidate Scored Above Cut-off, Yet Omitted from Select List
According to the petition, Advocate Mookhtiar appeared for the preliminary exam held on September 9, 2023, scoring 73.75 marks — well above the cut-off of 55 marks. He successfully cleared the main examination conducted on August 24, 2024, and was placed at Serial No. 25 in the list of qualified candidates.
He also appeared for the interview on March 18, 2025, and the General Merit List released on May 9, 2025, showed his total score as 139 marks (112 in written + 27 in interview), placing him at Serial No. 205.
However, the Provisional Select List, also released on the same day, did not include his name, prompting suspicion over evaluation errors.
Advocate Mookhtiar had filed an RTI application on April 1, 2025, requesting copies of his evaluated answer booklets. However, he received a reply on April 23, 2025, from the Commission’s Information Officer stating that the information could not be provided at that stage.
His First Appeal was also rejected, citing that the final recruitment result had not yet been declared — despite the fact that the Provisional Select List was already published on the MPSC website.
The petitioner argued that denying access to one’s own evaluated answer sheet after the provisional list is out defeats the purpose of transparency in public recruitment and violates natural justice.
He further contended that had he received the copies in time, he could have verified the accuracy of the evaluation and taken necessary steps to correct any discrepancies.
Also Watch:
Petitioner Calls HC Ruling a ‘Landmark Order’
Speaking to the FPJ , Advocate A.Z. Mookhtiar, counsel for the petitioner, termed the High Court’s ruling as a “landmark order”, stating: “This decision will set a precedent for candidates appearing in MPSC and other public examinations. It affirms that answer sheets cannot be denied under the pretext of incomplete final results, especially when provisional lists are already out. This promotes fairness and restores confidence in the selection process.”
