Ruhs: Rajasthan High Court Ruling on Processing Fees

Rajasthan High Court Ruling on RUHS Processing Fees

The Rajasthan High Court has made a significant ruling that prohibits universities from imposing additional processing charges for providing certified copies of answer sheets under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. This decision directly impacts the Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (RUHS), which had previously demanded a processing fee of ₹1000 per application.

The case, identified as D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13783/2021, was brought forth by Vipika, a B.Sc. Nursing student. Vipika sought certified copies of her evaluated answer books but faced a total demand of ₹1225 for each answer book, which included the ₹1000 processing fee. The Court’s ruling emphasized that such charges are contrary to the provisions of the RTI Act.

The Court highlighted that public authorities must adhere to the fee structure prescribed under the RTI Act, which allows for a nominal application fee of ₹10 and a cost of ₹2 per page for copies of documents. In this instance, the total photocopy charges for the 40 pages of an answer book would amount to ₹80, plus ₹145 for postal charges, significantly less than the amount demanded by RUHS.

In delivering its judgment, the Rajasthan High Court referred to several Supreme Court decisions that recognize the right of examinees to access their evaluated answer sheets under the RTI Act. The Court noted that imposing a processing fee of ₹1000 serves to discourage students from seeking access to their academic evaluations.

The ruling quashed the guidelines set by RUHS that mandated this processing fee, reinforcing the principle that public authorities cannot impose additional charges inconsistent with the RTI rules. The Court stated, “The fee payable for seeking information under the Act is already specified by the statutory rules and public authorities cannot prescribe additional charges that are inconsistent with those rules.”

Furthermore, the Court emphasized the overriding effect of the RTI Act, as stated in Section 22, which ensures that it takes precedence over any other law or regulation. This ruling is expected to have a broader impact on how public universities across India handle RTI requests, particularly regarding the accessibility of evaluated answer sheets.

As of now, the implications of this ruling are being observed closely, especially by other educational institutions that may have similar fee structures in place. The decision is likely to encourage more students to exercise their rights under the RTI Act without the burden of excessive fees.

Details remain unconfirmed regarding any immediate changes to RUHS’s policies following this ruling, but it is anticipated that the university will need to comply with the Court’s directives to avoid further legal challenges.