RTI and institute inspection routes are co-existent; fee must follow the route chosen, and guideline quashing was unwarranted.

A candidate seeking inspection of answer scripts or certified copies of answer books may choose either the RTI route or the Institute's guideline route, because the two avenues are co-existent and non-exclusive. If the request is made under the RTI framework, the fee must be charged only under the RTI Rules; if the request is made under the Institute's guidelines, the fee may be levied under those guidelines. The Supreme Court held that quashing Guideline No. 3 was unwarranted where no proper challenge to that guideline had been sought, and set aside that quashing.

---

---

Issues: Whether a candidate seeking inspection of answer scripts or certified copies of answer books could be charged either under the Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005 or under the Institute's guidelines, and whether the quashing of Guideline No. 3 was warranted.

Analysis: The Institute's statutory framework empowered its Examination Committee to frame guidelines regulating inspection and supply of certified copies of answer scripts. At the same time, the Right to Information regime also provided an independent avenue for seeking the same information on the fee structure prescribed under the RTI Rules. The two routes were held to be co-existent and non-exclusive. If information is sought under the RTI framework, the fee must be taken only under the RTI Rules; if it is sought under the Institute's guidelines, the Institute may levy the fee fixed thereunder. In that setting, the Division Bench's decision to quash Guideline No. 3, despite no such relief having been sought, was held to be unwarranted.

Conclusion: The candidate may choose either the RTI route or the Institute's guideline route, and the charge must follow the route chosen. The quashing of Guideline No. 3 was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where two legally available avenues for obtaining the same information are independent and non-exclusive, the requester is entitled to elect the route, and the applicable fee structure must follow that elected route; a guideline regulating one such route cannot be quashed absent a proper challenge.

---