Rti Imp Internals

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
5. Explain the Supreme Court decisions on RTI Act. - June 2012
Introduction
The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all the citizens of the
country vide Article 19(1.a). Article 19(2) places certain reasonable restrictions upon this freedom in
the interest of certain human and professional values.
The right to information is implicitly guaranteed by the Constitution but the public authorities
denied access to information in the name of official secrets. The progressive individuals and
organizations fought for the right to information consistently in the post-independence era.
Several judicial pronouncements also upheld the fundamental right to information which is a
powerful instrument of good governance.
The Indian Parliament enacted the Right to Information Act, 2005 with a view to set out a practical
regime for securing information in the country. It gave a powerful tool to the citizens to get
information from the Government as a matter of right. This law is very comprehensive and covers
almost all matters of governance and has the widest possible reach, being applicable to Government
at all levels- Union, State and Local as well as recipients of government grants.
The various court judgments and their implications on the Right to Information Act are listed below:
Case Laws
1. Free Flow of Information for Public Record / Right to Information is not Absolute Right
• Indira Jaising v. Registrar General, Supreme Court of India
Supreme Court of India (2003:29) examined the case of Indira Jaising v. Registrar General, Supreme
Court of India and remarked:
In a democratic framework free flow of information to the citizens is necessary for proper
functioning particularly in matters which form part of public record.
There are several areas where such information need not be furnished. Information which belongs
to an exceptional category need not be disclosed to anybody under the existing principles and
practices. That position in law is very clear.
A report made to the Chief Justice of India on his ordering an inquiry being confidential and discreet
is only for the purpose of his information and not for the purpose of disclosure to any other person.
The Chief Justice of India can exercise his power of inquiry on moral or ethical grounds and not by
the powers under any law. Exercise of such power of the Chief Justice of India cannot be made the
subject-matter of a writ petition to disclose a report made to him.
2. Right to Information
• Bennett Coleman and Co. v. Union of India .
Supreme Court of India (1973:16) examined the case of Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India and
struck down the newsprint control order saying that it directly affected the petitioners’ right to
freely publish and circulate their paper.
The court observed: “The constitutional guarantee of the freedom of speech is not so much for the
benefit of the press as it is for the benefit of the people. The freedom of speech includes within its
compass the right of all citizens to read and be informed”.
3. Disclosure of Information/Documents
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain
Supreme Court of India (1975:17) examined the case of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain and stated:
18
Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
“In a Government of democracy like ours, where all the agents of the public must be responsible for
their conduct, there can be but few secrets. The people of this country have a right to know every
public act, everything that is done in a public way by their public functionaries. They are entitled to
know the particulars of every public transaction in all its bearing.
Their right to know, which is derived from the concept of freedom of speech, though not absolute, is
a factor which should make one wary when secrecy is claimed for transactions which can have no
repercussions on public scrutiny. The responsibility of officials to explain or to justify their acts is the
chief safeguard against oppression and corruption”.
• S.P. Gupta v. Union of India

In the case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, it was held that exposure to public gaze and scrutiny is
one of the surest means of achieving clean and healthy administration for it ensures effective
participatory democracy and 'a popular Government without popular information or the means of
obtaining it, is but a prologue to a farce or tragedy or perhaps both'.
4. Right to acquire and Disseminate Information

• Secretary, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Government of India v. Cricket Association of
Bengal
A citizen has a fundamental right to use the best means of imparting and receiving information and
as such to have an access to telecasting for the purpose.
5. Direction on Voters' Right to Information

• People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India
Supreme Court of India (2003:28) examined the case of People’s Union For Civil Liberties (PUCL) v.
Union of India and noted:
“The foundation of a healthy democracy is to have well informed citizens-voters. The reason to have
right of information with regard to the antecedents of the candidate is that voter can judge and
decide in whose favour he should cast his vote.
It is voter’s discretion whether to vote in favour of an illiterate or literate candidate. It is his choice
whether to elect a candidate against whom criminal cases for serious or non-serious charges were
filed but is acquitted or discharged. Exposure to public scrutiny is one of the known means for
getting clean and less polluted persons to govern the country”.
The court upheld the need for enabling the voters to know relevant antecedents of the candidate
contesting the elections.
6. Right to Information and Community Participation

• Research Foundation for Science Technology and Natural Resource Policy v. Union of India
Supreme Court of India (2007:30) examined the case of Research Foundation for Science Technology
and National Resource Policy v. Union of India and observed: “The right to information and
community participation for protection of environment and human health is also a right which flows
from article 21. The Government and authorities have, thus to motivate the public participation.
These well enshrined principles have been kept in view by us (Court) while examining and
determining various aspects and facets of the problems in issue and the permissible remedies”.
7. Restrictions on Information Pertaining to Judicial Decisions

• Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative Officer
19

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
Supreme Court of India (2010:31) examined the case of Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative
Officer & Ors and stated:
“Under the Act, an applicant is entitled to get copy of the opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc but
he cannot ask for any information as to why such opinions, advices, circulars, orders etc have been
passed especially in matters pertaining to judicial decisions.
A judge speaks through his judgments or orders passed by him. If any party feels aggrieved by the
order and or judgment passed by a judge, the remedy available to such a party is either to challenge
the same by way of appeal or by revision or any other legally permissible mode”.
The court held that a judge cannot be expected to give reasons other than those that have been
enumerated in the judgment or order to protect the public from the dangers to which the
administration of justice would be exposed. The court ordered that applicants have no right to seek
information which would adversely affect the independence of the judiciary.
8. Right to Privacy and Right to Information

• Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh
In India, the Constitution does not expressly recognize the right to privacy. The concept of privacy as
a fundamental right first evolved in 1964 in the case of Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh. The
Supreme Court, for the first time, recognized that there is a right of privacy implicit in the Indian
Constitution under Article 21. The Court held that the Right to Privacy is an integral part of the Right
to Life, but with out any clear cut laws, it still remains in the grey area.
20

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
6. Examine the origin and development of the concept of “Right to Know” in India. Jan 2013
Background of RTI in India

The voice of the public to get information from the Government got momentum during the last
decade and various State Governments in India enacted Right to Information Acts in the years 2000-
2002, which were applicable in the respective States.
Then came the Freedom of Information Act, 2002. It was found that even this Act did not fulfil the
aspiration of the citizens of India. In order to ensure greater and more effective access to
information, it was thought that the Freedom of Information Act, 2002 must be made more
progressive, participatory and meaningful. Thus the Freedom of Information Act, 2002 was repealed
and the Right to Information Act, 2005 has been enacted by the Parliament, which is considered as a
landmark step to enhance fundamental right of life and liberty guaranteed under Article 19 of the
Constitution of India.
The Right to Information Bill received assent of the President of India on 15th June, 2005 and has
come on the statute book as the Right to Information Act, 2005. This Act is applicable to the whole
of India except Jammu and Kashmir.
Preamble
The Preamble of the Act spells the purpose of the RTI Act as under:
(a) for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens;
(b) to secure access to information under the control of public authorities;
(c) to promote transparency & accountability in the working of every public authority;
(d) to ensure informed citizenry and transparency in governance;
(e) to curtail corruption and to hold Government & their instrumentalities accountable
to the governed;
(f) to harmonize conflicting public interests in disclosure and exemptions;
(g) constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commission and for
matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.18
Objectives
It sets out the following objectives to be achieved through the Right to Information Act:
(a) to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access
to information under the control of public authorities;
(b) in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority;
(c) the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions; and
(d) for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
21

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
UNIT 2
1. What are the Salient Features of the RTI Act?
SALIENT FEATURES OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

Preamble of the Act
The Preamble of the Act spells the purpose of the RTI Act as under:
(a) for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens;
(b) to secure access to information under the control of public authorities;
(c) to promote transparency & accountability in the working of every public authority;
(d) to ensure informed citizenry and transparency in governance;
(e) to curtail corruption and to hold Government & their instrumentalities accountable
to the governed;
(f) to harmonize conflicting public interests in disclosure and exemptions;
(g) constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commission and for
matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
Commencement of the Act

The Act consists of 31 sections out of which 9 came into effect from 15th June, 2005. Section 4(1)(b)
fixes 120 days from that date as the date from which it becomes effective. Therefore, the entire Act
can be said to have been effective from 12th October, 2005.
1. Only citizens can apply for information

2. All public authorities are answerable under the Act
3. Nature of the information must be relevant to administration of the State
4. Applicant need not provide reasons
5. The information must be disseminated within 30 days
6. Reasons or rejection of application to be provided
7. First Appellate Authority and the Second Appellate Authority
8. Limitation to file and dispose the appeals
9. Information is one which is already recorded in official records and published
10. Information requested should not relate to any exempted matter under the Act.
Criticism of the Act

The Act penalises the public authorities only in case of non provision of information. There is no
penalty or remedy under the Act for non compliance with procedural aspects like display of the
names of information officers on the departmental notice boards. Also, the State Governments and
Competent Authorities are at liberty to fix the application fee which is a power that can be grossly
misused to deny information. Another criticism of the Act is the exclusion of file notings from the
purview of the Act.
Objects of the Act

To enable smoother and greater access to information by replacement of the Freedom of
Information Act, 2002.
Changes in the new Act include:

1. Establishment of an Appellate Machinery to review decisions of the PIOs.
2. Penal provisions for failure to provide information
3. Provisions to ensure maximum disclosure, and minimum exemptions, consistent with the
Constitution.
22

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
4. Effective mechanism for disclosure of information by the authorities.

Making an application for information
23

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
2. Examine the procedure to get information and the obligation of the Public Authorities to
provide information. June 2011
Act: Right to Information Act, 2005

Chapter 1, Preliminary
Section 1. Short title, extent and commencement.
Section 2. Definitions
Chapter 2, Right To Information And Obligations Of Public Authorities

Section 3. Right to information
Section 4. Obligations of public authorities
Section 5. Designation of Public Information Officers
Section 6. Request for obtaining information
Section 7. Disposal of request
Section 8. Exemption from disclosure of information
Section 9. Grounds for rejection to access in certain cases.
Section 10. Severability
Section 11. Third party information
Chapter 5, Powers and functions of the information commissions, appeal and penalties
Section 18. Powers and Functions of information commissions.
Section 19. Appeal
Section 20. Penalties
Chapter 6, Miscellaneous
Section 27. Power to make rules by appropriate Government
Section 28. Power to make rules by competent authority.
Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) – What is it for?

The Right to Information Act, 2005 was established to make the government accountable for its
work by empowering citizens to demand information regarding its activities. This act applies to both
the Central and the State Governments of India except Jammu and Kashmir, which has its own RTI
Act.
When used effectively, the RTI Act can help us in effectively getting various personal and commercial
results, especially when we are dealing with the government. Latest amendment in 2016, for fixing a
time limit on second appeal.
Examples
• Information such as status of your passport application (or reasons for delay)? ( Public Service)
• How money is being spent by the government?
To whom Applicable?
Applicable to Government at all levels- Union, State and Local as well as recipients of government
grants. i.e. from the public authorities or all the governing bodies.
From village panchayats to the presidential office.
24

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
Since the RTI Act is applicable only to the Public Authorities, private bodies such as private schools,
colleges, co-operative societies, banks, companies, trusts, service providers etc. are outside its
purview.
What is a Public Authority - Section 2(h)

A “public authority” is any authority or body or institution of self-government established or
constituted by or under the Constitution;
or by any other law made by the Parliament or a State Legislature;
or by notification issued or order made by the Central Government or a State Government.
The bodies owned, controlled or substantially financed by the Central Government or a State
Government and non-Government organisations substantially financed by the Central Government
or a State Government also fall within the definition of public authority. The financing of the body or
the NGO by the Government may be direct or indirect.
What information are we talking about? Section 2(f)

The RTI aims to allow citizens to ask for records, documents, circulars, contracts, reports, papers,
emails, memos and all other information held in print or electronic form from the public
authorities, i.e. all the governing bodies.
Broadly, the Act applies to functions performed by public authorities.
Information about how budgets are decided, purchases made, government discretion is used,
ministers spend their time, hospitals are run, benefits are distributed, transfers and appointments
made, courts function, environmental clearances are given, criteria for secrecy is founded, and much
more.
It also includes information relating to any private body which can be accessed by the public
authority under any law for the time being in force.
Information about commercial ventures where the government is significantly involved (e.g.
transport, mining, banking etc.), where it is in a joint venture with the private sector (e.g. public-
private partnerships for infrastructure development) or where it has conducted auctions (e.g. for
natural resources or issuance of licenses for spectrum allocation) where private parties have bid, is
brought within the ambit of RTI.
Exceptions
There are certain sections of administrative activities that are exempt from the RTI Act, details of
which can be found in Section 8 and 9 of RTI Act 2005.
A PIO can refuse information on 11 subjects that are listed in the RTI Act. These include Cabinet
papers, information received in confidence from foreign governments, information prejudicial to
security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the country, breach of privilege of legislatures,
etc.
The central intelligence agencies need not give information, except on matters pertaining to
allegations of corruption or human rights violations.
Procedure
Identification of Information Required
Determine what information is required from a governing body.
Finding the Relevant Public Authority

For example, if your local drainage system is in a bad shape, you know that your application has to
be addressed to the local Municipal Corporation. Similarly, if you want information on your ration
card, you need to approach Food Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department.
25

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
Locating The Public Information Officer

After having identified the department, the next step would be locating PIO officers. The role of PIOs
is pivotal as it is them who make the right of citizens to seek Information a reality.
The Act envisages that each public authority must appoint a PIO to disseminate information and to
make him liable for penalty in case of default.
Most of the Public authorities have placed details of PIO and APIO on their websites.
You can also visit the address of the nearest Public Authority and ask for PIO details.
Further, the Department of Posts has appointed Central Assistant Public Information (CAPIO)
Officers in various post offices and they work as Assistant Public Information Officers for all the
public authorities under the central Government departments.
You can also take help of local/state-level NGOs or RTI helpline phone numbers for locating the
correct PIO. who would be holding information required by you.
You can call RTI National Helpline on any of the 7 days of the week from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. at
(080) 666-00-999
When No PIO Has Been Appointed By The Public Authority

It is mandatory for all Public Authorities to appoint PIOs under Section 5 of the Act which provides
that all Public Authorities shall appoint Public Information Officers within hundred days
of enactment of the RTI Act.
The Applicant, has a right to file a complaint to the State Information Commission or Central
Information Commission, as the case may be, under Section 18 of the RTI Act if no PIO, APIO or First
Appellate Authority (FAA) has been appointed by the Public Authority.
Application
Who can make an RTI Application?
The Right to Information Act extends to whole of India except the state of Jammu and Kashmir. S1(2)
All citizens including Indians living abroad possess the right to seek information.
This implies that the person seeking information must be an individual and not a corporation, society
or any other public authority.
Neither persons of Indian Origin nor foreign nationals can avail the benefits under this Act.
Language of the RTI Application

The application can be written in English, Hindi or any official language of the state in which the
department lies.
The courts and commissions have laid down in several judgments that information should be given
to Applicant in the language he understands. As a precautionary measure, It is always advisable to
mention in your application clearly the language in which you seek reply.
26

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
The documents, records, file noting etc. that you are seeking will be provided in the language in
which they were originally prepared. The PIO will not translate the documents in the language you
understand. It is only his/her reply that can be given in the preferred language and not the content
of documents sought.
Important fields to be covered in an application

1. Addressee & Address
You must address your application to the Public Information Officer of the department which is likely
to have the information you are seeking.
The address of the PIO must contain the details of the department viz. name, address and city in
which it is located.
2. NAME & ADDRESS OF THE APPLICANT

Write down your name and the postal address of the place you wish to receive information at. Make
sure that all the information provided is accurate as this would be the address at which PIO could be
corresponding with you.
3. PARTICULARS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED

In this section, all the information sought must be broken down in a systematic manner so as
to ensure that the reader deciphers accurately the information sought from the department. For
convenience, this segment may be divided into
4 heads, viz:
a. Subject matter of information: In this section, you must mention:

• The kind of records being sought, such as file noting, communication, documents etc.,
• Pertaining to what, for example - for appointment to a particular post,
• Whose records are being sought, for example - Chancellor, Vice president etc.
• Concerning which department, for example - Labour Department, Government of West Bengal.
For example:
Please give a copy of the contract signed by the M/s. Akhil Bhartiya Amrit Paryavaran Samity to
operate and maintain the public toilet in Jagdamba Camp in Sheik Sarai I, New Delhi -17
b. The period to which the information relates: In this section, it must be mentioned which period's
records are being sought for.
For example:
o Please provide copies of all communication between Kandla Port Trust and Ministry of Shipping
from 2012-2013 with regard to appointment of chairman of Kandla Port Trust,
o Please provide Daily Stock Register and Daily Sale Register of Fair Price Shop No. 343 situated in
Raigad dist., Maharashtra from January 2014 to January 2015.
c. Whether information is required by post or in person: It must be mentioned whether the

information sought should be furnished in person or by post
d. Whether inspection of the documents is sought: If you wish to view the documents, it must be
explicitly written in this column. If you say yes to taking inspection of the documents, it then
becomes duty of PIO to give you a suitable time and date to come and take inspection.
27

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
4. Reason for Information

Section 6(2) of the RTI Act clearly states that an applicant making a request for information shall not
be required to give any reason for requesting the information.
5. BPL STATUS:
The next paragraph of your application must set out whether you lie above or below the poverty
line. A person is said to be living below the poverty line if their per capita expenditure is than Rs. 32
a day in villages and less than Rs.47 in cities.
If the answer is YES, then a proof should be submitted in support of the claim that you belong to the
below poverty line. No fee is required to be paid by persons falling below the poverty line. However,
if you do not belong to the category of Below Poverty Line, you must undertake to pay appropriate
costs for furnishing required information.
6. TRANSFER OF APPLICATIONS
Many times the nature of the information sought from a particular PIO might be such that it is more
closely connected to another public authority or that it is held by another department. Section 6(3)
of the RTI Act lays down the provisions for transfer of such applications to the relevant public
authority within 5 days of receipt of application. Thus, it is always advisable to state, in the last
paragraph, if any part of the information sought is held by another public
authority, the same may be transferred to the relevant public authority.
7. Signature
The place from where the application is written and date on which it is written should also be
specified. The application must end with the signature of the applicant and the required contact
details.
8. Enclosures
Lastly, you must write down the details of your enclosures. For instance if you belong to the Below
Poverty line category, then you must enclose the Below Poverty Line Certificate along with your
application.
An amount of Rs. 10 is also supposed to be enclosed which you may pay be cheque, demand draft or
cash.
Filing Your RTI Application

You can file your RTI application by any of three methods:
1. Physical Delivery
You can submit your application to the 'TAPAL” also called as Inward/Outward section of the
respective department. Make sure that you collect a signed and dated copy of your RTI Application.
This enables you to keep a track on your application at a later stage.
2. By post
You can send your RTI application by post to the PIO of the relevant department by any of the two
modes:
• Registered Post AD:
The AD card will act as proof of submission, after it is returned to you by the postal department.
• Speed Post (A postal department service):

Once the application is sent by Speed Post, track it and keep a print out of the delivery status
carefully with you.
28

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
NOTE: Do not use ordinary post, private courier companies, etc. since these will not provide you with
a confirmed proof of delivery.
3. Online
You can also file your RTI applications to the Central Ministries/Departments and other Central
Public Authorities mentioned in ONLINE RTI request form through the RTI Online Portal by simply
clicking on rtionline.gov.in. The word limit for filing applications online through this portal is
3000 words.
Note: If possible also send an email of RTI Application to PIO's official email ID displayed in the
website on the same date. The clock starts ticking from the moment the email is sent (not opened).
It isn’t a valid application till it is accompanied by the proper fee. The Fees (Rs.10) along with RTI
Application can be sent by post subsequently, but the time limit starts from the day the email is
sent/received.
WHAT IF THE PIO REFUSES TO ACCEPT AN APPLICATION?

If the PIO refuses to take physical delivery of your RTI application, you should send it by post and
keep the acknowledgment receipt with you.
The PIO cannot refuse to accept your application even if the information is not related to his
department. lt is the duty of the PIO to accept the application and transfer it to the right PIO within 5
days as per section 6(2).
You can also make a formal complaint to Information Commission under Section 18 who has the
power to impose penalty on the defaulting officer up to Rs. 25,000.
Fees
Application Fee: A person who desires to seek some information from a Public Authority is usually
required to pay a sum of Rs. 10 along with the application.
This application fee may differ from state to state and some organizations also lay down a separate
provision for payments of fees.
Such fees must be payable to the Accounts Officer of the public authority and can paid to the Public
Authority in the following manner:
1. By way of a demand draft
2. Banker’s cheque
3. Indian Postal Order
4. By way of cash to the Accounts Officer or to the Assistant Public Information Officer against
proper receipt.
5. The payment of fee to the Central Ministries/departments can also be made online through
internet banking of State Bank of India or through Master/Visa Debit/credit cards.
Cost of providing information:

In addition to the application fees, you may also have to also pay a further fee towards cost of
providing the information, details of which are duly intimated by the PIO as per the rules laid down
under Right to Information (Regulation of fees and cost) Rules, 2005, after your application is filed.
The rates as prescribed by the rules are as follows:

a. For information provided in printed form –
At the price fixed for such publication or Rupees two (Rs. 2/-) per page of photocopy for extracts
from publication
29

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
b. For inspection of records-

There is no fee for the first hour, and a fee of Rupees five (Rs. 5/-) for each subsequent hour (or
fraction thereof)
c. For making copies of information (that is identified after inspection)-

• Rupees Two (Rs. 2/-) for each page (A-4 or A-3 size) created or copied
• Actual charge or cost price of a copy in larger size paper
• Actual cost or price for samples or models
d. For information provided in digital media (disks or floppy) –

Rupees Fifty (Rs. 50/-) per diskette or floppy - Floppy drives are obsolete now, so you may want to
insist on information to be provided on CDs.
Please note that applicants belonging to the Below Poverty Line Category are not required to pay
any fee.
HOW / When DOES ONE KNOW THE COST TO BE PAID TOWARDS PROCUREMENT OF RECORDS?
The PIO after receiving your RTI application evaluates the cost of the documents that you have
sought and sends an intimation letter giving out the breakup of the cost. In case you have asked for
inspection, he will also give you the date, time and place for carrying out the inspection.
Practically speaking, the PIO replies within 30-45 days of receiving your application. Once you
receive this letter of intimation, you can make payment of requisite fee through any of the modes as
mentioned above and your information will be furnished to you within 7 days.
What happens if you fail to pay additional fees towards cost of providing information within 30
days deadline? Can PIO be penalized for lapse on your part?
No, PIO will not invite penalty in such cases. The30 day clock stops ticking from the date of
dispatching the intimation for further fees issued by the PIO and restarts from the day such fee is
paid by the applicant. [Section 7(3)(a) and Section 7(3)(b)]
For example, if the PIO dispatches the intimation letter of additional fees on the 4th of receipt of
your application, then only 4 days would be counted to have lapsed from 30 day limit. The clock will
restart from the day he receives payment of additional fees from you. The PIO in the present case
will have to provide you information within 26 days from the date of payment of such additional
fees. If the applicant chooses to seek review of the additional fee from the Appellate Authority or
SIC/CIC, then the period taken to decide the matter will not be included in the 30 day limit.
Appeal
You can file an appeal under the Right to Information Act whenever the PIO fails to respond to your
application, or when you are aggrieved by the response of the PIO.
In other words, this means that if the PIO fails to give you a reply, or charges unreasonable fees for
giving copies of documents, or fails to give a satisfactory reply, or does not give a reply within the
stipulated time frame etc., you have the power to file an appeal with the appropriate authority.
Section 19 of the Right to Information Act lays down two stages of appeal, the First Appeal is to be
made to the appellate authority and the Second Appeal lies with the Central Information
Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be.
30

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
I. FIRST APPEAL
When can the first appeal be made:
You can make an appeal to the Appellate Authority if:
a. You are aggrieved by the decision made;
b. If no decision was made within the proper time limits;
c. You are a third party consulted during the application process, and you are unhappy with the
decision made by the PIO.
What is the time frame for making First Appeal:

The Applicants who are aggrieved by a decision of a PIO can make an appeal to a departmental
Appellate Authority within 30 days of receiving a reply from the PIO or at the expiry of the time
period within which the information should have been provided by the PIO. However, if you
miss that deadline and the Appellate Authority is convinced that you had justifiable cause for missing
the deadline, he/she may allow you to submit an appeal even after the 30 days have expired at their
discretion.
Who can make First Appeal:

Any person aggrieved by the order of the PIO can file first appeal. You can also request your friend or
an RTI Activist or any other person to file a complaint on your behalf, provided he/she has a copy of
all the relevant documents such as RTI Application, acknowledgment receipt, PIO reply, etc.
Who should the First Appeal be made to:

In every public authority, an officer who is senior in rank to the PIO has been designated to hear
appeals and is referred to as the First Appellate Authority (FAA). Every first appeal shall be referred
to the FAA of the same public authority within which the RTI application was made. The original
decision or rejection notice you receive from the PIO should include contact details for the relevant
Appellate Authority so that you know who you can go to get the decision reviewed. If the notice is
deficient, you may want to check the website of the public authority or contact the PIO directly and
ask for the Appellate Authority's details.
How to file First Appeal

a. Directly by handing documents over in person to the FAA
b. Send the set of appeal documents by speed post or RPAD to the FAA of the relevant public
authority
c. Additionally you can also send the appeal to the APIO in the relevant public authority who then
has a duty to forward it to the relevant Appellate Authority.
d. Online Portal for Central Government public authorities only- http://rtionline.gov.in for filing your
appeal online,
What is the prescribed fee for filing First Appeal

The Central Government has not prescribed any fee for filing an appeal with the Appellate Authority.
Unfortunately, some State Governments, like Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, have prescribed
Rules which impose an appeal fee. Challenges have been filed against such rules, stating that no
appeal can be rejected or stalled on account of non-payment of fee towards an appeal. If your State
Government has prescribed an appeal fee and you are unwilling or unable to pay it, you can either
move the relevant State Information Commission or the State High Court to consider the issue of
levy of fees.
Disposal of First Appeal
The RTI Act does not provide for any procedure to be followed for deciding appeals. However, the
Appellate Authority must offer you an opportunity to be heard before a decision on your appeal is
31

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
reached. In any appeal, it is the PIO who needs to prove to the Appellate Authority that they made
the right decision. Only if they make a defensible case, should you be asked to explain why you think
they are wrong.
The Central Act requires that the internal Appellate Authority (FAA) dispose off your appeal within
30 days or 45 days if an extension is necessary.
II. SECOND APPEAL

The Right to Information Act lays down provision for second appeal in cases when you are unhappy
and dissatisfied with the decision given by the First Appellate Authority. Information Commissions
have been set up at the centre and states for hearing such appeals.
What is the time frame for making Second Appeal:

A second appeal against a decision of an Appellate Authority to the Information Commission must be
made within 90 days from the date on which the decision should have been made or from the date a
decision was actually received. However, the Information Commission has the discretion to allow
appeals after this period has expired if there is sufficient cause for such delay.
Who can make Second Appeal

Any person aggrieved by the order of the PIO can file second appeal. You can also request your
friend or a RTI Activist or any other person to file a complaint on your behalf provided he has a copy
of all the relevant documents such as RTI Application, acknowledgment receipt, PIO reply, first
appeal, order of FAA etc. Format of Authorization Letter enclosed.
Who should the Second Appeal be made to:

The Central Information Commission and State Information Commission have been set up at the
centre and state level respectively to hear complaints and second appeals. You need to send your
appeal to the relevant Information Commission in writing. In matters relating to Central
Government public authorities, you need to send your appeal to the Central Information
Commission.
For matters relating to State Government public authorities you will need to send your appeal to the
concerned State Information Commission. Appeals against Panchayats will be sent to the relevant
State Information Commission.
How to file Second Appeal

a. directly by handing them over in person
b. send them by speed post or RPAD to the respective Information Commission of the state or
Central information Commission.
c. Additionally you can also send the appeal to the APIO in the relevant public authority who then
has a duty to forward it to the relevant Information Commission.
d. Online Portal for second appeals pertaining to central government-related public authorities -
rtionline.gov.in.
What is the prescribed fee for filing Second Appeal
The Central Government has not prescribed any fee for filing a second appeal with the Information
Commission. Unfortunately, some State Governments, like Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, have
prescribed Rules which impose an appeal fee. Legally speaking, no appeal can be rejected or stalled
on account of non-payment of fee towards an appeal. But if your State Government has prescribed
an appeal fee, you can either move the relevant Information Commission or your High Court to
consider the same.
Disposal of Second Appeal
The RTI Act does not provide for any procedure to be followed for deciding appeals. However, the
Information Commissions must offer you an opportunity to be heard before a decision on your
32

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
appeal is reached. In any appeal, it is the PIO who needs to prove to the Appellate Authority that
they made the right decision. Only if they make a defensible case, should you be asked to explain
why you think they are wrong.
Though the Act specifies time limit for providing information in case of first appeal by the Public
Information Officers, no such time limit has been set for second appeal before the Commission. As
per the data available, as on 26 January, 2016, at the Central Information Commission, a total of
27682 appeals are pending. Similar will be the case for various State Information Commissions. This
makes the objectives of the Act defeated. The proposed amendment seeks to put a time limit of
ninety days for disposal of second appeals filed under sub-section (3) of section 19 of the Act.
1. (1) This Act may be called the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2016. (2) It shall come into
force on such date as Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, appoint. 2. In
the Right to Information Act, 2005, in section 19, after sub-section (6), the following sub-section
shall be inserted, namely:— "(6A) The second appeal under sub-section (3) shall be disposed of
within ninety days of the receipt of the appeal or within such extended period not exceeding a total
of one hundred and twenty days from the date of filing thereof, as the case may be, for reasons to
be recorded in writing.
Proceedings Before Information Commissions
Proceedings before the Information Commission are informal unlike court proceedings and you need
not hire a lawyer to plead your case before the Information Commission. Any person can assist you
during the course of hearing and it is not necessary that such person should be a legal practitioner.
Usually, the appellant appears in person and argues his case. He also has the liberty to appear
through his authorized representative or opt out of the course of hearings.
Burden of Proof:
The burden of proof that the denial of a request was justified lies on the person who wants to keep
the information undisclosed, i.e, the PIO or a third party. In practice, this means that you should only
need to interact with the Commission after the person who wants to withhold the information has
first been questioned, because they are the ones who have to show the Information Commission
that they are right. If a hearing is then organised, the PIO or third party arguing for secrecy needs to
be called on to make their case first. You will only need to make a case if the Commission thinks the
PIO or third party has a point worth considering. At that stage, you then need to argue in favour of
disclosure.
Decision:
If an Information Commission decides that your appeal was justified, he may pass an order:
(a) Asking the public authority to take concrete steps towards meeting its duties under the Act, for
example, by providing access to the information you requested, by ordering information be provided
in a different form or by reducing the amount of fees you need to pay;
(b) Ordering the public authority to compensate you for any loss you may have suffered in the
process;
(c) Imposing penalties on the PIO or any other official who failed in their duties under the Act.
(d) If the Information Commission decides that your case is groundless, it will reject your appeal and
give you a notice of its decision to you and the public authority, which should include any right of
appeal.
Appeal To The Courts
The last point of appeal is, of course, the courts. The Right to Information Act bars the courts from
deciding any application, appeal or proceedings made under the Act. However, this bar is not
absolute as the right to information is a fundamental constitutional right which implies that the High
Court (under Article 226) and the Supreme Court (under Article 32) have the power to look into all
matters where such right is infringed. In fact, several applicants, dissatisfied with the decision of the
Information commission, have taken their complaints to the High Courts of their respective state.
Numerous Public Interest Litigations have also been filed before the Supreme Court by RTI Activists
and NGOs for better enforcement of the right to information.
33

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
Complaints
Section 18 (1) of the RTI Act gives an alternate route to approach the Information Commissions
when PIO fails to reply to your application, charges unreasonable fee, etc. Whenever you are
dissatisfied by the response given by PIO or when he has failed to give the response, you can choose
to file a Complaint under Section 18(1) of the RTI Act. This is a particularly useful option if you wish
to immediately seek a penalty against the PIO or seek compensation for yourself. When you
approach the Information Commission directly through this method, you bypass the Appellate
Authority. The Appellate Authority does not have the power to order either of these, but
Information Commissions do. Thus, under Section 18(1) of the Act, a complaint can be filed before
the Information Commission whenever PIO fails to perform its duties.
When can complaints be filed:
You can file a complaint to the Information Commissions if you have any trouble in accessing
information under the RTI Act, for example, if you have been:
• refused access to any information requested under the Act (presumably in cases where the person
believes there has been a misapplication of an exemption or a failure to appreciate the public
interest involved disclosure* unable to submit a request or appeal to a Central or State PIO or
Assistant PIO;
• Not given a response to a request for information within the time limit specified under the Act;
• required to pay an amount of fee which you consider unreasonable or you are unhappy with the
form of access granted;
• You believe that you have been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act.
This clause basically means that the Commissions have the power to inquire into any matter, even if
not specifically mentioned in the Act.
Who to file complaint under:
You can file your complaint before the Central or State Information Commission depending on the
ministry or law the concerned Public Authority falls under. Say, if your RTI application was sent to
Delhi Jal Board, the complaint will have to be made to Delhi Information Commission. On the other
hand, if your RTI application was sent to the Ministry of External Affairs, your application should be
directed to the Central Information Commission.
Who Can File Complaint
Any person aggrieved by the order of the PIO can file a complaint. You can also request another
person to file a complaint on your behalf provided he has a copy of all the relevant documents such
as RTI Application, acknowledgment receipt, PIO reply etc.
Time Limit For Filing Complaint
The RTI Act is silent with respect to the time limit within which a complaint is to be filed before the
Information Commission. Few States have yet not developed the procedural rules which apply to
their State Information Commission. Further, a lot of seats remain vacant in the office of Information
Commission which creates large amount of pending cases.
Disposal Of Complaints
No time frame has been prescribed under the RTI act with regard to disposal of the complaints filed
before it. The Information Commissions' decisions about whether or not information should be
disclosed are binding. The Information Commissions can also impose penalties for non-compliance
with the provisions of the Central Act.
Appeal or complaint?
One of the drawbacks of filing Complaints instead of an appeal is that there is no time frame within
which the complaint is to be decided.
Neither the Central Act nor the Appeals Rules have yet imposed a time limit on how long
Information Commissions should take to make their decisions. RTI activists have repeatedly
complained of the slow process of deciding appeals and complaints by the Information Commission.
Thus, it is entirely up to you to decide whether to file an appeal under Section 19 or whether to file a
Complaint under Section 18 of the Act.
34

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
However, practically speaking, unless the information is denied on account of the above mentioned
reasons, the Information Commissions usually do not entertain complaints at the first instance and
remand the case back to the FAA and hear second appeals thereafter.
Time Lines
For PIO to reply to application 30 days from date of receipt of application
For PIO to transfer to another PA under Sec 6(3) 5 days from date of receipt of application
For PIO to issue notice to 3rd Party 5 days from date of receipt of application
For 3rd Party to make a representation to PIO 10 days from receipt of notice from PIO
For PIO to reply to application if 3rdParty involved 40 days from date of receipt of application
For applicant to make First Appeal 30 days from date of receipt of PIO's reply
or from date when reply was to be received
For First Appellate Authority to pass an order 30 days from receipt of First Appeal OR
Maximum 45 days, if reasons for delay are
given in writing
For applicant to make Second Appeal before CIC/SIC 90 days from receipt of First Appeal orders
or from the date when orders were to be
received
For CIC/SIC to decide Second Appeal No time limit specified
35

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
4. Judgements of Supreme Court Section wise
Section 2(e) – Competent Public Authority.

Office of Chief Justice of India – A Competent Authority.
Expression "public authority" as used in the Act is of wide amplitude and includes an authority
created by or under the Constitution of India, which description holds good for Chief Justice of India
who is also a Competent authority for the purposes of RTI Act. (Secretary General, Supreme Court of
IndiaVs.Subhash Chandra Agarwal. High Court of Delhi, LPA No. 501/2009).
Section 2(f) - Information

Draft Judgment and personal notes of Judges, not to be an information under RTI.
Notes taken by the Judges while hearing a case cannot be treated as final views expressed by them
on the case. They are meant only for the use of the Judges and cannot be held to be a part of a
record "held" by the public authority.(Secretary General, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash
Chandra Agarwal. High Court of Delhi, LPA No. 501/200).
Section 4
Public authority is having an obligation to provide such information which is recorded and stored,
but not the thinking process.
A citizen has a right to receive "information", which is in any form, including records, documents, e-
mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers,
samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information in relation to any private
body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force.
Information does not mean every information, but it is only such information, which is recorded and
stored and circulated by the public authority. A citizen has a right to receive such information, which
is held by or under the control of any public authority and the public authorities have an obligation
to provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to the affected persons.
Khanapuram GandaiaS/o Late Balaiah Vs.The Administrative Officer, Ranga Reddy District Courts
Cum Assistant State Public Information Officer Under the Right to the Information Act 2005, The
Registrar General Cum Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act 2005, High Court of
A.P., The A.P. State Information Commission rep. by its Registrar and M. Seetharama Murthy S/o
Chittenna, District Judge and Presently Registrar General, High Court of A.P.( Writ Petition No. 28810
of 2008).
SECTION 6: REQUEST FOR OBTAINING INFORMATION.

1. No request to be entertained asking for reason of opinions in Judicial decisions.
An applicant can get any information which is already in existence and accessible to public authority
under law--But cannot ask any information as to why such opinion, advice etc. have been passed
especially in matters pertaining to judicial decisions--Answers to those could not have been with the
public authority nor could he had access to the said information--Remedy for a party aggrieved there
by lies in a challenge by way of appeal, revision or any other legally permissible mode--High Court
rightly dismissed writ petition. In the said petition, the direction was sought by the Petitioner to the
Respondent No. 1 to provide information as asked by him vide his application dated 15.11.2006 from
the Respondent No. 4 - a Judicial Officer as for what reasons, the Respondent No. 4 had decided his
Miscellaneous Appeal dishonestly.(Khanapuram Gandaiah Vs. Administrative Officer and Ors A.I.R
2010 SC 615).
2. Under Section 6, information can only be supplied or might be denied.

Looking to the provisions of the Act and combined effect of Section 6,19(2),3 & 4 Right to
information Act,2005, at the most information may be supplied or might be denied. Further order
like removal of encroachment etc cannot be passed by the Chief Information Commissioner while
39

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
hearing 2nd appeal. Before passing any order against any person, bare minimum requirement ought
to be kept in mind that principle of natural justice ought to be followed. (Nanabhai Patel Vs. chief
Information Commissioner & Ors, Spl Civil Appln. No. 16770 of 2007, High Court of Gujarat).
SECTION 7: DISPOSAL OF REQUEST.

REASONS TO BE RECORDED WHILE DISPOSING A REQUEST
The Commission or the public authority, as the case may be, is expected to formulate an opinion
that must specifically record the finding as to the application is disposed and also if there is failure to
receive an application for information or failure to furnish the information within the stipulated time
specified in Section 7(1), it should also record the opinion if such default was persistent and without
reasonable cause.[Manohar S/o Manikrao Anchule Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr SLP(C) No.
7529of 2009].
Section 8 on personal information.

Exemption from disclosure of personal information and as such Public authority is not legally
obliged to give or provide information even if it is held, or under its control, if that information falls
under Section 8(1)(j). (Thalappalam Ser. Coop. Bank Ltd. and Ors. Vs. State of Kerala and Ors.(1999) 3
SCC 396).
Examining body, not an exception to section 8.

Examining body cannot be in a fiduciary relationship either with reference to examinee who
participated in examination and whose answer-books were evaluated by examining body - In
furnishing copy of an answer-book, there is no question of breach of confidentiality, privacy, secrecy
or trust - Examining body is 'principal' and examiner is an agent entrusted with work of evaluation of
answer-books - Examining body does not hold evaluated answer-books in a fiduciary relationship -
Therefore, exemption under Section 8(1)(e)of Act is not available to examining bodies with
reference to evaluated answer-books - Therefore, examining bodies would have to permit inspection
sought by examinees. (Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr.Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and
Ors.2011 (9) SC 212).
Information not to be disclosed if it endangers physical safety or human life.

The ancillary question that arises is as to the consequences that the interviewers or the members of
the interview board would be exposed to in the event their names and addresses or individual marks
given by them are directed to be disclosed. First, the members of the Board are likely to be exposed
to danger to their lives or physical safety. Secondly, it will hamper effective performance and
discharge of their duties as examiners. This is the information available with the examining body in
confidence with the interviewers. Declaration of collective marks to the candidate is one thing and
that, in fact, has been permitted by the authorities as well as the High Court. There is no error of
jurisdiction or reasoning in this regard. But direction to furnish the names and addresses of the
interviewers would certainly be opposed to the very spirit of Section 8(1)(g) of the Act. [Bihar Public
Service Commission Vs. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi and Anr.(2012) 13 SCC 61]
SECTION 9: GROUNDS FOR REJECTION IN CERTAIN CASES.

1. Universities and examination boards not covered under Section 9.
The examining bodies (Universities, Examination Boards, CBSC etc.) are neither security nor
intelligence organizations and therefore the exemption will not apply. The disclosure of information
with reference to answer-books does not also involve infringement of any copyright and therefore
Section 9 will not apply. Resultantly, unless the examining bodies are able to demonstrate that the
evaluated answer-books fall under any of the categories of exempted 'information' enumerated in
Clauses (a) to (j) of Sub-section (1) Section 8, they will be bound to provide access to the information
and any applicant can either inspect the document/record, take notes, extracts or obtain certified
40

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
copies thereof.(Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr.Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Ors
(2011) 8 SCC 497).
SECTION 19: APPEALS

Judicial Review in RTI Act.
Under the scheme of the Act of 2005, it is clear that the orders of the commissions are subject to
judicial review before the High Court and then before the Supreme Court of India. In terms of Article
141 of the constitution, the judgements of the Supreme court are law of the land and are binding on
all courts and tribunals. Thus, it is abundantly clear that the Information Commission is bound by the
law of precendence, i.e, judgements of the High Court and the Supreme Court of India. In order to
maintain judicial discipline and consistency in the functioning of the Commission, we direct that
Commission shall give appropriate attention to the doctrine of precedence and shall not overlook
the judgements of the courts dealing with the subject and principles applicable, in a given case.
[Namit Sharma Vs. Union of IndiaWP(Civil)no. 210 of 2012 SCC].
41

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
5. The obligation of the Public Authorities to provide information. June 2011

Section 4, Clauses 1 to 4.
1. General
The citizens' right to know the facts, the true facts, about the administration of the country is thus
one of the pillars of a democratic State. And that is why the demand for openness in the
Government is increasingly growing in different parts of the world.- S.P. Gupta v. Union of India,
Under section 4 of the Act, obligations have been cast upon every public authority to maintain all its
records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to
information under this Act and publish particulars of its organisation, etc., within one hundred and
twenty days from the enactment of this Act and then at regular intervals.
The effect of the provisions and scheme of the Right to Information Act is to divide 'information' into
the three categories. They are:
(i) Information which promotes transparency and accountability in the working of every public
authority, disclosure of which may help in containing or discouraging corruption (enumerated in
clauses (b) and (c) of section 4(1) of Act).
(ii) Other information held by public authority (that is all information other than those falling under
clauses (b) and (c) of section 4(1) of Act).
(iii) Information which is not held by or under the control of any public authority and which cannot
be accessed by a public authority under any law for the time being in force.
Section 3 of Act gives every citizen, the right to 'information' held by or under the control of a public
authority, which falls either under the first or second category.
In regard to the information falling under the first category, there is also a special responsibility upon
public authorities to suo moto publish and disseminate such information so that these will be easily
and readily accessible to the public without any need to access them by having recourse to section 6
of Act.
There is no such obligation to publish and disseminate the other information which falls under the
second category.
The information falling under the first category, enumerated in sections 4(1) (b) & (c) of Right to
Information Act are extracted below:
"4. Obligations of public authorities. -(1) Every public authority shall-
(a) xxxxxx
(b) publish within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this Act, -
(i) the particulars of its organisation, functions and duties;
(ii) the powers and duties of its officers and employees;
(iii) the procedure followed in the decision-making process, including channels of supervision and
accountability;
(iv) the norms set by it for the discharge of its functions;
(v) the rules, regulations, instructions, manuals and records, held by it or under its control or used by
its employees for discharging its functions;
(vi) a statement of the categories of documents that are held by it or under its control;
(vii) the particulars of any arrangement that exists for consultation with, or representation by, the
members of the public in relation to the formulation of its policy or implementation thereof;
(viii) a statement of the boards, councils, committees and other bodies consisting of two or more
persons constituted as its part or for the purpose of its advice, and as to whether meetings of those
boards, councils, committee and other bodies are open to the public, or the minutes of such
meetings are accessible for public;
42

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
(ix) a directory of its officers and employees;

(x) the monthly remuneration received by each of its officers and employees, including the system of
compensation as provided in its regulations;
(xi) the budget allocated to each of its agency, indicating the particulars of all plans, proposed
expenditures and reports on disbursements made;
(xii) the manner of execution of subsidy programmes, including the amounts allocated and the
details of beneficiaries of such programmes;
(xiii) particulars of recipients f concessions, permits or authorisations granted by it;
(xiv) details in respect of the information, available to or held bit, reduced in an electronic form;
(xv) the particulars of facilities available to citizens for obtaining information, including the working
hours of a library or reading room, if maintained for public use;
(xvi) the names, designations and other particulars of the Public Information Officers;
(xvii) such other information as may be prescribed; and thereafter update these publications every
year;
(c) publish all relevant facts while formulating important policies or announcing the decisions which
affect public;
Sub-sections (2), (3) and (4) of section 4 of the Act relate to dissemination:
Authorities have to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through
various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the
use of this Act to obtain information.
Dissemination means making known or communication of information to the public through notice
boards, newspapers, public announcements, media broadcasts, the internet or any other means,
including inspection of offices of any public authority.
The material should be available in electronic format with the Central Public Information Officer or
State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, free or at a minimum cost.
The Act seeks to bring about a balance between two conflicting interests .One is to bring about
transparency and accountability by providing access to information under the control of public
authorities. The other is to ensure that the revelation of information, in actual practice, does not
conflict with other public interests which include efficient operation of the governments, optimum
use of limited fiscal resources and preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information. Central
Board of Secondary Education v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011)
2. Maintenance of Record
As per Clause 1(a) of section 4 of the Act, every public authority shall maintain all its records
Duly catalogued and indexed,
All possible records are computerised and
Connected through a network all over the country on different systems.
Case: In the case of Paramveer Singh vs. Panjab University (CIC/OK/A/2006/00016, dated 15/6/06),
the applicant had applied for information regarding the merit list for selection of candidates to a
particular post in the university.
However, no proper information was supplied to him due to the negligence of the university’s PIO in
identifying and collecting the proper information. As a result, the applicant was given misleading
information.
Judgment: The Commission held that every public authority, particularly after the implementation of
the Right to Information Act, must take all measures in pursuance of Section 4(1)(a), to implement
efficient record management systems in their offices so that the requests for information can be
dealt with promptly and accurately.
In the above case, the Commission further held, that the university should streamline its university
record management system in such a manner that information can be provided to the citizens
without any delay.
43

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
3. Publication of Particulars of Organisation Etc.

Under section 4 of the Right to Information Act, duty has been imposed upon every public authority
to publish within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this Act 17 items and
thereafter update these publications every year.
The information which can be called 'public domain information' required to be published under
section 4 of the Right to Information Act, particularly that concerning the organisation, powers and
duties of officers, etc., given in sub-clauses (i) to (xvi) of sub-section 1(b) of section 4 of the Act must
be computerised and connected through a network throughout the country by every public
authority.
Several Ministries of Government of India have published 'proactive disclosure manual' on their
websites.
To-day a person by visiting the website of the Supreme Court can get information regarding pending
cases. Even the cause lists of Supreme Court, High Courts and other Courts are available on internet
This had helped in achieving transparency and accountability.
So every public authority must devise means to provide all the "public domain proactive"
information to the public if not provided so far immediately as required under section 4 of the Act.
Under section 4(1) of the Right to Information Act, the obligations of public authorities are clearly
mentioned, which require inter alia that 'a directory of its officers and employees; and the monthly
remuneration received by each of its officers and employees, including the system of compensation
as, provided in regulations, under section 4(1)(ix) & (x), of the Right to Information Act should be
published and/or put on website.- S.J.S. Oberoi v. Punjab National Bank, Zonal Office, Rudraprauag,
F. No. CIC/MA/ A/2006/ 00235.
As a public authority, the bank is required to make pro-active disclosure of all the relevant
information as per provisions under section 4(1) of the Right to Information Act, unless the same is
exempt under the provisions of section 8(1) of the Act. In fact, an information regime should be
created so that citizens would have easy access to information without making any formal request
for it.- Appeal No. 23/IC(A)/2006 as referred with approval in Shri Kishur J. Aggarwal v. UCO Bank,
Appeal No. 24/IC(A)/2006.
Record management system ought to be improved such that information which are to be disclosed
to public could be easily provided, after delineating the information that are confidential or in the
nature of trade secret. On the pretext of confidentiality of information, a company should not
deprive the citizens of their right to access information that could be utilised for societal benefits.-
Kishur J. Aggarwal v. Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited, Appeal No. 27/
IC(A)/2006.
There is no provision in the Right to Information Act to collect and recover from the information
seekers the imputed cost, i.e., the average salary and wages of the staff deployed for compiling and
providing the information, as they are on the pay-roll of the public authority which is under
obligation to provide information. And, most importantly, there are no norms and guidelines
prescribed by the Government for recovery of attributable expenditure on account of salaries and
wages of the concerned staff who are put on the job of providing information. The bank should not
have done what it has done in asking for payments towards the costs of compilation of information.
This is seemingly done merely to discourage the information seeker, which is not consistent with the
letter and spirit of the Right to Information Act. The bank was, accordingly, directed to make suo
motu disclosure of information without unduly burdening the staff and sacrificing its normal
activities or disproportionately diverting its resources, to ensure transparency in its functioning. It
should not arbitrarily charge for the costs that is not prescribed by the Government- Kishur J.
Aggarwal v. Corporation Bank, Appeal No. 23/IC(A)/2006.
The outcome of the examination process should be put in public domain so that the affected
persons can have access to it. Mark sheets and model answers to the set questions, if prepared,
44

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
should be disclosed after the entire process is complete.- Parmod Kumar Gupta v. Canara Bank, F.
No. CIC/MA/ A/2006/00308
Section 4(1)(b)(xiii) of the Right to Information Act mandates the public authority to disclose
proactively the particulars of the recipients of concessions etc.
Thus when the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (HPCL), a public authority, is itself required by
law to publish the details of all such recipients, to treat the list of recipients, in this case, consumers
of subsidised cooking gas, a commercial confidence goes totally counter to the letter and spirit of
the Right to Information Act. Transparency demand that such information is routinely published in
the public domain so that no one needs to approach CPIO for seeking the information. Once such
information is placed in the public domain, the diversion of scarce cooking gas meant for domestic
consumers and provided at a great cost to the nation will become difficult as the public would know
about both classes of beneficiaries in advance and highlight any such diversion noticed by them.
Keeping this information secret and confidential is not at all in the public interest nor in tune with
the provisions of the Right to Information Act and the provisions of section 8(1)(d) of the Act cannot
be invoked to exempt the disclosure of the list of consumers, both domestic and commercial- Kushi
Ram v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Lid., CIC/MA/ A/2009/000375-SM, decided on 4-1-2011.
The authorities discharging judicial functions are not covered under section 4 of the Right to
Information Act and, therefore, they are not obliged to provide any information to the applicant
under the provisions of the Right to Information Act in relation to the decisions taken by them.
The reason for excluding the authorities concerned with giving judicial decisions is quite apparent.
Judicial authorities are supposed to support their judicial decisions by giving reasons for which they
come to a particular conclusion. They are supposed to pass reasoned orders to that the concerned
party can know the reason for which he failed or succeeded and the appellate authority can know
the reasons for which a particular conclusion was arrived at.
Coming to the case on hand, the petitioner has filed an application under section 6 of the Right to
Information Act, seeking information from respondent No. 1. In the said application, the petitioner
has asked as to why certain documents and arguments were not considered by the learned judge
while considering the C.M.A.
The application was nothing but a memo of appeal, which could have been filed before the appellate
court, but, instead of approaching the appellate court, the petitioner, for the reasons best known to
him, had filed an application under the Right to Information Act for knowing as to why the learned
judge had come to a particular conclusion, either by perusing or ignoring certain documents placed
on record of the said case.
It has been held that there is no merit in the petition which is rejected. - Khanapuram Gandaiah v.
Administrative Officer, Ranga Reddy District Courts, AIR 2009 AP 174 (177-78) (DB): 2009 (4) Andh
LD 113. Also refer to AIR 2010 SC 615.
4. To Take Steps to Provide Suo Motu Information to Public on Regular Intervals

The duty has been cast upon the public authorities to make constant endeavour to take all steps to
provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of
communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to
obtain information. Every information shall be disseminated widely and in such form and manner
which is easily accessible to the public. It should be borne in mind that all materials shall be
disseminated taking into consideration:
(a) the cost effectiveness,
(b) local language; and
(c) the most effective method of communication in that local area and the information should be
easily accessible, to the extent possible in electronic format with the Central Public Information
Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, available free or at such cost of the
medium or the print cost price as may be prescribed.
45

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
"Dissemination" shall mean making known or communicated the information to the public through,-
(a) notice boards,
(b) newspapers,
(c) public announcements,
(d) media broadcasts,
(e) the internet, or
(f) any other means, including inspection of offices of any public authority.
The proviso to section 8(1) of the Act provides that the information, which cannot be denied to the
Parliament or a State Legislature, shall not be denied to any person. Moreover, section 8(2) and 8(3)
of the Act provide as under-
"(2) Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923) nor any of the
exemptions permissible in accordance with sub-section (1), a public authority may allow access to
information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests.
(3) Subject to the provisions of Clauses (a), (c) and (i) of sub-section (1), any information relating to
any occurrence, event or matter which has taken place, occurred or happened twenty years before
the date on which any request is made under section 6 shall be provided to any person making a
request under that section."
It is now recognised that while a public servant may be subject to a duty of confidentiality, this duty
does not extend to remaining silent regarding corruption of other public servants. Society is entitled
to know and public interest is better served if corruption or mal-administration is exposed.
5. Conclusion
Right to Information Act, 2005 recognizes the right of the citizen to secure access to information
under the control of public authority, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the
working of every public authority.
Section 3 of the Act confers right to information to all citizens and a corresponding obligation under
section 4 on every public authority to maintain the records so that the information sought for can be
provided.
46

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
6. What information are exempted from disclosure? Refer to cases. June 2011

Section 8. Exemption from disclosure of information.
Synopsis
1. General
2. Exemption from Disclosure of Information under the Act
(a) Information Contained in the Noting Portions of the Files
(b) Information for the Supply of which there are Specific Rules
(c) Information Including Commercial Confidence, Trade Secret, Intellectual Property Etc. [Section
8(1)(d) of the Act]
(d) Information Available to a Person in his Fiduciary Relationship [Section 8(1)(e) of the Act]
(e) Information, the Disclosure of which would Endanger the Life or Personal Safety of any Person
etc. or which would Impede the Process of Investigation or Apprehension or Prosecution of
Offenders [Section 8(1) (g) and section 8(1)(h) of the Act]
(f) Information which Relate to Personal Information the Disclosure of which has No Relationship to
any Public Activity or Interest or which would Cause Invasion of the Privacy of an Individual [Section
8(1)(j) of the Act]
3. Information in respect of Individual Officers Public Duty
4. Right to Information Act vis-a-vis Official Secret Act
5. Information Relating to any Occurrence, Event or Matter which has Taken Place, Occurred or
Happened Twenty Years from the Date of Application to be Supplied
6. Right to Information is a Basic and Celebrated Fundamental/basic Right
1. General
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India declares that all citizens shall have the right of freedom of
speech and expression, which right include right to receive information.
Clause (2) of Article 19, at the same time, provides restrictions and the State is free to make laws in
future imposing such restrictions.
The grounds aforesaid are conceived in the interest of ensuring and maintaining conditions in which
the said right can meaningfully and peacefully be exercised by the citizens of this country.- Secretary,
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India v. Cricket Association of West
Bengal,'
The right to information guaranteed to the citizens of India under section 3 of the Right to
Information Act is subject to the provisions of this Act. Section 8 of the Right to Information Act set
out clearly the information which is exempted from disclosure under the Act.
2. Exemption from Disclosure of Information under the Act

Section 8 of the Act lays down such exceptions where information shall not be supplied to the
citizens by laying down categorically that notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall
be no obligation to give any citizen,-
(a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India,
the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or
lead to incitement of an offence;
(b) information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal
or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court;
(c) information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or the State
Legislature;
47

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
(d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the
disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent
authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
(e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is
satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;
(f) information received in confidence from foreign Government;
(g) information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or
identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security
purposes;
(h) information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of
offenders;
(i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of Ministers, secretaries and other
officers: provided that the decisions of Council of Ministers, the reasons thereof, and the material on
the basis of which the decisions were taken shall be made public after the decision has been taken,
and the matter is complete, or over;
j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to
any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the
individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the
appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the
disclosure of such information.
It is necessary to clear some misconceptions about the Right to Information Act. The Act provides
access to all information that is available and existing.
Where the information sought is not a part of the record of a public authority, and where such
information is not required to be maintained under any law or the rules or regulations of the public
authority, the Act does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to collect or collate such
non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant.
It is also not required to provide' advice' or 'opinion' to an applicant.
Under section 8 of the RTI Act there are ten categories of information which are exempted from
disclosure:
1) Absolute Exemptions :
Six categories described in clauses (a), (b), (c), (f), (g) and (h) carry absolute exemption.
2) Conditional Exemptions:
Three categories described in clauses (d), (e) and (j) carry conditional exemption,
3) Time limited Exemptions:
One categories described in clause (i) relates to exemption for a specific period with an
obligation to make the said information public after such period.
Section 8(1)(a):
It has been the convention to allow a lot of leeway to the Government agencies in matters of claim
of national security and strategic interests a stated in exemption under section 8(1)(a) of the Right to
Information Act.
At the same time, it is also expected that the public authorities, who make these claims, do so after
carefully studying the documents, through proper application of mind and then coming to an
irrefutable conclusion about the matter being sensitive from the point of view of country' security
interests.
Purulia Arms Drop case

Communication from the Special Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs to the Government of West
Bengal regarding entrusting the Purulia Arms Drop Case to the CBI was through an open fax-
48

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
message. The information which is handled through open channels is potentially disclosable, and the
public authorities ought to know this fact.
The respondents' plea for non-disclosure of this information from the Ministry of Home Affairs to
the State Government, on grounds of exemption under section 8(1)(a) must, therefore, fail. The PIO
is directed to supply to the appellant a copy of the fax-message of the Special Secretary, MHA to the
Government of West Bengal about entrusting the Purulia Arms Drop case to the CBI, within 2 weeks
from the date of the receipt of this order.
(a) Information Contained in the Noting Portions of the Files

File notings are that part of a file in which an officer records his observations and impressions meant
for his immediate superior officers.
It is necessary to differentiate between files classified as confidential and those not so classified.
In case of an unclassified file the employee of a public authority records his notes with full
knowledge that these could be accessed at some stage by a larger number of entities, and may even
find it way into the public domain under certain given circumstances.
Information concerning 'noting portions' of the files shall have to be supplied to the citizens under
the Act.
In the case of a file classified as confidential/ secret or top secret, the fiduciary relationship between
officers is underpinned by a certain trust as well as a certain confidence that its contents shall not be
accessed by anyone not authorised to access them.
Rules even provide punishment for possession of documents of classified files by unauthorised
entities. The trust that characterises file notings in the confidential files is thus qualitatively different.
The information contained in the notings of such classified files is given by the officer, who is also
the third party, in "confidence" as described under section 11(1) of the Right to Information Act.
Section 11(1) and section 8(1)(e), unerringly point to a conclusion that notings of a "confidential" file
should be disclosed only after giving opportunity to the third party, viz., the officer / officers writing
those notes, to be heard.- . Dr. RK. Garg v. Ministry of Home Affairs.
Therefore it has been held by the Central Information Commission that the file-notings in the case of
files classified as confidential attract the exemption of section 8(1)(j) of the Act; and if in a given case
it is decided to disclose notings of a confidential file, it has to be done only in terms of section 11(1)
of the Right to Information Act.- A.P. Sharma v Ministry of Defence
(b) Information for the Supply of which there are Specific Rules
Guidelines and rules pertaining to scrutiny of writ petition etc., are available in Karnataka High Court
Act and Rules made thereunder. The said Act and Rules are available in the market. Under the Rules,
any person, who is a party or not a party to the proceedings, can obtain the orders of the High Court
as per the procedure prescribed in the Rules.
It is not open for the respondent to ask for copies of the same from the petitioner.
As it is open for the respondent to obtain certified copies of the order sheet in pending as well as the
disposed of matters, the State Chief Information Commissioner is not justified in directing the
petitioner to furnish copies of the same free of costs.
If the order of the State Chief Information Commissioner is to be implemented, then, it will lead to
illegal demands.
The State Information Commissioner should have adverted to the High Court Rules before
proceeding further. Since the impugned order is illegal and arbitrary, the same is liable to be
quashed and accordingly the order dated 14-5-2008 passed by the Karnataka Information
Commission has been quashed.- State Public Information Officer & Deputy Registrar, Karnataka v. N.
Anbarasm.
(c) Information Including Commercial Confidence, Trade Secret, Intellectual Property Etc. [Section
8(1)(d) of the Act]
49

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
There is no obligation to give information of commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual

property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the
competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such
information.
The Public Information Officer will have to consider the following before giving information:
(i) the objections raised by the third party by claiming confidentiality in respect of the information
sought for;
(ii) whether the information is being sought by the applicant in larger public interest or to wreak
vendetta against the third party and in deciding that, the profile of the person seeking information
and his credentials will have to be looked into and if the profile of the person seeking information, in
the light of other attending circumstances, leads to the construction that under the pretext of
serving public interest, such person is aiming to settle personal score against the third party, it
cannot be said that public interest warrants disclosure of the information solicited; and
(iii) the Public Information Officer, while dealing with the information relating to or supplied by the
third party, has to constantly bear in mind that the Act does not become a tool in the hands of a
busy body to settle a personal score- Reliance Industries Limited v. Gujarat State Information
Commission.
(d) Information Available to a person in his Fiduciary Relationship [ Section 8(1)(e)]

CJI , Not a Fudiciary.
CJI cannot be a fiduciary vis-a-vis Judges of the Supreme Court . Judges of the Supreme Court hold
independent office, and there is no hierarchy, in their judicial functions, which places them at a
different plane than the CJI.
Declarations are not furnished to the CJI in a private relationship or as a trust but in discharge of the
constitutional obligation to maintain higher standards and probity of judicial life and are in the larger
public interest .
It cannot be held that the asset information shared with the CJI, by the Judges of the Supreme Court,
are held by him in the capacity of fiduciary, which if directed to be revealed, would result in breach
of such duty -.Section 8(e) does not cover asset declarations made by Judges of the Supreme Court
and held by the CJI - CJI does not hold such declarations in a fiduciary capacity or relationship.[
Secretary General, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal. High Court of Delhi, LPA
No. 501/2009].
(e) Section 8(1)g: Information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or personal safety
of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence.
Information not to be disclosed if it endangers physical safety or human life.
The question that arises is as to the consequences that the interviewers or the members of the
interview board would be exposed to in the event their names and addresses or individual marks
given by them are directed to be disclosed.
First, the members of the Board are likely to be exposed to danger to their lives or physical safety.
Secondly, it will hamper effective performance and discharge of their duties as examiners.
This is the information available with the examining body in confidence with the interviewers.
Declaration of collective marks to the candidate is one thing and that, in fact, has been permitted by
the authorities as well as the High Court.
There is no error of jurisdiction or reasoning in this regard. But direction to furnish the names and
addresses of the interviewers would certainly be opposed to the very spirit of Section 8(1)(g) of the
Act. [Bihar Public Service Commission Vs. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi and Anr.(2012) 13 SCC 61]
(f) Section 8(1)h: Information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension
or prosecution of offenders.
No disclosure in case of pending trial [Sec. 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act]
50

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
Case: In the case of Ashok Agarwal, Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Department of Revenue
(Appeal No.01/IC (A)/2006, dated 16/02/2006), the applicant asked for certified copies of files
relating to the prosecution proceedings against him, under Section 6 of the RTI Act, 2005.
Judgment: The Commission said that since the matter is sub-judice (in trial before a court of law),
there is a due process of law under which the appellant may obtain the documents to defend
himself in his case before the trial court.
The Commission rejected his appeal to obtain the documents from the public authority, and held
that since the matter is under investigation, the exemption under Section 8(1)(h) would apply
(g) Information Which Relates to Personal Information the disclosure of Which has no Relationship
to any Public Activity or interest or Which Would Cause Invasion of the Privacy of an Individual
(Section 8(1)(j) of the Act)
In order to qualify for the exemption contained in section 8(1)(g) of the Right to Information Act, the
information sought must satisfy the following criteria:
(a) The information sought must be personal in nature- The adjective 'personal' may be ascribed to
an attribute which applies to an individual and not to an institution, organisation or a corporate-
(b) Various public authorities while performing their functions routinely ask for 'personal
information' from citizens, and this is clearly a public activity. Public activities include situations
wherein a person gives information about himself to a public authority as an employee, or asks for
permission, licence or authorisation etc.
(c) The disclosure of the information would lead to unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the
individual. The State has no right to invade the privacy of an individual. Where the State routinely
obtains information from citizens, this information is in relationship to a public activity, and will not
be an intrusion on privacy.
Personal information such as marital status, name of spouse, name of the passport-holder figuring
as parent/ guardian in any minor's passport, residential address, details of cases pending against
passport holder are exempted from disclosure under section 8 of the Right to Information Act.-
Union of India through Ministry of External Affairs v. Rajesh Bhatia.
The passport number and the date of issue and expiry of passport can be provided under the Right
to Information Act. However, the birth certificate of the passport holder as well as documents of his
education and documents submitted by him as proof of residential address are personal information
which cannot be supplied under section 8 of the Right to Information Act.- Union of India V Anitha
Singh.
3. Information in respect of Individual Officers Public Duty

The information sought is not personal information but it pertains to individual CBI officers in
respect of their pubic duty. Therefore the CBI has been directed to supply such information. The
reluctance of the CBI to supply the requisite information is palpable. The exemption claimed under
section 8 is unjustified and has no bearing on the information required.
4. Right to Information Act vis-a-vis Official Secrets Act, Section 8(2)

Section 8(2) of the Right to Information Act lays down as under:-
"Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923) nor any of the exemptions
permissible in accordance with sub-section (1), a public authority may allow access to information, if
public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests."
The Official Secrets Act, 1923, imposes restrictions on the right to information in India, but, in view
of section 8(2) of the Right to Information Act, a public authority has the right to allow access to
information even in respect of the activities covered by the Official Secrets Act; provided public
authority is of the opinion that public interest in disclosure of the said information outweighs the
harm to the protected interests. Moreover section 23 of the Right to Information Act lays down that
51

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
the provision of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the Official Secrets
Act, 1923 or any other law for the time being in force.
5. Information Relating to any Occurrence, Event or Matter which has Taken Place, Occurred or
Happened Twenty Years from the Date of Application to be Supplied – Section 8(3)
According to sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Right to Information Act, any information relating to
any occurrence, event or matter which has taken place, occurred or happened twenty years before
the date on which any request is made under section 6 shall be provided to any person making a
request under that section subject, of course, to the provisions of Clauses (a), (c) and (i) of sub-
section (1) of section 8 of the Act.
It is further provided that where any question arises as to the date from which the said period of
twenty years has to be computed, the decision of the Central Government shall be final.
The Right to Information Act which obliges the public authority to retain information relating to any
occurrence, event or matter which has taken place, occurred or happened twenty years before the
date on which any request is made under section 6 thereof shall be provided to a person, should not
be construed in a manner so as to oblige the public authorities to retain the answer scripts for any
days in excess of the period mentioned in the relevant regulations for preservation thereof, because
preserving answer scripts of lakhs of examinees who take such public examinations conducted by
the University, the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education and the Central Board of Secondary
Education each year for twenty years would work out immense hardship and palpable injustice to
them and a meek and mute submission to the plainness of the language has to be avoided to
prevent unworkable and undesirable results.- University of Calcutta v. Pritam Rooj
What section 8(3) stipulates is that, the exemption under section 8(1) cannot be applied if the
information sought related to a period prior to 20 years except those covered in section Clauses (a),
(c) and (i) of sub-section 8(1).
In other words, even if the information sought is exempt in terms of other sub-classes of sub-section
(1) of section 8, and if the same relates to a period 20 years prior to the date of application, then the
same shall be provided. In the present case, since part of the information sought, even though
related to a period prior to 20 years, relates to notifications, DGS&D is bound to furnish the same, if
the same is available with it.- S.R. Pershad v. Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals
Conclusion
The Act seeks to bring about a balance between two conflicting interests, as harmony between them
is essential for preserving democracy. One is to bring about transparency and accountability by
providing access to information under the control of public authorities. The other is to ensure that
the revelation of information, in actual practice, does not conflict with other public interests which
include efficient operation of the governments, optimum use of limited fiscal resources and
preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information. The preamble to the Act specifically states
that the object of the Act is to harmonise these two conflicting interests. While sections 3 and 4 of
the Right to Information Act seek to achieve the first objective, sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Act
seek to achieve the second objective.
52

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
7. Define ‘Information’ and ‘Right to Information’. Jan 2012
Chapter 1, Preliminary
Section 2. Definitions.
Information
f) "information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails,
opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples,
models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which
can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force;
1. All information held by Public Authorities is owned by citizens, who are sovereign.
The Legislature's intent is to make available to the general public such information which had been
obtained by the public authorities from private bodies. Had it been the case where only information
related to public authorities was to be provided, the Legislature would not have included the word
"private body".
The people of this country have a right to know every public act, everything that is done in a public
way, by their functionaries. The right to know, which is derived from the concept of freedom of
speech, though not absolute, is a factor which should make one wary, when secrecy is claimed for
transactions which can, at any rate, have no repercussion on public security. (Reserve Bank Of India
and Ors V Jayantilal N. Misty and Ors A.I.R 1982 SC149).
2. Draft Judgment and personal notes of Judges, not to be an information

Notes taken by the Judges while hearing a case cannot be treated as final views expressed by them
on the case. They are meant only for the use of the Judges and cannot be held to be a part of a
record "held" by the public authority.(Secretary General, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash
Chandra Agarwal. High Court of Delhi, LPA No. 501/200).
3. Information regarding personal assets of Judges of High Courts

Judges have to declare their assets is a requirement that is not being introduced for the first time as
far as subordinate Judges are concerned. They have for long been required to do that year after year
in terms of the Rules governing their conditions of service.
If declaration of assets by a subordinate judicial officer is seen as essential to enforce accountability
at that level, then the need for such declaration by Judges of the constitutional courts is even
greater.
The introduction of the stipulation of declaring personal assets, is to be seen as an essential
ingredient of contemporary accepted behaviour and established convention. So, Asset declaration
by Judges - In absence of any specific exclusion, asset declarations by the Judges held by the CJI or
the CJs of the High Courts as the case may be, are "information" under Section 2(f).(Secretary
General, Supreme Court of IndiaVs.Subhash Chandra Agarwal, High Court of Delhi, LPA No.
501/2009).
4. Information sought should be clearly specified

Case: In the case of S.K. Ranga vs. Container Corporation of India Ltd. (Appeal
No.CIC/OK/A/2006/00260, dated 2/1/2007), the applicant had asked for inspection of all Dak
registers of the Corporation from 1/1/2003 onwards, pertaining to various departments, i.e., HRD,
Vigilance, MD’s office, as well as the General Dak Register.
Judgment: The CIC noted that the information asked by the appellant from the public authority was
vague.
The Commission held that the applicant under the RTI Act should clearly specify the information
sought in terms of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.
The appellant was directed to specify the information he seeks to inspect from the records
53

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
5. Information can be supplied only in the form available

Case: In the case of Sarabjit Roy vs. Delhi Development Authority (10/01/2005-CIC, dated
25/2/2006), the applicant had sought certain information in a particular form, from the PIO of a
public authority.
Judgment: The Commission held that if the information is not available in the particular form
requested, it does not have to be created in the form sought by the applicant, and information
under Section 2(f) includes information in any form available with a public authority and accessible.
In the present case, the Commission held that the applicant may be allowed, if he desires, to inspect
the original records at the office.
Information specifically asked may be provided in the form of printouts and certified photocopies of
original documents and records.
6. Language for providing information

Case: In the case of Jai Kumar Jain vs. Delhi Development Authority (Appeal
No.CIC/WB/A/2006/00117, dated 7/3/2006), the appellant had applied for some information from
the public authority, Delhi Development Authority (DDA), in respect of certain shops leased by the
Authority.
The appellant had sought this information in the Hindi language.
Judgment: The CIC interpreting Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, directed the DDA to provide the
requested information by translating it, in Hindi, within 25 days of the issue of its decision.
Section 2(J): Right To Information

(j) “right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or
under the control of any public authority and includes the right to-
(i) inspection of work, documents, records;
(ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records;
(iii) taking certified samples of material;
(iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other
electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other
device;
Information which relates to personal information.

1. The confidentiality required to be maintained of the medical records of a patient including a
convict considering the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India cannot override the
provisions of the Right to Information Act.
Information that cannot be denied to Parliament or a State Legislature should not be denied to any
person. Section 8(j)
Information can be denied only in rare and in exceptional cases with valid reasons recorded in
writing.
A Test in such a matter is always between the private rights of a citizen and of the third person.
Regulations cannot override the provisions of the Information Act
In case of inconsistency between the Regulations and the Information Act, the later would prevail
and the information will have to be made available as per the Act
Act however, carves out exceptions, including the release of personal information, disclosure of
which has no relationship to any public activity or interest
In such cases a discretion has been conferred on the concerned Public Information Officer to make
available such information, which to be exercised according to the facts of each case
Records of a person sentenced or convicted and admitted in hospital during such period should be
made available to the person seeking information provided such hospital is maintained by the State
or Public Authority
54

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
(Mr. Surupsingh Hrya NaikVs.State of Maharashtra through Additional Secretary, General

Administration Deptt. and Ors. Writ Petition No. 1750 of 2007, Bombay HC).
2. Significance of word “HELD BY” used Section 2(j).

The expression ‘Held by’ or ‘Under the control of any public authority’ in relation to ‘information’
means that information which is held by the public authority under its control to the exclusion of
others.
It is not information which the public authority has already ‘Let go’, i.e. shared generally with the
citizens.
It is not also that information, in respect of which there is statutory mechanism evolved which
obliges the public authority to share the same with the citizenry by following the prescribed
procedure, and upon fulfilment of the prescribed conditions.
[Registrar of Companies & Os. Vs. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Anr.( W.P.(C) 11271/2009) High Court
Delhi].
3. Information which relates to expired records cannot be provided [Sec. 2(j) of the RTI Act]
Case: In the case of Gurbachan Singh vs. Lt. General, Army Headquarters (CIC/AT/2006/20, dated
23/3/2006), the applicant had sought certain information regarding the copy of an order pertaining
to the appointment and chargesheeting of an army personnel, and the information sought was
supposed to be more than 20 years old.
Judgment: The Army, the public authority involved in this case, refused to provide the appellant with
the required information and said that they could not provide such old information as according to
their departmental rules for preservation of records, the maximum period for preservation of
records was only 10 years.
The CIC noted in the appeal before it held that, in this case, records of the court martial trial were
destroyed after a retention period of 10 years under the Army Rules.
It held that there was no obligation on the part of any public authority to provide non-existent
information in terms of Section 2(j) of the RTI Act if that information is no longer available due to the
fact that the records were not available, i.e., they have been destroyed after a maximum period of
preservation, as per the departmental rules for destruction of old records.
55

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
(i) the cost of the medium or print cost price of the materials to be disseminated under sub-section
(4) of section 4 of the Act;
(ii) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Act;
(iii) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Act; and
(iv) any other matter which is required to be, or may be, prescribed."
1. Office of Chief Justice of India – A Competent Authority.

Expression "public authority" as used in the Act is of wide amplitude and includes an authority
created by or under the Constitution of India, which description holds good for Chief Justice of India
who is also a Competent authority for the purposes of RTI Act.(Secretary General, Supreme Court of
India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal. High Court of Delhi, LPA No. 501/2009)
Public Authority
(h) "public authority" means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or
constituted—
(a) by or under the Constitution;
(b) by any other law made by Parliament;
(c) by any other law made by State Legislature;
(d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any—
(0 body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
(ii) non-Government organisation substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by
the appropriate Government;
1. Commission, A Public Authority.

The, 'public authority' is defined as any authority or body or institution of the Government,
established or constituted by the Government which falls in any of the stated categories Under
Section 2(h) of the Act. In terms of Section 2(h)(a), a body or an institution which is established or
constituted by or under the Constitution would be a public authority. Since Public Service
Commission is established under Article 315 of the Constitution of India and as such there cannot be
any escape from the conclusion that the Commission shall be a public authority within the scope of
this section.[Bihar Public Service Commission V Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi and Anr (2012)13 SCC 61.
2. Agency substantially funded by the government to be deemed as public authority

Case: In the case of Navneet Kaur vs. Electronics & Computer Software Export Promotion Council
(Appeal No.ICPB/A-8/CIC/2006, dated 22/3/2006), the applicant had filed an application under the
RTI Act with an organisation. The organisation contended that it is not a public authority and was
outside the purview of the RTI Act.
Judgment: The CIC held that since the Department of Information Technology (DIT) of the Central
Government substantially funded the organisation in question, and also it was under the
administrative control of this department, therefore in terms of Section 2(h) of the Act, it was a
public authority, which is covered by the Right to Information Act
3. Co-operative society is not a public authority

This question has been dealt with by the Supreme Court of India in case Thalappalam Ser. Coop.
Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala, by holding that the Cooperative Societies registered under the Kerala Co-
operative Societies Act will not fall within the definition of 'public authority' as defined under section
2(h) of the Right to Information Act and the State Government letter, dated 5th May, 2006 and the
circular dated 1st June, 2006 issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kerala, stating that all
the co-operative institutions coming under the administrative control of the Registrar are 'public
authorities' under section 2(h) of the RTI Act, to the extent, made applicable to societies registered
57

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act would stand quashed in the absence of materials to
show that they are owned, controlled or substantially financed by the appropriate Government.
4. A School aided by the government is a public Authority

Where the school is aided by the government and 95% of the salary of the employees is paid by the
Department of Education, it is held that Queen Mary's School is substantially funded by the
appropriate Government and, therefore, the PIO of the School was ordered to provide the
information to the appellant under the Right to Information Act. J.D. Kataria v. Queen Mary's School,
Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi.
5. aided private colleges are Public Authorities

Where it was contended that the aided private colleges are not authorities coming within the
purview of the definition of 'public authority' under section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, it
has been held that every facet of the functions of the aided private colleges is strictly controlled and
financed by the Government and for coming within the definition of 'public authority' either control
or financing by Government need to be satisfied, whereas in this case both the conditions are
satisfied. V.G. Shende v. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
6. Unaided Colleges are not Public Authorities but may have to provide Information
Whether the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations (CISCE) is a 'public authority'
under the Right to Information Act. The respondent pointed out that they were neither controlled
nor substantially financed by the Government and hence could not be classed as a 'public authority'.
The appellant, on the other hand, pointed out that in their Council; the CISCE had a strong
representation of the Government through its nominees. He also presented before the Commission
a copy of the Constitution of the Council. The Central Information Commission recalled that in earlier
case dealing with the CISCE it had ordered: “After hearing the submissions of the respondents, the
Commission came to the conclusion that prima facie CISCE is not covered by the definition of a
public authority since it is neither funded nor controlled by the Government or any other public
body. However, going by the definition of the term 'information' under section 2(f) of the Right to
Information Act, which includes 'information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a
public authority under any other law for the time being in force to be disclosed, the Commission
reiterated its stand." The respondent emphasised the fact that there was no law for the time being
in force under which the information could be passed on to the appellant. However, the Commission
felt that since the information could be accessed by the Government, the respondents were
obligated to disclose the information sought for by the appellant. Shri Ajay Jhuria v Council for the
Indian School Certificate Examinations
58

lOMoARcPSD|7732137
1. Problems
a) A State Govt. appointed a sitting MLA as State Chief Information Commissioner. Is it valid ?
b) Can a voter file an RTI application before the SPIO of Police Department asking the
antecedents of the contesting candidate for MLA of his constituency?
c) An RTI activist filed an application before the CPIO seeking the bank accounts held by Indians
in Foreign Banks. Advise.
d) An applicant in his complaint requested the commission to impose penalty on PIO for non-
supply of information within thirty days and also to award damages to him for the loss
suffered. Decide
e) A PIO who rejected a RTI application earlier, subsequently appointed as First Appellate
Authority of a Department. Can he decide the case as First Appellate Authority?
f) Mr. ‘X’ filed a complaint to the commission against a public information officer for non-
disclosure of information. Commission rejected his application with a direction to approach
the first appellate authority. Advice the complaint.
g) A student of Government Medical College, Bangalore wants to marry his junior in the
College. He files an RTI application before the college for disclosure of passouts in a
Particular year. Is he entitled to information?
h) An applicant in his application sought reply from the Public Information officer of a Public
Authority, why a librarian post in his department was lying vacant for the last 10 years. Is
Public information officer bound to provide such information?
i) An applicant in his complaint requested the commission to impose Penalty on a public
information officer for not transferring his application before the appropriate PIO under
Section 6(3) of the Act. Is it valid?
103

Rti Imp Internals

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rti Imp Internals

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

lOMoARcPSD|7732137

5. Explain the Supreme Court decisions on RTI Act. - June 2012

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

• S.P. Gupta v. Union of India

4. Right to acquire and Disseminate Information

5. Direction on Voters' Right to Information

6. Right to Information and Community Participation

7. Restrictions on Information Pertaining to Judicial Decisions

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

8. Right to Privacy and Right to Information

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

Background of RTI in India

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

1. What are the Salient Features of the RTI Act?

SALIENT FEATURES OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

Commencement of the Act

1. Only citizens can apply for information

Criticism of the Act

Objects of the Act

Changes in the new Act include:

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

4. Effective mechanism for disclosure of information by the authorities.

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

Act: Right to Information Act, 2005

Chapter 2, Right To Information And Obligations Of Public Authorities

Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) – What is it for?

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

What is a Public Authority - Section 2(h)

What information are we talking about? Section 2(f)

Finding the Relevant Public Authority

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

Locating The Public Information Officer

When No PIO Has Been Appointed By The Public Authority

Language of the RTI Application

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

Important fields to be covered in an application

2. NAME & ADDRESS OF THE APPLICANT

3. PARTICULARS OF INFORMATION REQUIRED

a. Subject matter of information: In this section, you must mention:

c. Whether information is required by post or in person: It must be mentioned whether the

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

4. Reason for Information

Filing Your RTI Application

• Speed Post (A postal department service):

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

WHAT IF THE PIO REFUSES TO ACCEPT AN APPLICATION?

Cost of providing information:

The rates as prescribed by the rules are as follows:

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

b. For inspection of records-

c. For making copies of information (that is identified after inspection)-

d. For information provided in digital media (disks or floppy) –

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

What is the time frame for making First Appeal:

Who can make First Appeal:

Who should the First Appeal be made to:

How to file First Appeal

What is the prescribed fee for filing First Appeal

Downloaded by chandrashekar th (chandrashekarth5@gmail.com)

II. SECOND APPEAL

What is the time frame for making Second Appeal:

Who can make Second Appeal

Who should the Second Appeal be made to:

How to file Second Appeal