RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT

History
The right to information gained power when Universal Declaration of Human Rights
provided everyone the right to seek, receive, information and ideas through any media which is
mentioned under Art.19 of the same.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political rights 1966 states that everyone shall have
the right to freedom of expression, the freedom to seek and impart information and ideas of all
kinds.

The right to information is a fundamental right under Article 19 (1) of the Indian Constitution. In
1976, in the Raj Narain vs the State of Uttar Pradesh case, the Supreme Court ruled that Right
to information will be treated as a fundamental right under article 19. The Supreme Court held
that in Indian democracy, people are the masters and they have the right to know about the
working of the government.
Thus the government enacted the Right to Information act in 2005 which provides machinery for
exercising this fundamental right.
The Right to Information Act of 2005
The Act defines “right to information” as the right to access information accessible under the Act

which is held or under the control of a public authority [Sec. 2 (j)]. Section 3 of the Act provides

that subject to the provisions of the Act, all citizens shall have the right to information. The

question that then arises is against whom is this right enforceable? The right to information

conferred on citizens by the Act is enforceable against public authorities. ‘”Public authority” is

defined in Sec.2 (h) of the Act.

Since the provisions of the Act are applicable only to public authorities as defined in Sec. 2(h),

the Act imposes certain obligations (Sec. 4) on public authorities cataloging, indexation and

computerization of records within a reasonable time. Public authorities are mandated by the Act

to periodically publish information regarding its organization, employees, rules, regulations,

remuneration received by its employees, budgetary allocations, proposed expenditures etc. The

Act provides for suo motu provision of information to the public through various media.
The RTI Act replaced the Freedom of Information Act 2002. ●
The RTI Act mandates that any Indian citizen is free to seek any information from any public or
government authority and the authority is under liability to respond to such a request within a
period of 30 days from the date of receiving such an application.
Right to Information brings accessibility to the administration. The affairs of the state become
transparent when documents are accessible by public eyes. With transparency, rampant
corruption can be questioned and reduced. It also helps in rectifying public policies with the help
of feedback provided by the people as these policies are made for the ultimate welfare of these
people.
The act is one of the most important acts which empowers ordinary citizens to question the
government and its working. This has been widely used by citizens and media to uncover
corruption, progress in government work, expenses related information, etc.
All constitutional authorities, agencies, owned and controlled, also those organizations which are
substantially financed by the government comes under the purview of the act. The act also
mandates public authorities of union government or state government, to provide timely response
to the citizens’ request for information.
The act also imposes penalties if the authorities delay in responding to the citizen in the
stipulated time.
SCHEME OF THE ACT
The Act is divided into six chapters and two schedules.
Chapter I : Deals with preliminary aspects, definitions, scope and extent of the Act.
Chapter II : Deals with the right to information and obligations of public
authorities.
Chapters III & IV: Deals with constitution of the Central Information Commission and the State
Information Commission. Chapter V : Deals with appeals and penalties.
Chapter VI : Deals with Miscellaneous aspects.
Objectives of the RTI Act

1. Empower citizens to question the government.

2. The act promotes transparency and accountability in the working of the government.
3. The act also helps in containing corruption in the government and work for the people in
a better way.
4. The act envisages building better-informed citizens who would keep necessary vigil
about the functioning of the government machinery.
 What type of information can be requested through RTI?
The citizens can seek any information from the government authorities that the government can
disclose to the parliament.
Some information that can affect the sovereignty and the integrity of India is exempted from the
purview of RTI.
Information relating to internal security, relations with foreign countries, intellectual property
rights (IPR), cabinet discussions are exempted from RTI.

RTI: WHO IS NOT COVERED?

Intelligence Bureau, Research & Analysis Wing, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Central Economic
Intelligence Bureau, Department of Enforcement, Narcotics Control Bureau, Aviation Research Centre,
Special Frontier Force, BSF.

Important provisions under the Right to Information Act, 2005 or KEY FEAUTERS (from
bare act)

• Section 2(h): Public authorities mean all authorities and bodies under the union
government, state government or local bodies. The civil societies that are substantially
funded, directly or indirectly, by the public funds also fall within the ambit of RTI.
• Section 4 1(b): Government has to maintain and proactively disclose information.
• Section 6: Prescribes a simple procedure for securing information.
• Section 7: Prescribes a time frame for providing information(s) by PIOs.
• Section 8: Only minimum information exempted from disclosure.
• Section 8 (1) mentions exemptions against furnishing information under the RTI Act.
• Section 8 (2) provides for disclosure of information exempted under the Official Secrets
Act, 1923 if the larger public interest is served.
• Section 19: Two-tier mechanism for appeal.
• Section 20: Provides penalties in case of failure to provide information on time, incorrect,
incomplete or misleading or distorted information.
• Section 23: Lower courts are barred from entertaining suits or applications. However, the
writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India and high courts under Articles 32 and 226
of the Constitution remains unaffected.

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS (PIO)

The Act provides for constitution of an executive wing to enforce the right to information
conferred on citizens by the Act. Every public authority is required to appoint public information
officers (“PIO”) for providing information to persons requesting information under the Act (Sec.
5). A PIO shall receive and dispose of applications seeking information in accordance with and
within the time frame prescribed in Secs. 6 & 7 of the Act.

EXEMPTION FROM DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION

Sec. 8 of the Act sets out certain information that is exempt from disclosure. When a request is
made to a public authority seeking information that falls within any of the following categories,
Sec. 8 exempts a public authority from the obligation of disclosure

CENTRAL AND STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONS

The Act envisages the constitution of Central and State Information Commissions (Sec. 12 &
Sec. 15). The Central Information Commission shall be headed by a Chief Information
Commissioner assisted by such number of Central Information Commissioners, who shall be
appointed by the President of India. Similarly, the State Information Commission shall be headed
by a State Chief Information Commissioner assisted by such number of

State Information Commissioners, who shall be appointed by the Governor.

POWERS OF THE COMMISSION (SEC. 18)

The Act casts a duty on the Information Commission to receive and inquire into complaints from
any person:

Who has been unable to submit a request for information to a public authority because a PIO
has not been appointed;

Who has been refused access to information;

Who has received no response to his application seeking information, within the time frame
specified by the Act;

Who considers the fee charged by the public authority to divulge information, unreasonable;

Who believes that he has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under the
Act;

In respect of any matter relating to access to records under the Act.

While an Information Commission is inquiring into any matter, it shall have the same powers as
are vested in a civil court while trying a suit in the following matters:

Summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compelling them to give evidence
and/or produce documents;

Requiring discovery and inspection of documents;

Reception of evidence on affidavits;

Requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any court or office;

Issuing witness summons.

APPEALS (SEC. 19)

A two-tier appeal mechanism is provided under the Act for persons who do not receive
information from a PIO or who are aggrieved by a decision of the PIO.

There are 2 apeals

PENALTIES

The Act empowers (Sec. 20) an Information Commission to impose a penalty of Rs.250/- per
day (not exceeding Rs.25,000/-) in the following cases, till an application requesting information
is received or till such information is accepted:

Not accepting an application seeking information;

Delaying disclosure of information without reasonable cause;

Malafide denial of information;

Knowingly giving incomplete, in correct or misleading information;

Destroying information that has been requested;

Obstructing furnishing of an information in any manner

MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
 Bar of jurisdiction of Civil Courts in respect of any order made under the Act;

The provisions of the Act are inapplicable to intelligence and security organizations
specified in the Second Schedule

Monitoring and reporting

IMPORTANT CASE LAWS

CASE LAWS ON SECTION 2(h) – PUBLIC AUTHORITIES

In Thalappalam Ser. Coop. Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala, it was held that where a body is
not merely regulated or supervised by the appropriate government but is rather
“substantially controlled” by it. The body becomes public authority under the RTI Act,
2005.

In Prime Ministers National Relief fund v. Aseem Takyar, it was held that the
satisfaction of Section 2(h)(d)(i) by the fund will bring it within the definition of “public
authority” within the meaning of public authority.

Tamil Nadu Newsprint & Papers Ltd v. State Information Commission. In this case, the
court had observed that since the mere requirement of the RTI Act for an institution to be deemed
a "public authority" is that the Government must substantially finance it, and exercise control
over its affairs, it is not necessary that the Government must be the majority shareholder in that
institution. The Court had further gone ahead to make an observation that whether or not the
government exercises such control is immaterial.

Other important case laws-

Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950)

One of the earliest cases where the Supreme Court emphasized the people’s right to know.

State of UP vs Raj Narain (1975)

One of the prominent instances, when the Supreme Court took cognizance of the public demand
for the right to information, was in this case.

The SC ruled that--- 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 bearings
SP Gupta & others vs The President of India and others (1982)

In the year 1982, the Supreme Court in this case held that the right to information was a
fundamental right under the Indian Constitution. Justice Bhagwati rejected the government’s
claim for protection against disclosure under Art. 74(2) of Indian Const and S.123 of Indian
Evidence Act and directed the Union of India to disclose the documents containing the
correspondence.

AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY THE 2019 BILL

The 2019 amendment bill amended section 13 and section 16 of the RTI Act, 2005.

1. Firstly, previously the term of office for the Central Chief Information Commissioner (‘CIC’), the State
Information Commissioner (‘SIC’) and Information Commissioner was fixed to 5 years or until the age of
65 years whichever is earlier. However, the newly amended bill empowers the Central Government to
prescribe the term of office for the commissioners as it may deem fit to the government.
2. Secondly, the salary was previously identical to the salary of -

Chief Information Commissioner - Chief Election Commissioner (‘CEC’) and

Central Information Commissioner - Election Commissioner
whereas thesalary of the
Chief State Information Commissioner - Election Commissioner at the state level
State Information Commissioners - Chief Secretary of the state.

The newly amended bill, however, empowers the Central government to prescribe the salary, allowances
and other terms and conditions of service of, the Chief Information Commissioner and Information
Commissioners and the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners.
3. Thirdly, as per the newly amended bill, if Chief Information Commissioner and Information
Commissioners are receiving the pension or any other retirement benefits from the previous government
service, their salaries will be decreased by an amount equivalent to that pension.