The RTI Act 2005: rights, duties and machinery

Detail

1. The right and who holds it

• Right to Information Act 2005 (RTI Act): a law that lets any citizen ask a public body for information. The body must answer within fixed time limits.
• Section 3: every citizen has this right. Foreigners and companies get no right under the Act. This is a common trap.
• Section 6(2): the applicant does not have to give a reason. They only give contact details so the reply can be sent.
• Roots: the right grew out of the MKSS (Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan) movement in 1990s Rajasthan. MKSS used jan sunwais (public hearings) to check muster rolls and bills for village works.
• Class 9 NCERT treats RTI as a tool of accountability (the government must answer for what it does). It also lists the CIC among the institutions that hold government to account.

2. Key definitions (Section 2)

• "Information" (s.2(f)): any material in any form. This includes:
• records, documents, memos and e-mails;
• opinions, advice, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks and contracts;
• reports, papers, samples, models and electronic data;

• information about a private body that a public authority can access under any law in force.

• "Right to information" (s.2(j)): the right to:

• inspect works, documents and records;
• take notes, extracts or certified copies (copies signed as true by an officer);
• take certified samples of material;

• get information as printouts, diskettes, tapes or other electronic copies.

• "Public authority" (s.2(h)): a body that must answer RTI requests. It covers any body:

• set up by or under the Constitution;
• set up by a law of Parliament or of a State Legislature;
• set up by a government notification or order;
• owned, controlled or substantially financed by government;

• including NGOs substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by government funds.

• Case law on "public authority":

Case	Year	Principle
Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank v. State of Kerala	2013	Set the test for "substantially financed". A small or nominal grant is not enough. The funding must be large enough that the body could hardly run without it. Being regulated by a government Registrar does not by itself make a co-operative society a public authority. The SC decided the case on 7 October 2013 (Civil Appeal No. 9017 of 2013). It also held that an applicant can get only the information the public authority can itself access under law [8]
DAV College Trust and Management Society v. Director of Public Instructions	2019	Schools, colleges and NGOs that get substantial government funding are public authorities. "Substantial" does not have to mean more than 50%.
CPIO, Supreme Court v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal	2019	The office of the Chief Justice of India is a public authority. (Covered in the judiciary note.)

3. Officers who handle requests

• Public Information Officer (PIO) (s.5): an officer named in every public authority. The PIO receives RTI applications and supplies the information. At the Centre this officer is the CPIO. In states, the officer is the SPIO.
• Assistant PIO (APIO) (s.5(2)): an officer at sub-division or district level. The APIO accepts applications and appeals and sends them on to the PIO.
• s.5(4)–(5): the PIO can ask any other officer for help. That officer is then treated as a PIO for penalty purposes.

4. How to apply: the procedure in steps

1. Write the application in English, Hindi or the official language of the area. It can be on paper or online. The PIO must help a person who cannot write (s.6(1)).
2. Pay the fee: ₹10 at the Centre. BPL (below poverty line) applicants pay nothing.
3. No reasons needed (s.6(2)).
4. Transfer: if the request belongs to another authority, it must be sent there within 5 days, and the applicant must be told (s.6(3)).
5. Reply within the time limit (s.7). The PIO either gives the information or rejects the request with reasons under s.8 or s.9.

Situation	Time limit	Provision
Normal reply	30 days	s.7(1)
Life or liberty of a person involved	48 hours	proviso to s.7(1)
Application filed through an APIO	+5 days (35 days in all)	s.5(2)
Third party information involved	40 days	s.11
Transfer to the right authority	5 days	s.6(3)
Security or intelligence body (Second Schedule), only for corruption or human-rights claims	45 days	s.24

• Deemed refusal (s.7(2)): if the PIO gives no reply in time, the law treats it as a refusal. The applicant can appeal straight away.
• Free information when late (s.7(6)): if the deadline is missed, the information must be given free of charge.
• Severability (s.10): if only part of a record is exempt, the PIO must remove that part and give the rest.
• Third party (s.11): if the information concerns a third party who has treated it as confidential, the PIO must give that party a chance to object. The final decision must come within 40 days.

5. Proactive disclosure (Section 4)

• Proactive disclosure: information a public authority must publish on its own, without anyone asking.
• s.4(1)(b): lists 17 categories. These had to be published within 120 days of the Act's enactment and must be kept up to date. Examples:
• the body's organisation, functions and duties;
• powers and duties of officers, and the monthly pay of each;
• its budget, plans and spending;
• how subsidy schemes are run, and who benefits;

• names and details of its PIOs.

• s.4(2): the authority should disclose so much on its own that people need to file RTI applications as little as possible.

• Weak compliance: transparency audits of public authorities find that many websites are incomplete or out of date.
• Jan Soochna Portal (Rajasthan, 2019): a single state website that shows scheme, beneficiary and service data for each person and each village. For example, it shows ration, pension and MGNREGA records. It is seen as the model of s.4 in practice.

6. RTI in everyday life (NCERT examples)

• Class 7 NCERT (gees206) suggests things a citizen can ask the government about:
• how much was spent on a road;
• who received scholarships;

• how far a metro project has progressed.

• Bagepalli case (Karnataka): villagers filed an RTI asking about the money for a road-widening project. The question exposed the delay, and the work was then completed.

7. Appeals, complaints and penalties

The appeal chain

• First appeal (s.19(1)): to an officer senior in rank to the PIO in the same authority, within 30 days of the reply or of the deadline passing. It is decided in 30 days, which can be extended to 45 days.
• Second appeal (s.19(3)): to the Central Information Commission (CIC) or the State Information Commission (SIC), within 90 days of the first-appeal decision.
• Complaint (s.18): goes directly to the Commission. It is used when no PIO has been named, a request was refused, the fee charged was too high, or the information given was false or incomplete. When handling a complaint, the Commission has the powers of a civil court. It can summon people and examine records.
• Burden of proof (s.19(5)): the PIO must prove that refusing the request was justified.

Penalty (s.20)

• The PIO is fined: ₹250 a day, up to ₹25,000. This applies when the PIO refuses to accept an application, delays without reason, refuses in bad faith, or gives wrong information.
• The fine is personal: it is recovered from the PIO's own salary, not from the department.
• Disciplinary action: for repeated or serious default, the Commission can also recommend disciplinary action against the PIO.

8. The Information Commissions

• Central Information Commission (CIC) (s.12): a statutory body (set up by a law, not by the Constitution). It has a Chief Information Commissioner and up to 10 Information Commissioners.
• Appointment (s.12(3)):
• a three-member panel recommends names: the Prime Minister (chair), the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha (or the leader of the largest opposition party), and a Union Cabinet minister nominated by the PM;
• the President then appoints them;

• Commissioners must be people of standing in public life, with knowledge of fields such as law, science, social service, management, journalism or administration (s.12(5)).

• State Information Commission (s.15): the Governor appoints its members. The panel is the Chief Minister, the Leader of Opposition in the Assembly and a Cabinet minister nominated by the CM.

• Removal (s.14):
• the President refers a charge of proved misbehaviour or incapacity to the Supreme Court;
• the SC holds an inquiry;
• the President removes the member if the SC upholds the charge;

• the President can also remove a member directly for insolvency, conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude, or taking paid outside work.

• Present CIC: Raj Kumar Goyal is Chief Information Commissioner. He is a retired IAS officer of 1990 who retired on 31 August 2025 [4]. The President gave him the oath at Rashtrapati Bhavan on 15 December 2025 [5]. Eight new Information Commissioners took oath in the CIC on the same day [6].

9. RTI (Amendment) Act 2019

• What changed: the Act amended s.13 (Central Commission) and s.16 (State Commissions).
• Before 2019: members had a fixed five-year term (or until age 65) [3]. The Chief Information Commissioner's pay matched the Chief Election Commissioner, and an Information Commissioner's pay matched an Election Commissioner (NCERT: parity with Election Commissioners).

• After 2019: the Central Government decides the term, salary and service conditions of both central and state commissioners [3].

• RTI Rules 2019: notified on 24 October 2019 [2].

• Term: three years for central and state commissioners [2].
• Pay at the Centre: ₹2,50,000 a month for the Chief Information Commissioner and ₹2,25,000 a month for each Information Commissioner [2].

• Pay in the states: ₹2,25,000 a month for both the State Chief and State Information Commissioners [2].

• Criticism:

• Weaker independence: if the government fixes a watchdog's pay and term by rules, it can change them. This makes the watchdog dependent on the government it must check.
• Federalism: the Centre now decides service conditions for state commissions, which takes power away from the states.
• Lower status: the change ended parity with the Election Commission, which is a constitutional body.

10. Vacancies and pending cases

• Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (15 February 2019): decided on Writ Petition (Civil) No. 436 of 2018 [7].
• The problem: when the petition was filed, 4 Information Commissioner posts in the CIC were vacant. More than 23,500 appeals and complaints were pending [7].
• Why it happened: posts fell vacant in the normal way, on a five-year term ending or a member reaching 65. The government took no timely steps to fill them [7].

• What the Court ordered: appointments must be timely and transparent. The government must publish the search committee, the selection criteria and the shortlisted names, and start filling a post before it falls vacant.

• 2025: the CIC ran short of members and for a time had no Chief. This ended when the new Chief and eight Commissioners took oath on 15 December 2025 [5][6].

• State Information Commissions: many still have large backlogs and vacant posts (check the latest figures).

Prelims Hooks

• Section 3: the right belongs only to citizens, not to companies or foreigners.
• Section 2(f): "information" includes e-mails, opinions, advice, samples and electronic data. It also includes private-body information that a public authority can access under law.
• Time limits: 30 days normally; 48 hours for life or liberty; +5 days through an APIO; 40 days with a third party; transfer within 5 days (s.6(3)).
• Deemed refusal: no reply in time counts as refusal (s.7(2)), and late information must be given free (s.7(6)).
• Section 4(1)(b): 17 categories of proactive disclosure, due within 120 days of enactment.
• Appeals: first appeal within 30 days (s.19(1)); second appeal to the CIC/SIC within 90 days (s.19(3)); a complaint under s.18 goes directly to the Commission.
• Penalty (s.20): ₹250 a day, up to ₹25,000, imposed on the PIO personally, not on the department.
• CIC selection panel (s.12(3)): PM + Leader of Opposition + a Cabinet minister nominated by the PM. The CJI is not a member. This is a common trap.
• RTI (Amendment) Act 2019 → RTI Rules 2019: three-year term; the Centre fixes pay for both central and state commissioners [2].
• Case–principle pairs: Thalappalam (2013) → test for "substantially financed"; DAV College Trust (2019) → NGOs with substantial funding are covered; Anjali Bhardwaj (2019) → timely, transparent appointment of Information Commissioners.

Mains Points

• Independence vs executive control: the 2019 amendment lets the Centre set commissioners' terms and pay by rules, so a watchdog depends on the government it checks. It also overrides the states on their own commissions. Reform: put fixed terms and pay back in the Act itself, or restore parity with the Election Commission.
• Weak enforcement:
• vacancies leave Commissions short of members, as seen in Anjali Bhardwaj (2019) and the headless CIC of 2025;
• pending cases pile up;
• Commissions rarely impose s.20 penalties;

• together these cancel out the 30-day promise. Reform: time-bound and transparent appointments, and filling posts before they fall vacant.

• Proactive disclosure as the real fix: applying s.4 fully would cut the number of RTI applications and the burden on PIOs. Rajasthan's Jan Soochna Portal (2019) shows how open, beneficiary-level data can enable a social audit (people checking how public money was spent). It also links RTI to Digital India (e-governance).

• Scope fights over "public authority":
• the "substantial financing" test (Thalappalam, 2013; DAV, 2019) decides whether NGOs, co-operatives and aided schools are covered;
• the coverage of political parties and sports bodies is still disputed;
• privacy now matters more because of the DPDP Act 2023 and s.8(1)(j).