UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — HC dismisses plea to bring RGF within ambit of RTI Act

Q1. Under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the foremost statutory test that brings a non-Government organisation within the meaning of 'public authority' is that such an organisation is:

  • A. registered as a society or a trust and is in receipt of any grant-in-aid, however small, from the appropriate Government
  • B. engaged in performing a public function of a character ordinarily discharged by the appropriate Government
  • C. substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by funds provided by the appropriate Government
  • D. owned or controlled by a body which is itself established by or under a law made by Parliament

Q2. Under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the power to constitute a body as a 'public authority' by issuing a notification or making an order vests in:

  • A. the Central Information Commission, by an order passed under Section 19(8) of the RTI Act, 2005
  • B. the appropriate Government, as that expression is defined in Section 2(a) of the RTI Act, 2005
  • C. the Department of Personnel and Training, as the nodal department administering the RTI Act, 2005
  • D. the appropriate Legislature, by a resolution adopted for the purposes of the RTI Act, 2005

Q3. Consider the following statements regarding decisions of the Central Information Commission on the applicability of the Right to Information Act, 2005 to bodies outside government: 1. On 15 October 2010 the Commission held that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation does not qualify as a 'public authority' under the Act. 2. Earlier, a full bench of the Commission had held that recognised stock exchanges, including the National Stock Exchange, are public authorities as they discharge public functions under statutory recognition. 3. The challenge to the Commission's order on the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation was finally decided by the Delhi High Court in 2026 by a ruling on merits holding the Foundation to be a public authority. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. On 15 October 2010 the Commission held that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation does not qualify as a 'public authority' under the Act.
  2. Earlier, a full bench of the Commission had held that recognised stock exchanges, including the National Stock Exchange, are public authorities as they discharge public functions under statutory recognition.
  3. The challenge to the Commission's order on the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation was finally decided by the Delhi High Court in 2026 by a ruling on merits holding the Foundation to be a public authority.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q4. The order of October 2010 holding that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation is not a 'public authority' under the Right to Information Act, 2005 was passed by:

  • A. the Central Information Commission, the appellate body constituted under Section 12 of the RTI Act, 2005
  • B. the Delhi High Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution
  • C. the Delhi State Information Commission, constituted under Section 15 of the RTI Act, 2005
  • D. the Central Administrative Tribunal, established under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

Q5. Which one of the following best states the principal legal effect of the Delhi High Court's order of 17 August 2026 in the petition seeking to bring the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation within the ambit of the Right to Information Act, 2005?

  • A. It conclusively settled for all future cases that no private trust in receipt of a government land concession can ever be a public authority
  • B. It disposed of the petition for non-prosecution, leaving the Foundation's status under Section 2(h) undecided on merits
  • C. It permanently barred the petitioner and all others from initiating any fresh proceeding on the Foundation's status under the Act
  • D. It set aside the 2010 order in its entirety and directed the Foundation to appoint a Public Information Officer forthwith

Q6. The writ petition dismissed by the Delhi High Court in August 2026 arose out of an order of the Central Information Commission. At the Union level, the Right to Information Act, 2005 is administered by:

  • A. the Ministry of Home Affairs, which administers the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010
  • B. the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, which administers the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
  • C. the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, through the Department of Personnel and Training
  • D. the Ministry of Law and Justice, through its Department of Legal Affairs

Q7. With reference to the debate on extending the Right to Information Act, 2005 to bodies outside government, consider the following: 1. Cooperative societies in Kerala — the Supreme Court in the Thalappalam case quashed a State Government circular that had made the RTI Act applicable to them. 2. The National Stock Exchange — the Central Information Commission's order declaring it a public authority was stayed by the Supreme Court in 2026. 3. Personal information — the exemption from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j), as amended by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, is under challenge before the Supreme Court. 4. Non-Government organisations substantially financed indirectly by government funds — expressly included within 'public authority' by the definition clause of the Act. Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

  1. Cooperative societies in Kerala — the Supreme Court in the Thalappalam case quashed a State Government circular that had made the RTI Act applicable to them.
  2. The National Stock Exchange — the Central Information Commission's order declaring it a public authority was stayed by the Supreme Court in 2026.
  3. Personal information — the exemption from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j), as amended by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, is under challenge before the Supreme Court.
  4. Non-Government organisations substantially financed indirectly by government funds — expressly included within 'public authority' by the definition clause of the Act.
  • A. 1 and 3 only
  • B. 2 and 4 only
  • C. 1, 2 and 4 only
  • D. 1, 2, 3 and 4

Q8. With reference to the question whether private bodies fall within the Right to Information Act, 2005, consider the following: 1. In the Thalappalam case the Supreme Court laid down that the test is whether the funds provided by government are of material or considerable value to the body concerned. 2. Before the Supreme Court, the National Stock Exchange contended that it is a private company with no government shareholding. 3. The Supreme Court's order of 2026 in the National Stock Exchange matter set aside the Central Information Commission's order and finally held that no stock exchange can be a public authority. 4. The Delhi High Court had held that the National Stock Exchange performs public functions because it cannot operate without recognition by the Securities and Exchange Board of India, treated as a delegated Central Government function. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. In the Thalappalam case the Supreme Court laid down that the test is whether the funds provided by government are of material or considerable value to the body concerned.
  2. Before the Supreme Court, the National Stock Exchange contended that it is a private company with no government shareholding.
  3. The Supreme Court's order of 2026 in the National Stock Exchange matter set aside the Central Information Commission's order and finally held that no stock exchange can be a public authority.
  4. The Delhi High Court had held that the National Stock Exchange performs public functions because it cannot operate without recognition by the Securities and Exchange Board of India, treated as a delegated Central Government function.
  • A. 1 and 3
  • B. 2 and 4
  • C. 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 4

Q9. Consider the following statements comparing the position of the Chief Information Commissioner before and after the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019: 1. Before the amendment, the Chief Information Commissioner held office for a term of five years or until attaining sixty-five years of age, whichever was earlier. 2. After the amendment, the term of office and the salary of the Chief Information Commissioner are such as may be prescribed by the Central Government. 3. Before the amendment, the salary and other terms of service of the Chief Information Commissioner were the same as those of a Judge of the Supreme Court of India. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Before the amendment, the Chief Information Commissioner held office for a term of five years or until attaining sixty-five years of age, whichever was earlier.
  2. After the amendment, the term of office and the salary of the Chief Information Commissioner are such as may be prescribed by the Central Government.
  3. Before the amendment, the salary and other terms of service of the Chief Information Commissioner were the same as those of a Judge of the Supreme Court of India.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q10. Consider the following pairings of subject matter with the provision of the Right to Information Act, 2005 under which it is dealt with: 1. Constitution of the Central Information Commission — Section 12 2. Second appeal to the Central Information Commission — Section 19 3. Imposition of penalty on a Public Information Officer — Section 16 4. Exercise of the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while inquiring into a complaint — Section 18 Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

  1. Constitution of the Central Information Commission — Section 12
  2. Second appeal to the Central Information Commission — Section 19
  3. Imposition of penalty on a Public Information Officer — Section 16
  4. Exercise of the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while inquiring into a complaint — Section 18
  • A. 1 and 3
  • B. 2 and 4
  • C. 1, 2 and 4
  • D. 3 and 4 only

Q11. In the writ petition dismissed by the Delhi High Court in August 2026, the petitioner's claim that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation ought to be treated as a 'public authority' rested principally on:

  • A. a plot measuring 9,319.42 sq. yards and a building on Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi, said to have been enjoyed without payment of licence fee or property tax
  • B. receipt of foreign contributions under a licence subsequently cancelled by the Union Government for violation of the applicable law
  • C. the presence of holders of high public office among its trustees at the time when the writ petition came to be filed
  • D. its registration as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 with the Registrar of Societies of the Government of Delhi

Q12. Which one of the following correctly describes the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, the body whose status under the Right to Information Act, 2005 was in question?

  • A. An autonomous society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and administered under the Ministry of Culture, Government of India
  • B. A private trust set up in 1991 and chaired by Sonia Gandhi, which has worked in fields such as health, education and disability support
  • C. A statutory body constituted by an Act of Parliament in 1991 to disburse memorial grants, with the Prime Minister as its ex officio chairperson
  • D. A central public sector foundation functioning under the Ministry of Rural Development and funded annually through the Union Budget