RIGHT TO INFORMATION

 UNIT 6 – INFORMATION COMMISSION

INTRODUCTION
 Section 12 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 deals with the constitution of a
statutory body known as the Central Information Commission.
 According to this provision, the central government shall constitute a body called the
Central Information Commission bypassing a notification in the Official Gazette.
 Their primary role is to ensure transparency and accountability in governance by
safeguarding citizens' right to access information.
 The Government of India through the Parliament of India amended the Right to
Information Act in July 2019 and introduced some changes in RTI Rules related to
salaries, allowances, and tenures of the Information Commissioner(s).
SECTION 12 OF RTI ACT
Section 12(1): Formation of the Central Information Commission
This section allows the central government to create a body called the Central Information
Commission (CIC). This body is responsible for handling and overseeing RTI matters at the
national level.
Section 12(2): Composition of the Central Information Commission
The CIC will have a Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and up to 10 other
Information Commissioners (ICs). The number of ICs can be decided based on what is
necessary, but there cannot be more than 10.
Section 12(3): Appointment of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information
Commissioners
The President of India appoints the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information
Commissioners. The selection is based on the recommendations of a committee made up of:
1. The Prime Minister – as the chairperson of the committee.
2. The Leader of the Opposition (or the leader of the largest opposition group in the
Lok Sabha).
3. A Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
This committee decides who will be recommended for appointment.
Section 12(5): Qualifications for Chief Information Commissioner and Information
Commissioners
The people chosen as the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information
Commissioners must be highly respected individuals with extensive experience in areas such
as:
 Law
  Technology
 Social sciences
 Management
 Science
 Mass media
 Journalism
 Governance
 Administration
These individuals should be well-known for their integrity and expertise in their respective
fields.
Section 12(6): Restrictions on the Chief Information Commissioner and Information
Commissioners
To ensure impartiality, the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information
Commissioners:
 Cannot hold any other job or office that makes money (office of profit).
 Cannot be Members of Parliament or any State/Union Territory Legislative
Assembly.
 Cannot have any business, be engaged in a profession, or be connected to any
political party.
This is to prevent any conflict of interest and to make sure they can act fairly while
performing their duties.

POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

1. Receiving and Inquiring into Complaints (Section 18):
 The Information Commission has the power to receive complaints from individuals in
the following cases:
o When they are unable to submit an RTI request due to refusal from the Public
Information Officer (PIO).
o When a public authority does not respond within the stipulated time (usually
30 days).
o If a person has been charged an unreasonable fee for information.
o If incomplete, misleading, or false information has been provided.
o Any other violation of the provisions of the RTI Act.
2. Appeals (Section 19):
 The Commission can hear appeals against the decisions of the PIO or the Appellate
Authority.
 If a person is not satisfied with the response of the PIO or feels aggrieved by it, they
can file a second appeal with the Information Commission.
 The decision of the Information Commission in the second appeal is final and
binding.
3. Suo Motu Power (Own Motion Inquiry):
 The Commission can take action on its own (suo motu) if it finds a public authority
violating provisions of the RTI Act.
 It can inspect records, call for documents, and conduct investigations on its own
initiative.
4. Imposing Penalties (Section 20):
 The Information Commission has the authority to penalize PIOs for:
o Delayed response to an RTI request beyond the stipulated period without
reasonable cause.
o Providing incomplete, incorrect, or misleading information.
o Denying information with malafide intent.
 The penalty can be up to ₹250 per day (from the date information was due) to a
maximum of ₹25,000.
 The Commission may also recommend disciplinary action against the erring officer.
5. Power to Secure Compliance (Section 19(8)):
 The Commission can issue directives to ensure compliance with the provisions of the
RTI Act. This includes:
o Requiring public authorities to provide information.
o Appointing Public Information Officers (if not appointed).
o Enhancing transparency by directing public authorities to maintain records and
publish certain information proactively.
6. Record-Keeping and Reporting (Section 25):
 The Information Commission must prepare an annual report, detailing its activities,
the number of RTI requests received, and their disposal.
 The report is presented to Parliament (in case of the Central Information Commission)
or the State Legislature (in case of State Information Commissions).
7. Overseeing Implementation of the RTI Act:
  The Commission plays a key role in monitoring the proper implementation of the Act.
 It can review public authorities’ compliance, assess their training programs, and
suggest reforms.
8. Power of Civil Court (Section 18(3)):
 While inquiring into complaints or appeals, the Commission has powers similar to
that of a civil court, including:
o Summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons.
o Requiring the production of documents.
o Receiving evidence on affidavit.
o Issuing requisition for public records from any office.
o Examining witnesses.
9. Monitoring and Promoting Awareness (Section 26):
 The Commission plays an educational role by spreading awareness about the RTI Act
among the public.
 It encourages public authorities to update their records and ensure proactive
disclosures under Section 4 of the Act.
PENALTIES UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005
1. Imposing Penalties for Non-Compliance:
The Information Commission (either Central or State) has the power to impose penalties on
PIOs in the following situations:
 Delay in providing information: If the PIO fails to provide the requested
information within the stipulated time (usually 30 days).
 Refusal to accept an RTI application: If the PIO refuses to receive an RTI request
without any reasonable cause.
 Providing incomplete, incorrect, or misleading information.
 Destruction of information that was requested.
 Malafide (deliberate) denial of information: If the PIO denies information with bad
intent.
2. Quantum of Penalty:
 The penalty can be ₹250 per day of delay, starting from the date when the
information was due, until the information is provided.
 However, the total penalty amount cannot exceed ₹25,000.
3. Disciplinary Action:
  In addition to the monetary penalty, the Information Commission can recommend
disciplinary action against the PIO under the relevant service rules if the PIO is
found to have acted with malice or bad intent.
4. Opportunity to Be Heard:
 Before imposing any penalty, the PIO must be given a chance to explain their
reasons for the delay or failure to provide the information. If the PIO can prove that
the delay or failure was due to reasonable cause, the penalty may not be imposed.

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION (MANAGEMENT) REGULATIONS,

2007
The Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007 were formulated
to provide a structured framework for the smooth functioning and management of the
Central Information Commission (CIC). These regulations lay down the procedures for
handling complaints, appeals, and the overall management of the affairs of the CIC under the
Right to Information Act, 2005.
1. Scope and Applicability:
 These regulations apply to all matters concerning the processing of complaints and
second appeals that are filed with the Central Information Commission.
 They define the internal processes the CIC follows for managing its day-to-day work,
especially concerning the handling of RTI cases.
2. Filing of Appeals and Complaints:
 Appeals: Any person who is not satisfied with the decision of the Public Information
Officer (PIO) or the First Appellate Authority (FAA) can file a second appeal with
the Central Information Commission.
 Complaints: A complaint can be filed with the CIC if:
o The PIO refuses to accept the RTI request.
o No response is received from the PIO within the prescribed time.
o The fee charged for information is unreasonable.
o False, incomplete, or misleading information is provided.
o Any other violations of the RTI Act occur.
3. Procedure for Appeals and Complaints:
 The appeal or complaint must be in writing and submitted in the prescribed format.
 It should include relevant details, such as copies of the RTI application, the PIO’s
response (if any), and the decision of the First Appellate Authority (FAA), if
applicable.
  If a complaint is filed, supporting documents or evidence related to the non-
compliance should be provided.
4. Admissibility of Appeals and Complaints:
 The CIC will examine whether the appeal or complaint is admissible.
 If an appeal or complaint does not meet the basic requirements or if it is incomplete,
the Commission may ask the appellant or complainant to rectify the deficiencies
within a specific period.
5. Summary Disposal of Appeals/Complaints:
 The Commission has the power to summarily dismiss appeals or complaints that:
o Are frivolous or vexatious.
o Lack substantive grounds.
o Are filed after a long delay without any reasonable cause for the delay.
6. Hearings:
 The Central Information Commission can conduct hearings to dispose of appeals and
complaints.
 These hearings can be done in person or via video conferencing to ensure
convenience.
 The appellant, complainant, or any public authority involved may be required to be
present, and the CIC can summon the Public Information Officer (PIO) or any other
relevant party to present their case.
7. Issuance of Orders:
 After examining all records and evidence, the Commission will issue an order. This
order is binding and can:
o Direct the public authority to disclose the information.
o Impose penalties on the PIO for failure to comply with the RTI Act.
o Recommend disciplinary action against erring officers.
8. Record Keeping and Publication:
 The CIC is required to maintain records of all cases (appeals and complaints) and
their final outcomes.
 The Commission must also publish its decisions to ensure transparency. Many of
these decisions are available on the CIC’s website for public access.
9. Management of the Central Information Commission:
 These regulations outline the administrative and operational framework for managing
the work within the CIC.
  The CIC is empowered to make internal decisions regarding its functioning, allocation
of cases to different Information Commissioners, and handling of workload.
10. Penalties and Compliance:
 The regulations also lay down procedures for imposing penalties on erring officials as
per the provisions of the RTI Act (Section 20).
 The CIC has the authority to monitor whether its orders are complied with, including
the imposition of penalties or recommendations for disciplinary action.

 UNIT 7 – APPEAL

INTRODUCTION
 Under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), if a person is dissatisfied with
the response or decision of a Public Information Officer (PIO) or the First Appellate
Authority (FAA), they can file an appeal.
 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.
APPEAL PROCESS UNDER THE RTI ACT
The RTI Act provides for a two-stage appeal process:
First Appeal:
 When to file: If the applicant does not receive a response from the PIO within the
stipulated time (usually 30 days), or is not satisfied with the information provided,
they can file a First Appeal.
 Where to file: The First Appeal is filed with the First Appellate Authority (FAA),
who is an officer senior in rank to the PIO in the same public authority.
 Time Limit: The First Appeal must be filed within 30 days from the date of receiving
the PIO's response or after the expiration of the 30-day period if no response is
received.
 Decision Timeline: The FAA must dispose of the appeal within 30-45 days.
Second Appeal:
 When to file: If the appellant is not satisfied with the decision of the FAA or if the
FAA does not respond within the stipulated time, they can file a Second Appeal with
the Central Information Commission (CIC) or the State Information Commission
(SIC), depending on whether it is a central or state public authority.
  Where to file: The Second Appeal is filed with the Central Information
Commission (for central government matters) or the State Information Commission
(for state government matters).
 Time Limit: The Second Appeal must be filed within 90 days from the date of the
decision of the First Appellate Authority (FAA).
DOCUMENTS REQUIRED TO FILE AN APPEAL
To file an appeal (whether First or Second), the appellant must submit the following
documents:
For the First Appeal:
1. Copy of the original RTI application submitted to the PIO.
2. Copy of the reply (if any) received from the PIO.
3. Self-attested copies of supporting documents, if any, related to the RTI request.
4. Grounds for the appeal: A brief note stating the reasons for the appeal (e.g., non-
receipt of information, incomplete or unsatisfactory information).
5. Appeal form (if required by the concerned public authority).
6. A copy of the postal receipt or acknowledgment as proof of submission of the RTI
application to the PIO (if no response was received).
For the Second Appeal:
1. Copy of the First Appeal filed with the First Appellate Authority.
2. Copy of the First Appellate Authority’s decision (if received).
3. Copy of the original RTI application and the PIO's reply (if any).
4. Detailed grounds for the Second Appeal, stating why the appellant is not satisfied
with the FAA’s decision or response.
5. A copy of the postal receipt or acknowledgment as proof of submission of the First
Appeal to the FAA.
6. Any other relevant supporting documents.
PROCEDURE FOR DECIDING AN APPEAL
The procedure for deciding an appeal under the RTI Act involves the following steps:
For the First Appeal (FAA Level):
1. Examination of the Appeal: The FAA reviews the RTI application, the PIO's
response (if any), and the grounds for the appeal.
2. Opportunity to be Heard: The FAA may call the appellant and the PIO for a hearing
to gather more information or clarify any points. However, hearings are not
mandatory, and the FAA can decide based on the written submissions.
 3. Issuance of Decision: After reviewing all relevant information, the FAA will issue an
order. This may include:
o Directing the PIO to provide the requested information.
o Upholding the PIO’s decision.
o Modifying the PIO’s response.
For the Second Appeal (CIC/SIC Level):
1. Registration of Appeal: Once the appeal is received, the Information Commission
(CIC or SIC) will register the appeal and issue a notice to the appellant and the public
authority (PIO or FAA).
2. Calling for Records: The Commission may request the relevant records from the PIO
and FAA for examination.
3. Hearing Process:
o The Commission may conduct a hearing where both the appellant and the
public authority (PIO and/or FAA) can present their case. This hearing may be
conducted in person or via video conferencing.
o If either party fails to appear for the hearing, the Commission can proceed
based on the available records.
o The Commission may also allow the appellant to present any additional
evidence or documentation.
4. Issuance of Final Order: After examining the records and hearing both sides, the
Information Commission will issue its final decision. This may include:
o Directing the PIO to provide the information.
o Imposing penalties on the PIO for non-compliance or delay.
o Recommending disciplinary action against the PIO.
PRESENCE OF APPELLANT
In First Appeal (FAA Level):
 The presence of the appellant is not mandatory. The FAA can decide the appeal
based on the documents and written submissions.
 However, if the FAA finds it necessary, they may summon the appellant and/or the
PIO for a hearing.
In Second Appeal (CIC/SIC Level):
 The presence of the appellant is generally advisable but not compulsory.
 The Information Commission may hold a hearing where the appellant is given an
opportunity to present their case in person or through a representative.
  If the appellant cannot be present, they can submit a written statement or request the
case to be decided based on written submissions.
 In some cases, hearings can be conducted via video conferencing for the convenience
of the appellant.
FIRST APPEAL
 The First Appeal under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 is the initial step
an applicant can take if they are dissatisfied with the response from a Public
Information Officer (PIO) or if they do not receive a response within the stipulated
time.
 The First Appeal is a crucial part of the RTI process, ensuring that citizens can
challenge any denial or delay of information by public authorities.
PROVISIONS RELATING TO FIRST APPEAL UNDER THE RTI ACT
The legal framework for the First Appeal is defined primarily in Section 19(1) and Section
19(6) of the RTI Act.
Section 19(1):
 If an applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the PIO or if no decision is received
within the stipulated time (30 days, or 48 hours in cases of life and liberty), the
applicant may file a First Appeal.
 The appeal is filed with the First Appellate Authority (FAA), an officer senior in
rank to the PIO in the same public authority.
Section 19(6):
 The First Appellate Authority (FAA) must decide the appeal within 30 to 45 days
from the date of receipt of the appeal.
 The FAA can extend this period but must provide reasons for the delay in writing.
 The FAA has the power to direct the PIO to provide the requested information or
rectify the PIO’s decision if found unjustified.
GROUNDS FOR FILING A FIRST APPEAL:
1. Non-receipt of information: If the PIO fails to provide the information within the
30-day period (or 48 hours in urgent cases).
2. Incomplete or unsatisfactory information: If the information provided is
incomplete, misleading, or incorrect.
3. Denial of information: If the PIO wrongfully denies information citing exemptions
that don’t apply.
4. Unreasonable fee: If the PIO charges an excessive fee for providing the information.
5. Refusal to accept the RTI application: If the PIO refuses to accept the application
without justification.
PROCEDURE FOR FILING A FIRST APPEAL:
1. Time Limit: The First Appeal must be filed within 30 days of receiving the PIO’s
decision or within 30 days from the expiry of the response time (30 days from filing
the RTI).
2. Form of Appeal: The appeal can be filed in writing and should include:
o A copy of the original RTI application.
o A copy of the PIO’s reply (if received).
o The grounds for the appeal (reasons for dissatisfaction with the PIO’s
response).
o Supporting documents, if any.
3. Submission: The appeal is submitted to the First Appellate Authority (FAA), who is
an officer senior to the PIO in the same public authority.
4. Processing the Appeal:
o The FAA will review the PIO’s response, the RTI application, and the
appellant’s arguments.
o The FAA may conduct a hearing, where the appellant and the PIO may be
asked to present their case. However, the FAA can also decide the case based
on written submissions.
5. FAA’s Decision:
o The FAA has the power to uphold, modify, or reverse the PIO’s decision.
o The decision must be provided within 30-45 days.
o If the FAA fails to respond, the applicant can proceed to file a Second Appeal
with the Information Commission.
CASE LAWS ON FIRST APPEAL UNDER THE RTI ACT:
Several judicial pronouncements have clarified and reinforced the scope and importance of
the First Appeal under the RTI Act. Some key cases are:
1. R.K. Jain v. Union of India (2018)
 Issue: The appellant sought inspection of third-party documents from the Customs
Department, which was denied by the PIO.
 Decision: The Central Information Commission (CIC) held that the denial of
information by the PIO was incorrect, as the information did not fall under any valid
exemption. The FAA directed the PIO to allow the inspection of the records.
 Key Takeaway: This case emphasized the duty of the FAA to carefully review the
PIO’s decision and protect the rights of the applicant to access information unless
valid exemptions are clearly established.
2. Suraj Prakash v. State Information Commission of Haryana (2012)
 Issue: The appellant did not receive a response from the PIO within the specified time
and filed a First Appeal. However, the FAA also failed to respond within the time
limit.
 Decision: The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that if the FAA fails to dispose
of the First Appeal within the prescribed time, the appellant has the right to directly
approach the State Information Commission.
 Key Takeaway: This case reinforced the timeliness of responses from the FAA and
established that undue delays violate the appellant’s rights.
3. Union of India v. Vishwas Bhamburkar (2013)
 Issue: The appellant filed a First Appeal after receiving incomplete information from
the PIO. The FAA upheld the PIO's decision without sufficient justification.
 Decision: The Delhi High Court criticized the mechanical disposal of the appeal by
the FAA and emphasized that the FAA must apply its mind and provide proper
reasons for its decision.
 Key Takeaway: This case highlighted the FAA’s duty to ensure proper scrutiny of
the PIO’s decision and not merely act as a rubber stamp.
4. Bhagat Singh v. Chief Information Commissioner (2008)
 Issue: The PIO refused to provide information, claiming exemptions under Section 8
of the RTI Act. The appellant filed a First Appeal, and the FAA upheld the PIO’s
decision.
 Decision: The Delhi High Court held that mere citing of exemptions under Section 8
is not sufficient to deny information. The FAA must ensure that the denial is based on
valid grounds and cannot mechanically support the PIO’s decision.
 Key Takeaway: This case established the importance of the FAA’s role in evaluating
exemptions and the burden of proof lies on the public authority to justify the denial of
information.
5. CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011)
 Issue: The appellant sought copies of evaluated answer sheets from the Central Board
of Secondary Education (CBSE), which was initially denied by the PIO. The appellant
filed a First Appeal, which was rejected.
 Decision: The Supreme Court of India held that evaluated answer sheets are
information under the RTI Act and must be disclosed unless exempted under
Section 8.
 Key Takeaway: This case confirmed the wide scope of the RTI Act and the FAA’s
responsibility to ensure transparency unless valid exemptions apply.
SECOND APPEAL
 A Second Appeal under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 is the final stage
of the appeal process when an applicant is dissatisfied with the decisions or inaction
of the First Appellate Authority (FAA) or does not receive a response within the
prescribed time.
 The Second Appeal is filed with the Central Information Commission (CIC) or the
State Information Commission (SIC), depending on whether the public authority is
under the central or state government.
PROVISIONS FOR SECOND APPEAL UNDER THE RTI ACT
The Second Appeal is governed by Section 19(3) of the RTI Act. Here are the key
provisions:
1. Right to File Second Appeal:
 Section 19(3) allows the applicant to file a Second Appeal with the CIC or SIC if they
are not satisfied with the decision of the FAA or if the FAA does not provide a
decision within the prescribed period (usually 30-45 days).
2. Time Limit to File Second Appeal:
 The Second Appeal must be filed within 90 days from the date of the First Appellate
Authority’s decision. However, the Information Commission can admit appeals after
the 90-day period if there is sufficient cause for the delay.
3. Grounds for Filing Second Appeal:
An applicant can file a Second Appeal for several reasons, including:
 Failure of the FAA to issue a decision within the time frame.
 Unsatisfactory decision by the FAA (e.g., information is still withheld, incomplete,
or incorrect).
 Unjustified denial of information by the PIO or FAA.
 Excessive fees being charged for information.
4. Procedure for Filing Second Appeal:
 The Second Appeal must be submitted in writing to the CIC (for central government
bodies) or the SIC (for state government bodies).
 It should include:
o A copy of the original RTI application.
o A copy of the PIO’s reply (if any).
o A copy of the First Appeal and the FAA’s decision (if received).
o Grounds for the Second Appeal, clearly stating why the applicant is
dissatisfied.
 o Any other relevant supporting documents.
 The appeal can be sent via post, email, or submitted in person at the Commission's
office.
5. Powers of the Information Commission:
The Information Commission has wide-ranging powers under Section 19(8) of the RTI Act
to ensure that public authorities comply with the law. These powers include:
 Ordering the public authority to provide the requested information.
 Imposing penalties on the PIO (under Section 20 of the Act) for malafide actions,
delay, or refusal to provide information.
 Recommending disciplinary action against the PIO or FAA.
 Compensating the appellant if it is found that they have suffered any loss or
detriment due to the non-disclosure of information.
6. Procedure During Hearing:
 The Information Commission may call for hearings where both the appellant and the
public authority (PIO/FAA) can present their cases. Hearings may be conducted in
person or via video conferencing.
 The Commission has the power to summon the PIO and require the submission of
documents and records relevant to the case.
KEY CASE LAWS RELATED TO SECOND APPEAL
Several judicial pronouncements have helped shape the interpretation and implementation of
the Second Appeal process under the RTI Act. Some important case laws include:
1. Union of India vs. Namit Sharma (2013)
 Background: The Supreme Court examined the qualifications of Information
Commissioners.
 Significance: The Court highlighted the importance of having independent and
competent Information Commissioners who can ensure a fair appeal process. It also
clarified that the decisions of Information Commissions should be well-reasoned and
transparent.
2. CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011)
 Background: The case dealt with the right of students to access their answer sheets
under the RTI Act.
 Significance: The Supreme Court emphasized that the purpose of the RTI Act is to
ensure maximum disclosure of information, and the exemptions under Section 8 of
the Act should be strictly interpreted. The ruling reinforced that citizens have the right
to access information unless a clear exemption applies.
3. Khanapuram Gandaiah vs. Administrative Officer (2010)
  Background: This case dealt with the issue of whether the Information Commission
has the power to direct public authorities to provide reasons for administrative
decisions.
 Significance: The Supreme Court ruled that the RTI Act provides access to
information that is held by public authorities, but it does not give the right to question
why an administrative decision was made unless that information is recorded. The
ruling clarified the scope of the Second Appeal process in terms of the types of
information that can be accessed.
4. J.K. Mittal vs. Central Information Commission (2013)
 Background: This case dealt with the penalty provisions under the RTI Act.
 Significance: The Delhi High Court held that penalties should not be imposed on
PIOs without providing them a reasonable opportunity to present their case. It
reinforced the principle of natural justice in Second Appeal proceedings.
5. Registrar of Companies vs. Dharmendra Kumar Garg (2012)
 Background: This case dealt with the issue of whether public authorities could charge
high fees for providing information.
 Significance: The Delhi High Court ruled that the fee structure under the RTI Act is
meant to facilitate access to information and should not be a barrier. The Court struck
down the imposition of arbitrary fees in RTI cases.

RTI RULES, 2019

 The RTI Rules, 2019 were notified by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances,
and Pensions, Government of India, under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
 These rules lay down the procedures and guidelines for the functioning of the Central
Information Commission (CIC) and govern appeals, complaints, and penalties
under the RTI Act. The RTI Rules, 2019, have replaced the earlier rules from 2012
and brought in some key changes regarding the tenure of Information Commissioners,
disposal of cases, and procedures for appeals and complaints.
KEY PROVISIONS OF RTI RULES, 2019
1. Tenure of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners:
o Rule 3: The Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and Information
Commissioners (ICs) shall hold office for a term of three years from the date
of their appointment, or until they reach the age of 65 years, whichever is
earlier.
o This is a significant change, as the earlier rules (RTI Rules, 2012) provided a
fixed tenure of five years or until the age of 65 years, whichever was earlier.
2. Term of State Information Commissioners:
 o Rule 3(3): The Chief State Information Commissioner (CSIC) and the State
Information Commissioners (SICs) will also have a tenure of three years, or
until they attain the age of 65, whichever is earlier.
3. Salary and Allowances of Information Commissioners:
o Rule 4: The salary, allowances, and other terms of service for the Chief
Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners at the central and
state levels will be as decided by the central government.
o The salary for the CIC is equivalent to the Chief Election Commissioner
(CEC), and for the ICs, it is equivalent to the Election Commissioners.
o In case the CIC or IC is receiving a pension or any other retirement benefits
from the previous government service, their salary may be reduced
accordingly.
4. Filing of Appeals and Complaints:
o Rule 8: A person who is not satisfied with the decision of the Public
Information Officer (PIO) or First Appellate Authority (FAA) may file a
Second Appeal with the Central Information Commission (CIC) or lodge a
complaint with the CIC.
o The Second Appeal must be filed within 90 days from the date on which the
decision of the FAA was received.
o In the case of a complaint, there is no prescribed time limit for filing.
5. Disposal of Appeals and Complaints:
o Rule 11: The Information Commission (CIC or SIC) can dispose of a case
after receiving the written submissions of both parties. It is not mandatory to
hold hearings.
o However, the Commission can choose to call for a hearing if deemed
necessary. Hearings can be conducted in person or through video
conferencing.
o The Commission can seek additional information, documents, or clarifications
from the public authority or the complainant/appellant during the process.
6. Withdrawal of Appeal or Complaint:
o Rule 12: If an appellant or complainant wishes to withdraw their appeal or
complaint, they may request the Commission to permit such a withdrawal. The
Commission can grant or reject this request based on its judgment.
7. Procedure for Imposing Penalties:
o Rule 14: The Commission can impose penalties under Section 20 of the RTI
Act if it finds that the PIO has not furnished the information within the
prescribed time or has given misleading or incomplete information.
 o Before imposing a penalty, the Commission must provide the PIO an
opportunity to be heard. The PIO will be asked to explain the reasons for the
delay or non-compliance.
o The penalty can be up to ₹250 per day of delay (up to a maximum of
₹25,000).
8. Opportunity for Hearing:
o Rule 13: Both the appellant and the public authority (PIO) have the right to be
heard before the Commission makes a final decision. If either party does not
appear for the hearing, the Commission may proceed with the case based on
the available documents and evidence.
9. Service of Notice:
o Rule 10: The Information Commission can serve notice to the
appellant/complainant or public authority by delivering a copy in person, by
post, or by email. Electronic service of notices is allowed to expedite the
process.
KEY CHANGES INTRODUCED BY RTI RULES, 2019
The 2019 rules introduced several important changes, some of which were contentious:
1. Reduced Tenure for Information Commissioners: The earlier rules allowed the
Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and the Information Commissioners (ICs) to
hold office for five years, but the RTI Rules, 2019, reduced this to three years. This
was viewed as a dilution of their independence, as shorter tenure might increase
political influence.
2. Government Control Over Salaries: The rules allow the central government to
determine the salary and allowances of the CIC and ICs. Earlier, their salary was fixed
and equated to the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners.
Now, the government has greater flexibility in deciding their salary.
3. No Fixed Time Limit for Disposal of Appeals: Unlike the previous rules, the RTI
Rules, 2019, do not specify a fixed time period for the disposal of Second Appeals or
complaints. The Commission can take its own time to decide cases, which has raised
concerns about delays in resolving information disputes.
4. No Fixed Time Limit for Complaints: The rules do not prescribe any time limit for
filing complaints with the Information Commission. While appeals must be filed
within 90 days, complaints can be lodged without any time restriction.
CRITICISM OF RTI RULES, 2019
The RTI Rules, 2019, have faced criticism from transparency advocates and civil society
groups due to the following concerns:
 Reduction in Tenure: The reduction of the tenure of CICs and ICs from five to three
years is seen as undermining their independence, making them more susceptible to
external pressures.
  Government Control Over Salaries: Allowing the government to determine the
salary and allowances of Information Commissioners gives the executive more
influence over their functioning.
 No Fixed Time Limit for Disposal of Appeals: The absence of a prescribed time
limit for disposing of Second Appeals or complaints has raised concerns about
potential delays in accessing information.

 UNIT 8 – USA AND UK

RTI IN U.K
 The Right to Information (RTI) framework in the United Kingdom is governed by
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
 The UK’s FOIA is designed to promote transparency and accountability in public
authorities by granting the public the right to access information held by public
bodies.
 It came into force on January 1, 2005, and covers a wide range of public authorities,
including government departments, local authorities, health trusts, schools, and police
forces.
1. Overview of the Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 came into force on 1 January 2005 and allows
members of the public to request information from public authorities. It was introduced to
enhance democratic accountability and provide a means for citizens to access information
that is held by public bodies.
Key Objectives of FOIA:
 To promote transparency and openness in government.
 To enable public access to information held by public authorities.
 To foster accountability and participation in the democratic process.
2. Scope of the Act
The FOIA applies to a wide range of public authorities, including:
 Central government departments (e.g., Home Office, Treasury).
 Local authorities (e.g., councils).
 Publicly funded bodies (e.g., NHS trusts, universities).
 Non-departmental public bodies (e.g., regulators).
 The armed forces, police, and certain other public bodies.
3. Key Provisions of FOIA
Right to Access Information
  Under Section 1, any person has the right to request access to information held by
public authorities.
 Public authorities are obliged to provide information unless exemptions apply.
Requesting Information
 Section 8 outlines the requirements for making a request. The request must:
o Be made in writing (including email).
o Describe the information requested.
o Include the requester's name and contact details.
Response Timeframe
 Public authorities are required to respond to requests promptly, usually within 20
working days of receiving the request.
 If a request is complex or involves a significant volume of information, the authority
may extend the timeframe but must inform the requester of the delay.
Exemptions
 The FOIA includes a number of exemptions under Sections 21-44 that allow public
authorities to withhold information. These exemptions can be broadly categorized as:
o Absolute Exemptions: Information that is completely exempt from disclosure
(e.g., national security, personal data).
o Qualified Exemptions: Information that can be withheld only if it is not in the
public interest to disclose (e.g., law enforcement, commercial interests).
 Public authorities must provide reasons for refusing a request based on an exemption.
Public Interest Test
 For qualified exemptions, authorities must conduct a public interest test to determine
whether the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest
in withholding it.
4. Enforcement and Oversight
Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)
 The Information Commissioner’s Office is the independent authority responsible
for promoting and enforcing the FOIA. The ICO has several key functions:
o Guidance: Provides guidance to public authorities and the public about their
rights and responsibilities under the FOIA.
o Monitoring Compliance: Monitors how public authorities comply with the
law.
 o Investigating Complaints: Investigates complaints from individuals who
believe their requests for information have been wrongly refused.
Appeals Process
 If a requester is dissatisfied with the response from a public authority, they can:
o Request an internal review within the public authority.
o If still unsatisfied, appeal to the Information Commissioner. The ICO can
issue a decision notice that requires the public authority to comply with the
FOIA if the request was wrongfully denied.
5. Additional Related Legislation
In addition to the FOIA, there are other pieces of legislation related to transparency and
access to information, including:
 Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR): This law grants public access
to environmental information held by public authorities.
 Data Protection Act 2018: This law governs the processing of personal data and
complements the rights provided under the FOIA, especially regarding personal
information.
6. Practical Implications of FOIA
 The FOIA has empowered citizens to access information about government decisions,
policies, and public spending, enhancing democratic engagement.
 It has led to increased transparency in public authorities, fostering public trust.
 However, there are challenges, including:
o Compliance: Some authorities may struggle with compliance due to a lack of
resources or knowledge.
o Abuse of Process: There have been concerns about individuals or
organizations misusing the FOIA to harass public authorities or for
commercial gain.
o Information Overload: The sheer volume of requests can overwhelm some
authorities, potentially leading to delays in responses.
7. Recent Developments and Reforms
In recent years, there have been discussions about potential reforms to the FOIA to address
concerns about misuse and to improve compliance. Some proposals include:
 Introducing new exemptions to protect sensitive information.
 Streamlining the appeals process to make it more efficient.
 Enhancing training for public authorities to ensure they understand their obligations
under the FOIA.
RTI IN USA
 The Right to Information (RTI) in the United States is primarily governed by the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), enacted in 1966 and significantly amended
over the years.
 FOIA establishes the public’s right to access records from any federal agency,
ensuring transparency and accountability in government. Here’s a detailed overview
of the FOIA, including its provisions, processes, exemptions, and related laws.
1. Overview of FOIA
 Purpose: The Freedom of Information Act was designed to promote transparency and
ensure public access to government records. It allows citizens to request information
from federal agencies, encouraging openness and accountability.
 Scope: FOIA applies to federal executive branch agencies, including departments,
agencies, and commissions. It does not apply to Congress, the courts, or state and
local governments, though many states have their own freedom of information laws.
2. Key Provisions of FOIA
 Request Process:
o Who Can Request: Any person, U.S. citizen or not, can submit a FOIA
request.
o How to Request: Requests can be made in writing (via mail, email, or online
forms) and should include a description of the records sought. Agencies are
encouraged to assist requesters in formulating requests that can be fulfilled.
o No Reason Required: Requesters do not need to explain why they are seeking
the information.
 Response Time: Agencies are required to respond to FOIA requests within 20
business days. However, this timeframe can be extended under certain circumstances,
particularly for complex requests.
 Fees: Agencies may charge fees for processing requests, though fee waivers are
available for those who can demonstrate that the disclosure of information is in the
public interest.
3. Exemptions
While FOIA promotes transparency, it includes nine exemptions that allow agencies to
withhold information under specific circumstances:
1. National Security: Information that is classified in the interest of national defense or
foreign relations (Exemption 1).
2. Internal Agency Rules: Records related to internal agency rules and practices
(Exemption 2).
3. Statutory Exemptions: Information specifically exempted from disclosure by statute
(Exemption 3).
 4. Trade Secrets: Commercial or financial information that is confidential or privileged
(Exemption 4).
5. Inter-agency or Intra-agency Memoranda: Certain records that reflect the
deliberative process and are protected (Exemption 5).
6. Personal Privacy: Information that would constitute an unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy (Exemption 6).
7. Law Enforcement: Records compiled for law enforcement purposes that could
reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings (Exemption 7).
8. Financial Institutions: Information related to the supervision of financial institutions
(Exemption 8).
9. Geological and Geophysical Information: Records concerning oil and gas wells
(Exemption 9).
4. Appeals and Litigation
 Administrative Appeals: If a request is denied or if the requester is dissatisfied with
the response (e.g., excessive fees, inadequate search), they can file an administrative
appeal within the agency.
 Judicial Review: If the administrative appeal is unsuccessful, the requester can seek
judicial review in federal court, where the burden of proof lies with the agency to
justify the denial of access to records.
5. FOIA Improvement Act of 2016
This amendment to FOIA aimed to strengthen transparency by:
 Presumption of Openness: Agencies must apply a presumption of openness when
responding to requests.
 Limits on Exemptions: The law introduced limitations on the use of Exemption 5,
particularly regarding deliberative process documents, to enhance public access to
government records.
 Online Availability: Agencies are encouraged to make more records available online
to facilitate public access without the need for requests.
6. Related Laws and Regulations
In addition to FOIA, several other laws govern access to information in specific contexts:
 Privacy Act of 1974: Regulates the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination
of personally identifiable information held by federal agencies, ensuring individuals’
privacy rights are respected.
 Government in the Sunshine Act: Requires that meetings of federal agencies be
open to the public, enhancing transparency in government operations.
 Federal Records Act: Governs the creation, maintenance, and disposal of federal
records, ensuring that records are preserved for future access and accountability.
7. State Freedom of Information Laws
Each state has its own freedom of information laws, which govern access to state and local
government records. While there are similarities to FOIA, the specifics vary by state in terms
of the scope of records covered, the process for requesting information, and the exemptions
available.
8. Challenges and Criticisms
Despite its intention to promote transparency, FOIA faces several challenges:
 Backlogs and Delays: Many agencies struggle with backlogs of requests and fail to
meet the 20-day response deadline, leading to significant delays in obtaining
information.
 Excessive Redactions: Agencies may overly redact documents, citing exemptions
that can sometimes appear to be applied too liberally.
 Fee Structures: The fee structure can act as a barrier for some requesters, especially
those unable to afford the costs associated with large requests.

 UNIT 9 – DRAFTING
INTRODUCTION

 Drafting a Right to Information (RTI) application requires clarity, precision, and

adherence to specific guidelines set out under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in
India.
1. Who Can Make an RTI Application?
Any citizen of India can file an RTI application. The Act does not impose any restrictions
based on age, gender, or profession. This includes:
 Individual citizens
 Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
 Educational institutions
 Any other body comprising Indian citizens
2. How to Draft Your RTI Application
Here are the key elements to include when drafting an RTI application:
a. Format and Structure
 Title: Start with a title, typically “Application under the Right to Information Act,
2005.”
  To Whom It May Concern: Address the application to the relevant Public
Information Officer (PIO) or the First Appellate Authority (FAA). It’s best to mention
the name of the department or the public authority.
 Applicant’s Information: Provide your name, address, and contact information. If
you wish to receive information by post, it’s important to include your full address.
b. Content of the Application
 Subject/Request: Clearly state that you are seeking information under the RTI Act.
You may use a line like, “I am seeking information under the Right to Information
Act, 2005.”
 Details of Information Required: Specify the information you seek. Be as precise
and concise as possible. If there are multiple queries, number them for clarity.
 Relevant Period: If applicable, mention the time period for which you are requesting
the information.
 Mode of Receiving Information: Indicate how you would like to receive the
information (e.g., via post, email, or in person).
 Fee Payment: Mention the mode of payment for the RTI application fee. Generally,
the application fee is ₹10, which can be paid through cash, demand draft, postal order,
or any other prescribed mode.
 Signature: Sign the application at the bottom.
3. Sample RTI Application
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, Zip Code]
[Email Address]
[Phone Number]

Date: [DD/MM/YYYY]

To,
The Public Information Officer (PIO)
[Name of the Department or Public Authority]
[Address of the Department]
[City, State, Zip Code]
Subject: Application under the Right to Information Act, 2005

Respected Sir/Madam,

I, [Your Name], a citizen of India, hereby request the following information under the Right
to Information Act, 2005.

1. Please provide the details of the training programs conducted by [Name of Department] in
the financial year [specify year]. I would like to know:
a. The number of training programs conducted.
b. The total number of participants in each training program.
c. The names of the trainers or resource persons involved.

2. If any of the requested information is held in electronic format, kindly provide it via email
at [Your Email Address] or send it to my address mentioned above.

I am enclosing the application fee of ₹10 in the form of [mention mode of payment, e.g.,
cash, demand draft, postal order, etc.].

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt response within the
stipulated time frame as per the RTI Act.

Sincerely,

[Your Signature]
[Your Name]

DRAFTING APPEAL
 Drafting an appeal under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 is an important
step if you are not satisfied with the response received from the Public Information
Officer (PIO) or the First Appellate Authority (FAA).
1. Understanding the Appeal Process
An appeal can be filed in the following situations:
  If the PIO does not respond within the stipulated time (30 days).
 If the information provided is incomplete, misleading, or denied without sufficient
reason.
 If the fees charged are excessive.
2. Format and Structure of the RTI Appeal
Here’s how to structure your appeal:
a. Title
 Begin with a title indicating that it is an "Appeal under the Right to Information Act,
2005."
b. Applicant's Information
 Your Name: Clearly mention your name.
 Your Address: Include your full address.
 Contact Information: Add your phone number and/or email address.
c. Date
 Write the date on which you are drafting the appeal.
d. To Whom It May Concern
 Address the appeal to the First Appellate Authority (FAA) of the respective
department or public authority.
e. Subject
 Clearly state that this is an appeal under the RTI Act regarding your previous request.
f. Background of the Appeal
 Mention the date of your original RTI application.
 State the name of the PIO and the public authority to whom you originally applied.
 Include any reference number or application number given by the PIO.
g. Grounds for Appeal
 Clearly outline the reasons for your appeal:
o Specify if there was no response within the stipulated time.
o Mention if the response was inadequate, incomplete, or unsatisfactory.
o Highlight any excessive fees charged or any other issues faced.
h. Request for Relief
 Clearly state what you expect from the FAA (e.g., providing the information, revising
the fees, etc.).
i. Signature
 Conclude with your signature and name.
3. Sample RTI Appeal
[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State, Zip Code]
[Email Address]
[Phone Number]

Date: [DD/MM/YYYY]

To,
The First Appellate Authority
[Name of the Department/Public Authority]
[Address of the Department]
[City, State, Zip Code]

Subject: Appeal under the Right to Information Act, 2005

Respected Sir/Madam,

I, [Your Name], a citizen of India, hereby submit my appeal under Section 19 of the Right to
Information Act, 2005, regarding my RTI application dated [DD/MM/YYYY], which I
submitted to [Name of PIO/Department].

1. **Details of the Original RTI Application**:

- **RTI Application Date**: [DD/MM/YYYY]
- **Application Number**: [If provided by the PIO]
- **PIO's Name**: [Name of the PIO]
- **Public Authority**: [Name of the Department/Public Authority]
2. **Grounds for Appeal**:
- [State the specific reason for your appeal. For example: - I did not receive a response
within the stipulated 30 days. - The information provided was incomplete/misleading. -
The fees charged were excessive.]

3. **Request for Relief**:

- I request you to kindly review my original application and provide the requested
information as per the provisions of the RTI Act.

I am attaching a copy of my original RTI application and the response received (if any) for
your reference.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt response.

Sincerely,

[Your Signature]
[Your Name]

 UNIT 10

THE WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT, 2014

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 and the Whistleblower Protection Act, 2014
serve complementary roles in promoting transparency, accountability, and good governance
in India. While the RTI Act empowers citizens to seek information from public authorities,
the Whistleblower Protection Act safeguards individuals (whistleblowers) who expose
corruption, abuse of power, and mismanagement in government bodies. Here's how the two
laws interrelate and their combined impact on promoting transparency:
1. Overview of the RTI Act and Whistleblower Protection Act
RTI Act, 2005
 Purpose: Promotes transparency by allowing citizens to access information from
public authorities.
 Scope: Applies to all public authorities, ensuring they provide timely and accurate
information unless it falls under certain exemptions (e.g., national security, privacy).
  Main Focus: Empower citizens to hold the government accountable by obtaining
information on decisions, policies, and expenditures.
Whistleblower Protection Act, 2014
 Purpose: Provides protection to individuals who expose corruption or wrongdoing in
government bodies, ensuring that they do not face retribution for reporting such
activities.
 Scope: Applies to all public servants and institutions under the central and state
governments, protecting whistleblowers from victimization and ensuring their
complaints are investigated.
 Main Focus: Encourage the reporting of corruption and misconduct by protecting the
identity and safety of whistleblowers.
2. Applicability and Linkages Between RTI and the Whistleblower Protection Act
Both Acts aim to foster transparency and accountability in governance, though they operate in
slightly different ways. Here's how they intersect:
a. Whistleblowers and RTI Requesters
 Common Role of Citizens: Both the RTI Act and the Whistleblower Protection Act
empower citizens to act as watchdogs over public institutions. Citizens can use the
RTI Act to obtain documents and information that may reveal corrupt practices,
mismanagement, or the misuse of public funds. Whistleblowers can similarly report
wrongdoings within the system but with the added assurance of legal protection
against retaliation.
 Protection of RTI Activists: In several cases, RTI applicants have faced threats,
harassment, or violence for exposing sensitive information, especially concerning
corruption. Many activists have sought protection under the Whistleblower Protection
Act. However, there has been debate on whether the Whistleblower Act should
explicitly extend protection to RTI users who expose corruption through the
information obtained.
b. Overlapping Goals
 Preventing Corruption: The core objective of both the RTI and the Whistleblower
Protection Act is to combat corruption and increase government transparency.
Citizens may use the RTI Act to gather evidence of wrongdoing, and if they are
subjected to threats or retaliation after exposing such corruption, they may seek
protection under the Whistleblower Protection Act.
 Whistleblowers Using RTI Information: Whistleblowers can use information
gathered through RTI applications as evidence when reporting corruption or
misconduct to investigative authorities. The RTI Act can thus act as a tool for
whistleblowers in their efforts to expose wrongdoing.
3. Whistleblower Protection and RTI Exemptions
The RTI Act includes specific exemptions that restrict access to certain types of information,
especially if releasing such information could:
 Compromise national security (Section 8(1)(a))
 Affect ongoing investigations (Section 8(1)(h))
 Infringe on the privacy of individuals (Section 8(1)(j))
However, under the Whistleblower Protection Act, certain exemptions might be relaxed for
whistleblowers if the information pertains to exposing corruption, abuse of authority, or
public interest concerns. This balance is crucial to allow whistleblowers access to the
information they need to report wrongdoing while still safeguarding sensitive government
information.
4. Differences in Approach
RTI Act
 Citizen-driven Information Disclosure: The RTI Act is based on the premise that all
information held by public authorities should be accessible to the public unless
specifically exempted.
 Focus on Transparency: It encourages transparency across all levels of government
by allowing any citizen to request information.
Whistleblower Protection Act
 Protection from Retaliation: The Whistleblower Protection Act focuses on
protecting individuals who disclose illegal or unethical behavior within public bodies,
shielding them from any form of retaliation or victimization.
 Confidential Reporting: Unlike the RTI Act, where requests are made publicly,
whistleblower complaints can be made confidentially to safeguard the identity of the
whistleblower.
5. Case Laws Highlighting the Interplay Between RTI and Whistleblower Protection
1. Shehla Masood Case (2011): RTI activist Shehla Masood was murdered in 2011
while investigating corruption in Madhya Pradesh using the RTI Act. The case drew
attention to the vulnerabilities faced by RTI activists and the need for whistleblower
protection laws to safeguard such individuals.
2. Satish Shetty Case (2010): Another high-profile murder of an RTI activist, Satish
Shetty, who had exposed land scams, underscored the importance of protecting
individuals who use the RTI Act to expose corruption.
These cases led to increased demands for better protection of RTI activists under the
Whistleblower Protection Act or similar legal frameworks.
6. Challenges and Criticisms
 Delayed Implementation of the Whistleblower Protection Act: Although the Act
was passed in 2014, it has faced delays in implementation, and amendments have
 been proposed that could weaken its provisions by restricting disclosures related to
national security, official secrets, etc.
 No Direct Protection for RTI Activists: The Whistleblower Protection Act does not
explicitly protect RTI activists, despite many RTI users acting as whistleblowers by
exposing corruption through the information they obtain.
 Lack of Awareness: Both laws suffer from a lack of public awareness, particularly
among government employees and the general public. Whistleblowers may not be
fully aware of the protections available to them, while citizens might not fully
understand how to use the RTI Act to gather information that could expose corruption.
THE OFFICIAL SECRET ACT, 1923
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 and the Official Secrets Act, 1923 have
conflicting objectives. The RTI Act aims to promote transparency and accountability by
allowing citizens to access information held by public authorities, while the Official Secrets
Act (OSA) focuses on protecting sensitive information, particularly related to national
security, defense, and state secrets, by restricting the disclosure of such information.
Understanding how these two laws interact is important for balancing the public’s right to
know with the need to safeguard national interests.
1. Overview of the Official Secrets Act, 1923
The Official Secrets Act, 1923 is a colonial-era law enacted to protect state secrets and
ensure the safety of sensitive information, particularly related to defense and national
security. Key provisions of the OSA include:
 Criminalization of Disclosure: The OSA criminalizes the disclosure of any
information that could potentially harm national security, including espionage, spying,
and leakage of confidential documents.
 Broad Definition of "Secret Information": The Act covers a wide range of
information, from military and defense strategies to any information considered
confidential by the government, even if not explicitly related to national security.
 Penalties: Under the OSA, any unauthorized disclosure of protected information can
result in imprisonment, fines, or both.
2. The Conflict Between RTI and OSA
 RTI’s Objective of Transparency: The RTI Act was enacted to promote transparency
and empower citizens by giving them access to information held by public authorities.
It overrides most restrictions on information disclosure, with some specific
exemptions.
 OSA’s Focus on Secrecy: In contrast, the OSA prioritizes the protection of sensitive
government information and state secrets, with the potential to punish those who
disclose such information, even if the disclosure is in the public interest.
3. Section 8 of the RTI Act: Exemptions and National Security
While the RTI Act promotes transparency, it recognizes the need to protect sensitive
information, particularly where national security is concerned. Section 8(1) of the RTI Act
outlines several exemptions to disclosure, which can be invoked to deny information,
particularly if it:
 Affects the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state, strategic or
scientific interests, or friendly relations with foreign states.
 Concerns cabinet papers, including records of deliberations of the Council of
Ministers.
 Is expressly forbidden by any court or tribunal, or if disclosure could lead to
contempt of court.
This section provides a framework for balancing transparency with confidentiality, and it
includes matters that overlap with the concerns of the OSA, especially when it comes to
defense, security, and strategic information.
4. How the RTI Act Overrides the OSA
The RTI Act, under Section 22, includes a superseding clause that states:
“The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith
contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being in force.”
This clause means that, in cases where the provisions of the RTI Act conflict with the Official
Secrets Act, the RTI Act will take precedence. This implies that unless the information falls
within the specific exemptions of Section 8 or 9 of the RTI Act, it should be disclosed, even if
it was previously considered secret under the OSA.
5. Exceptions Where OSA Can Still Apply
While the RTI Act supersedes the OSA, the exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act
give leeway to withhold certain categories of information, many of which align with the
purpose of the OSA, such as:
 National security and defense: Information that could endanger the security of the
state, such as military strategies, intelligence reports, or sensitive defense-related
information.
 Confidentiality of foreign relations: Information that could harm relations with
foreign states or international organizations.
 Law enforcement: Information related to police investigations, criminal
prosecutions, or other law enforcement activities.
In such cases, public authorities may choose to deny an RTI request if disclosing the
information would violate these exemptions, some of which echo the objectives of the OSA.
6. Balancing Public Interest with Secrecy
The RTI Act also includes a public interest override in Section 8(2), which states that:
“Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 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.”
This provision allows for greater flexibility, as it ensures that even if the information is
covered by an exemption or protected under the OSA, it can still be disclosed if the public
interest in revealing the information is greater than the potential harm caused by the
disclosure. This provision is particularly significant in cases involving corruption, human
rights violations, or other instances where public accountability is at stake.
7. Judicial Interpretations and Case Laws
Several judicial rulings have clarified the relationship between the RTI Act and the Official
Secrets Act:
 Central Information Commission (CIC) Orders: The CIC, in many cases, has
directed the disclosure of information where it determined that the public interest in
transparency outweighed the concerns about secrecy under the OSA. For example, in
cases involving defense procurement or public projects, the CIC has ordered the
release of documents that would ordinarily fall under the OSA but were deemed
necessary to disclose for public accountability.
 Supreme Court Rulings: The Indian judiciary has often emphasized the importance
of transparency in governance, stating that secrecy should be maintained only in cases
where it is absolutely necessary for protecting national security or other vital interests.
In the Subhash Chandra Agrawal v. CIC & Others (2010) case, the Delhi High Court
ruled that information relating to judicial appointments and public interest cases could be
disclosed despite objections, provided that the public interest in transparency outweighed the
need for confidentiality.
8. The Need for Harmonization
There is an ongoing debate on the need to harmonize the provisions of the Official Secrets
Act with the Right to Information Act. Many experts argue that the OSA, being a colonial-
era law, is overly broad and outdated, and reforms are necessary to narrow its scope so that it
doesn’t unduly restrict transparency and the right to know.
Conclusion
The RTI Act, 2005, with its overriding provision, takes precedence over the Official Secrets
Act, 1923, in promoting transparency and the public's right to information. However, certain
exemptions under the RTI Act still allow for withholding sensitive information related to
national security, defense, and foreign relations, reflecting the concerns addressed by the
OSA. The balance between these two laws ensures that while the public can access most
government information, critical and sensitive information related to state security remains
protected.
THE CENTRAL CIVIL SERVICES RULES
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 and the Central Civil Services (CCS) Rules
intersect in several important ways. While the RTI Act promotes transparency by allowing
citizens to access government information, the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules,
1964 and the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965
govern the conduct and disciplinary procedures for government employees. Here’s an
overview of how the RTI Act applies in conjunction with these rules:
1. Transparency and Accountability under RTI
The RTI Act promotes openness and accountability by allowing citizens to access information
from public authorities, including information about the conduct of government employees
governed by the CCS Rules.
How RTI Applies to CCS Rules:
 Information about Conduct and Service Rules: Citizens can request information
about how government employees are adhering to the CCS (Conduct) Rules. This
includes details about disciplinary proceedings, promotions, transfers, leaves, and
compliance with codes of conduct.
 Public Servants’ Accountability: RTI allows the public to obtain information
regarding the actions and decisions made by public servants under the framework of
the CCS Rules. For example, if an employee violates the conduct rules, the public can
request information about the disciplinary action taken.
2. Restrictions and Exemptions under RTI Act
While RTI promotes transparency, it is subject to certain exemptions under Section 8 of the
RTI Act. Some of these exemptions are relevant when dealing with information about civil
servants.
Relevant Exemptions:
 Personal Information (Section 8(1)(j)): Information that pertains to personal matters
of civil servants, including salary slips, personal addresses, and service records, may
be exempt from disclosure unless it serves a larger public interest. For example,
detailed personal information about an officer’s conduct may not be disclosed if it
invades privacy.
 Confidential Information: Information that could affect national security,
sovereignty, or integrity, or which is classified as confidential in disciplinary or
administrative proceedings, may also be exempt under the RTI Act.
 Internal Deliberations (Section 8(1)(i)): Information related to inter-departmental
deliberations or advice given during administrative proceedings (including decision-
making under CCS Rules) may be exempt until a decision is made, after which it may
become public.
3. Disclosure of Disciplinary Proceedings under CCS Rules
 Disciplinary Proceedings: Information related to disciplinary action against a public
servant under the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 is often requested under RTI. Public
authorities are required to provide information regarding the initiation and outcome of
disciplinary proceedings, unless exempt under Section 8 of the RTI Act.
 o Transparency in Actions Taken: If disciplinary actions are taken against a
public servant for misconduct, citizens can request information regarding the
charge sheet, the inquiry report, and the outcome of the proceedings. However,
details that fall under “personal information” or that compromise the privacy
of the public servant may be withheld unless there is a larger public interest.
4. Applicability to Recruitment, Transfers, and Promotions
The CCS Rules govern the recruitment, transfers, and promotions of central government
employees. Under RTI, citizens can request:
 Information on Recruitment: Details about recruitment processes, criteria,
appointments, and vacancies in government departments, ensuring transparency in
hiring.
 Promotions and Transfers: The rules related to the promotion of government
employees and their transfers are often sought under RTI. Citizens can request details
about promotion policies and decisions to ensure that they are fair and in accordance
with the rules.
o Seniority Lists: Information related to the seniority of officers in government
services, promotion orders, and related documents can be obtained under RTI,
ensuring transparency in personnel management.
5. Use of RTI in Grievances and Appeals under CCS Rules
Government employees who are governed by the CCS Rules often use RTI to seek
information regarding the handling of their grievances and appeals. For example:
 Service Record and Disciplinary Action: Employees may use RTI to access their
service records, files, and any disciplinary proceedings initiated against them.
 Appeal Information: If a civil servant files an appeal against a disciplinary action or
service-related decision, they can use RTI to track the status of their appeal and the
reasons behind any decisions made by the authority.
6. Role of Public Information Officers (PIOs) in Applying CCS Rules
Public Information Officers (PIOs) play an important role in handling RTI requests related to
civil servants under the CCS Rules. They must:
 Assess Public Interest: When requests involve personal information or sensitive
matters under CCS Rules, PIOs must assess whether the disclosure serves a larger
public interest and balance this with the privacy rights of the employee.
 Facilitate Access to Information: PIOs are required to assist the public in obtaining
information about the implementation of the CCS Rules, such as government
employees' adherence to codes of conduct or the results of departmental inquiries.
7. Case Law Examples: RTI vs CCS Rules
 Girish Ramchandra Deshpande Case (2012): The Supreme Court ruled that
information such as property returns, income details, and disciplinary proceedings
 falls under "personal information" as per Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. However, if
there is a larger public interest in disclosing such information, it can be provided.
 DOPT Circulars: The Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT), which
oversees the CCS Rules, has issued circulars clarifying the kind of information that
can be shared under RTI. For example, information related to recruitment, seniority
lists, and promotion can be disclosed, but personal details of civil servants are
protected unless there’s a compelling public interest.
Conclusion
The Right to Information Act and Central Civil Services Rules work together to promote
transparency and accountability in the functioning of government employees. While the RTI
Act provides a legal framework for citizens to seek information about the conduct,
recruitment, promotion, and disciplinary actions of public servants, the CCS Rules ensure
that employees adhere to codes of conduct and are disciplined in a fair and transparent
manner. However, the RTI Act’s exemptions, especially those related to personal information,
play a crucial role in balancing the need for transparency with the right to privacy for
government employees.
ALL INDIA SERVICES CONDUCT RULES, 1968
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 and the All India Services (Conduct) Rules,
1968 are two separate legal frameworks, but they intersect when it comes to the transparency
and accountability of government servants. The RTI Act promotes transparency in public
institutions by allowing citizens to access information related to government functioning,
while the Conduct Rules govern the behavior and ethical standards of officers in the All
India Services (IAS, IPS, and IFS).
1. Overview of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968
The All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 lay down standards of conduct, behavior, and
ethics that officers of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS),
and Indian Forest Service (IFS) are expected to follow. These rules aim to ensure that officers
act with integrity, impartiality, and dedication to public service.
Key provisions include:
 Integrity and Honesty: Officers are expected to uphold integrity in public dealings
and avoid corruption.
 Prohibition of Misconduct: The rules prohibit certain behaviors such as engaging in
political activities, accepting gifts beyond a certain limit, or engaging in private
employment.
 Disclosure of Assets: Officers must disclose their assets and liabilities annually to the
government.
2. Applicability of RTI to the All India Services Conduct Rules
The RTI Act is applicable to public authorities at all levels of government, including central,
state, and local governments, and any institution that receives significant public funding.
Officers of the All India Services, being government employees, are part of these public
authorities and, as such, information related to their work, conduct, and administrative
decisions may fall under the purview of the RTI Act. Here’s how the RTI applies to the All
India Services (Conduct) Rules:
a. Transparency in Conduct and Accountability
 Disclosure of Assets: Under the Conduct Rules, All India Services officers must file
an annual return of their assets and liabilities. This information is considered public
under the RTI Act and is subject to disclosure, except when it falls under specific
exemptions related to privacy or security.
 Disciplinary Proceedings: If an officer violates the Conduct Rules, the proceedings,
inquiries, and penalties imposed on them may also be disclosed under the RTI Act.
Citizens can request information related to any disciplinary actions taken against an
officer, although there are certain privacy considerations (discussed under
exemptions).
b. Applicability of RTI to Service Records
Citizens can seek access to certain service records of All India Services officers, including:
 Service history: Transfers, postings, promotions, and other service-related records.
 Conduct-related information: Records related to misconduct, inquiries, and
penalties imposed under the Conduct Rules.
 Public actions: Any official action taken by officers that affects public interest can be
accessed under RTI.
c. Limitations and Exemptions Under the RTI Act
While the RTI Act promotes transparency, it also provides exemptions under Section 8 that
can limit the disclosure of certain information related to All India Services officers:
 Personal Information (Section 8(1)(j)): Information related to personal details,
including health, family, or private life, is exempt from disclosure unless it is
demonstrated that such disclosure is in the public interest.
 National Security: Information related to officers working in sensitive areas such as
internal security or defense may be exempt under the national security clause.
 Confidential Information: Information that has been obtained in confidence from a
foreign government, or pertains to ongoing investigations or court cases, is also
exempt from disclosure under RTI.
d. Disciplinary Action and RTI
If an officer violates the Conduct Rules, citizens may file an RTI request to obtain
information regarding:
 The nature of the violation.
 The disciplinary proceedings initiated against the officer.
  The outcome of the inquiry or penalty imposed.
However, these disclosures must be balanced with the officer’s right to privacy, and
exemptions related to personal information or ongoing investigations may apply. In some
cases, Information Commissions have ruled in favor of disclosure in public interest,
particularly when the information concerns corruption or abuse of power by an officer.
3. Case Law and Precedents
Several legal cases and judgments have shaped the interaction between the RTI Act and the
All India Services Conduct Rules:
 Disclosure of Assets: In Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs CIC & Ors (2012), the
Supreme Court ruled that personal information such as assets and liabilities of public
servants cannot be disclosed under RTI unless it is demonstrated that disclosure serves
a larger public interest.
 Disciplinary Actions: In the case of R.K. Jain vs Union of India (2013), the
Supreme Court held that information related to disciplinary actions against public
servants can be disclosed if it is in the public interest, particularly if the matter
concerns corruption or misuse of public office.
 Privacy vs Public Interest: In several cases, the courts and Central Information
Commission (CIC) have weighed the balance between an officer’s privacy and the
public interest in disclosing information about their conduct and assets. Information is
usually disclosed if it pertains to public duties or involves misuse of public office.
4. Balancing Transparency and Privacy
While the RTI Act promotes transparency, the All India Services Conduct Rules also protect
officers’ personal privacy and dignity. Therefore, public authorities must carefully assess RTI
requests related to officers’ conduct, ensuring that:
 Public interest: The disclosure serves a greater public interest, such as exposing
corruption or safeguarding public funds.
 Privacy: Personal information that does not affect public duty is protected.
Public authorities may use the doctrine of proportionality, ensuring that the disclosure of
information balances transparency with the legitimate right to privacy of officers.
Conclusion
The RTI Act and the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 intersect in promoting
transparency and accountability in the functioning of government officers. Public access to
information regarding officers' conduct, disciplinary actions, and their official actions under
the Conduct Rules is permitted under the RTI Act, but with certain limitations based on
privacy and security. Courts have consistently upheld the principles of public interest when it
comes to disclosures, particularly in cases involving corruption, misconduct, or abuse of
office.
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT, 1962
The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 provides citizens the right to access information
from public authorities, promoting transparency and accountability in government
functioning. However, the Act also contains certain exemptions, especially concerning
sensitive areas like national security, defense, and atomic energy, where unrestricted access to
information could potentially compromise national interests.
Atomic Energy Act, 1962 and Its Impact on RTI
The Atomic Energy Act, 1962, is a special law that governs the development, control, and
use of atomic energy in India. This Act contains provisions that restrict the disclosure of
information related to atomic energy, especially if it pertains to national security or other
sensitive matters. When RTI and the Atomic Energy Act intersect, the exemptions under both
laws come into play, limiting the scope of information that can be disclosed.
Key Points Regarding the Applicability of RTI with the Atomic Energy Act, 1962
1. Exemption Under Section 8 of RTI Act
Section 8(1) of the RTI Act lists exemptions where public authorities are not required to
disclose information. Specifically, Section 8(1)(a) exempts information that could:
 Prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India.
 Impact the security, strategic, scientific, or economic interests of the state.
 Affect relations with foreign states or lead to incitement of an offense.
Since atomic energy is closely related to national security and scientific advancements, many
aspects of the Atomic Energy Act fall under these exemptions, particularly in areas related to
nuclear technology, defense, and weaponization.
2. Section 18 of the Atomic Energy Act, 1962
Section 18 of the Atomic Energy Act is critical when determining the scope of information
disclosure. It prohibits the sharing of any information related to:
 The location, design, construction, operation, or maintenance of nuclear installations.
 The processes involved in nuclear fuel production, reprocessing, or handling
radioactive substances.
 The procurement and use of materials essential for atomic energy.
This makes information related to atomic energy, nuclear facilities, or defense-related
activities strictly confidential and thus not accessible under the RTI Act.
3. Public Interest Exception Under RTI
While the RTI Act encourages disclosure, Section 8(2) states that if the public interest in
disclosure outweighs the harm to protected interests, information can be disclosed. However,
in the case of information covered by the Atomic Energy Act, authorities are likely to
prioritize national security over public interest, making it difficult to access classified or
sensitive data even through RTI.
4. Department of Atomic Energy as a Public Authority
The Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) is a public authority under the RTI Act and is
subject to providing information on its functions and policies, as long as the information does
not pertain to matters restricted under the Atomic Energy Act, 1962, or RTI’s Section 8
exemptions. For example:
 Administrative information or general policies might be accessible.
 Details of projects involving nuclear technology, sensitive locations, or strategic
materials are generally exempt.
5. Role of Central Public Information Officers (CPIOs)
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Department of Atomic Energy plays
a crucial role in determining what information can be disclosed. CPIOs must evaluate
whether the requested information falls under the exemptions provided by both the RTI Act
and the Atomic Energy Act. They also provide reasons for denial, referencing the relevant
sections of these laws.
6. Judicial Precedents and Case Laws
Several judicial decisions highlight the limits of RTI in matters concerning atomic energy:
 Central Information Commission (CIC) has often ruled in favor of non-disclosure
when it comes to sensitive information regarding nuclear installations or research
facilities, emphasizing the importance of national security.
 Courts have generally upheld the government's decision to withhold information
under the Atomic Energy Act, given the sensitive nature of the subject matter.
Examples of Information Likely to Be Exempt
The following categories of information are likely to be exempt from disclosure under the
RTI Act due to the Atomic Energy Act:
 Details about the design and location of nuclear reactors and power plants.
 Information on nuclear weapons and defense-related nuclear programs.
 Research and development related to the strategic use of nuclear technology.
 Procurement of sensitive nuclear materials such as uranium and plutonium.
Examples of Information That May Be Available
On the other hand, some non-sensitive or administrative information might still be available
under RTI, such as:
 Policies related to public safety measures around nuclear installations.
  Environmental assessments or reports on nuclear energy projects (subject to certain
conditions).
 Employment-related information or general information about non-sensitive projects
in the Department of Atomic Energy.
Conclusion
While the RTI Act promotes transparency, its applicability to matters governed by the Atomic
Energy Act, 1962, is limited due to national security concerns and the sensitive nature of
nuclear energy-related activities. Information related to atomic energy is generally exempt
from disclosure under Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act and Section 18 of the Atomic Energy
Act. However, citizens can still access certain non-sensitive administrative information,
though requests that compromise national interests or security will likely be denied.