Law of Right to Information

RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

AWARENESS & IMPLEMENTATION

RAJESH JINDAL

Sr.Advocate

Assistance: AKHIL JINDAL, Advocate

Lawyers’ Chamber No.261, District Courts, Rohtak-124 001. (Haryana)

E-Mail I.D. jindalrajesh007@gmail.com; jindaladvocate@rediffmail.com

Mobile- 9416102014.

__________________________________________________________

IN EVERLASTING MEMORY OF

MY RESPECTED PARENTS,

THIS PIECE OF WORK IS

DEDICATED TO THEM

PREFACE

It has given me immense pleasure to bring this piece of work on the RTI Act. This single piece of legislation has given every citizen the power to seek and receive any information, barring a few exceptions of classified nature, and has changed the existing equation between those who govern and the governed. It has empowered the citizens to know the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of all Governmental action thereby promoting openness, transparency and accountability in the working of all public authorities as never before. A period of about seven years has been passed since the enactment of the RTI Act, but still the public authorities are diffident to provide the required information to the citizens requesting to access the information. Also, there is lack of awareness and understanding the provisions of RTI Act among the citizens and as well as public information officers. Most of the people do not know as to how to exercise the rights contemplated under the Act.

An endeavor has been made by me to bring this book for every section of the society, in a very brief and simple language. Dissemination of information about the Act and its rules and procedures is a pre-requisite for enabling better understanding. This book has been divided into three parts, in Part-I, the gist of the RTI Act has been given under the different heads, which made easy to understand the entire act in short time, the Part-II contains the Right to Information Act, 2005 with comments and case law, Right to Information Rules, 2010, The Haryana Right to Information Rules, 2005, The Punjab Right to Information Rules, 2007, Himachal Pradesh Right to Information Rules, 2006 and Rajasthan Right to Information Rules, 2005 along with update notifications, and formats for RTI applications and appeals etc.

The full text of some latest important decisions of CIC has been produced in Part-III of the book and the head-notes of the said decisions have been given in the index of Part-III. The index of the book has been arranged in such a mode, the quick look of it enables the readers to have the desired material as per their need.

Previously, I had brought “All India Consumer Journal” in 1996 compiling the leading case law from 1986 to 1996, rendered by Supreme Court of India, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and various State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions, with the precise head-notes and inimitable Index. This journal was released by the then Election Commission of India, New Delhi, Shri G.V.G. Krishana Murty and was appreciated by the Justice Mr.V.B. Eradi, the then President of ‘NCDRC’ and a number of readers. The appreciation of my ‘Journal’ has inspired me to bring this book.

I feel that this will book will prove useful and provide much needed guidance to all the citizens, public authorities and other functionaries under the act.

Rohtak Rajesh Jindal, Sr. Advocate

The real Swaraj will come not

by the acquisition of authority

by a few, but by the acquisition

of capacity by all to resist

authority when abused.

- MAHATMA GANDHI

“I believe that the passage of this

bill will see the dawn of a new

era in our processes of

governance, an era of

performance and efficiency, an

ear which will ensure that

benefits of growth flow to all

sections of our people, an era

which will eliminate the scourge

of corruption, an era which will

bring the common man's

concern to the heart of all

processes of governance, an era

which will truly fulfill the hopes of

the founding fathers of our

Republic.”

- Dr. Manmohan Singh,

Prime Minister of India

In his intervention speech on

RTI bill debate in Lok Sabha in May 2005

RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

(22 of 2005)

THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION: FROM PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT TO LEGISLATION

“…Democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed”

The enactment of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is a historic event in the annals of democracy in India. Information is power and now a citizen has the right to access information “held by or under control of” the public authorities. Concurrently, it is the duty of all public authorities to provide information sought by citizens. A sea change can be achieved towards transparency and accountability in governance by implementing the Act in letter and spirit.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART- I

Introduction

Freedom of Information – A global aspect

Progression of RTI Act, 2005 in India

Definition

Obligation of public authorities & designation of public officers

How to access the Information

Grounds for Rejection of Requests

Third Party Information

How to file appeal

Implementation of Decisions on Appeals

Exempted information

Commission’s role on the implementation of provisions

of the Act – Legal Frame

Penalties

Bar of Jurisdiction of Courts

Reporting by Information Commissions

Annual Report of Information Commission

Awareness Programmes & Implementation

PART- II

THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

CHAPTER I

Preliminary

Sections

1. Short title, extent and commencement

2. Definitions

CHAPTER II

Right to information and obligations of public authorities

Sections

3. Right to information

4. Obligations of public authorities

5. Designation of Public Information Officers

6. Request for obtaining information

7. Disposal of request

8. Exemption from disclosure of information

9. Grounds for rejection to access in certain cases

10. Severability

11. Third party information

CHAPTER III

The Central Information Commission

12. Constitution of Central Information Commission

13. Term of office and conditions of service

14. Removal of Chief Information Commissioner or Information

Commissioner

CHAPTER IV

The State Information Commission

15. Constitution of State Information Commission

16. Term of office and conditions of service

17. Removal of State Chief Information Commissioner or State

Information Commissioner

CHAPTER V

Powers and functions of the Information Commissions,

appeal and penalties

18. Powers and functions of Information Commissions

19. Appeal

20. Penalties

CHAPTER VI

Miscellaneous

Sections

21. Protection of action taken in good faith

22. Act to have overriding effect

23. Bar of jurisdiction of courts

24. Act not to apply to certain organizations

25. Monitoring and Reporting

26. Appropriate Government to prepare programmes

27. Power to make rules by Appropriate Government

28. Power to make rules by competent authority

29. Laying of rules

30. Power to remove difficulties

31. Repeal

THE FIRST SCHEDULE

Form of oath or affirmation to be made by the Chief Information Commissioner/the Information Commissioner/the State Chief Information Commissioner/the State Information Commissioner

THE SECOND SCHEDULE Intelligence and security organisation established by the Central Government

RIGHT TO INFORMATION RULES, 2010

THE HARYANA RIGHT TO INFORMATION RULES, 2005

THE PUNJAB RIGHT TO INFORMATION RULES, 2007

HIMACHAL PRADESH RIGHT TO INFORMATION RULES, 2006

RAJASTHAN RIGHT TO INFORMATION RULES, 2005

PART- III

IMPORTANT DECISIONS OF CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

1. Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd (BSE) v. Security and Exchange Board of India (SEBI); DOD: 10th October, 2011

Section 11, Third party information: We may, however, observe that the objections filed by the appellant herein u/s 11 (1) are not binding on the CPIO. These objections are only to be kept in view by the CPIO while taking a decision regarding disclosure of information. We make it clear that this Commission can not fetter the discretion of the CPIO regarding the disclosure of 3rd party information.

(i) The CPIOs are mandated to send a copies of their orders to the 3rd party u/s 11 (3), from whom objections are sought u/s 11(1). (ii) It is not practical to lay down an inflexible rule that PIOs and AAs will always offer an opportunity of hearing to the parties, let alone to the 3rd party. They may do so as per their discretion, keeping in view the complexity of legal and factual issues involved, without forgetting that timelines are to be adhered to, being the essence of the Act.

2. Manish Bhatnagar v. Mr. R. N. Mangla, SPIO & Additional Director, Department of Women & Child Development, GNCTD; DOD: 26.8.2011

Section 8, Exemption from disclosure of information: Section 8(2) of the RTI Act mandates that even where disclosure of information is protected by the exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to such protected interests, the information must be disclosed under the RTI Act. This sentiment has resonance in Section 21 of the Juvenile Justice Act which complements this epithet and also allows disclosure of information pertaining to juvenile or the child if such disclosure is in the interest of the juvenile or the child. The menace of child labour has been plaguing the Indian society for a considerable period of time. Though there are several legislations, government policies and schemes in place aimed at prohibition and regulation of child labour and rehabilitation of such children, the implementation of such legislations, policies and schemes continues to remain in shambles. Moreover, despite several court verdicts, child labour still persists in a monstrous manner in our country.

In the present matter, the Commission is of the considered view that even if the information sought was exempted under Sections 8 (1)(e) and (j) of the RTI Act,-as claimed by the respondent,- Section 8(2) of the RTI Act would mandate disclosure of the information.

3. Ajay Kumar Aggarwal v. CPIO, Central Bureau of Investigation; DOD 24.8.2011

Section 24, The Central Government under Section 24(1) of the Right to Information Act had included the CBI in the Second Schedule to the Right to Information Act and, therefore, the provisions of the Act would not apply to the CBI. The request for information predated the Government notification, whether the applicant had a right to get the information?

4. Z.U. Alvi v. Ministry of Home Affairs, GOI; DOD: 31.1.2011

Section 8, In our view, while respectfully noting the observations of the Apex Court, it leaves no doubt that the contents of Bhopal Merger Agreement and the enclosures thereto are public documents. Hence, in the spirit of the RTI Act, such documents should also be furnished to the Appellant.

The foregoing reply itself is the reason why the Respondent’s contentions fall flat on the ground because the reply in Lok Sabha was specific only to Indore and Gwalior unlike Bhopal in the appeal before us. There is no similarity in the two situations as Bhopal’s merger agreement is a separate and peculiar document. Hence, the Respondent’s contentions are devoid of any merit and thus, dismissed. Moreover, the list of properties are not exempted in view of the Section 8(1)(3) of the RTI Act.

Regarding the points (a), (b) and (c ) of the RTI application (that is the correspondence between ex-ruler / the Nawab and the M/o Home Affairs) the Commission, while keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and also keeping in view the fact that the letters in question relate to property, is of the view that the information sought by the Appellant is not exempted under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Moreover, the sought for information is 20 years old and exemption clause under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act is not applicable in view of the Section 8(1)(3) of the RTI Act.

5. Smt Durgesh Kumari v. Income Tax Department; DOD:28.8.2011

Section 8, that the word ‘prosecution’, as occurring in section 8 (1) (h), means and implies initiation and continuation of criminal proceedings in the competent court. Termination of proceedings in the trial court can not mean conclusion of proceedings when this very issue has been agitated before a higher judicial forum (High Court in the present case) either by the State or by the accused. In the premises, we hold that the case is still under ‘prosecution’ in terms of section 8 (1) (h).

The real question is whether disclosure of requested information would impede the process of ongoing prosecution. It may be apt to mention that a full fledged Code, namely, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, ……… No trial can be conducted without offering fair opportunity to the accused to defend himself. The Code provides for supply of copies of documents to the accused relied upon by the prosecution. The accused has a right to be defended by a Counsel of his choice. He has also the right to the cross examine the witnesses produced against him. Besides, he can also produce witnesses in his defence. Section 313 of the code entitles him to explain or clarify the evidence proved against him at the trial.

We hold that the present matter is still under ‘prosecution’ and the disclosure of requested information would impede the process of prosecution in terms of section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act. Hence, in our opinion, the decisions of CPIO and AA do not call for any interference.

6. Shanmuga Patro v. Rajiv Gandhi Foundation; DOD: 15.10.2010

Section 2(h), It is plain that RGF does not fall in sub clauses (a), (b) & (c) of clause (h). As per sub clause (d), to qualify for Public Authority, an entity should be owned, controlled or substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by the Government. It is nobody’s case that RGF is owned by the Government. Nor is it controlled by the Government in as much as its control vests in a Board of Trustees which is an elected body. Next question comes whether it is ‘substantially financed’ by the Government. As noted herein above, the contribution of the Government is less than 4% of the total average income of RGF since its inception. It, therefore, cannot be said to be ‘substantially financed’ by the Government.

7. Ms. Sarah Cyriac v. Delhi University; DOD: 15.4.2010

Section 12, The stand of respondents that this issue stands settled in a decision of this Commission is correct. It will not be possible for a Bench of this Commission to now rule on the general issue. This Commission has moreover no powers of review unless it is in exercise of general inherent power to review its decision which has erred in fact or in law.

a larger Bench has already ruled only of the applicability in regard to public examinations conducted by institutions established by the Constitution like UPSC or institutions established by any enactment by the Parliament or Rules made there under like CBSE, Staff Selection Commission, Universities., etc, the function of which is mainly to conduct examinations and which have an established system as fool-proof as that can be.

8. Ms. Bindu Khanna v. Directorate of Education; DOD: 14.7.2010

Section 2(f), Section 2(j), Section 2(n), Section 8(1)j, Section 11, Whether the third party, a private school performing public function, can refuse to furnish the information under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, particularly when the FAA of the respondent has ordered for disclosure of information. ……… we hold that the orders passed by the First Appellate Authority directing the third party to provide complete information to the appellant and the decision of the Commission affirming the orders of the First Appellate Authority are perfectly in compliance with the provisions of the Act. The third party is hence obliged to comply with the said orders. The Commission, therefore, directs the Respondent to seek compliance of the aforementioned order from the third party.

9. M. Vasudeva v. Superintendent of Police, Korba, Chattisgarh; DOD: 9.4.2010.

Section 20(1), and 21, the Commission is also clear that we have no authority to adjudicate upon whether the case registered u/s 304/201 IPC read with Sec. 34 IPC is in keeping with the law since the law in that case is the Indian Penal Code and not the Right to Information Act. The only action that the Commission would be in a position to take would be if it established that action has been taken by the SP, Korba in violation of sec. 21 of RTI Act.

In light of this, the complaint is hereby dismissed with a word of caution to respondents in the Office of SP, Korba that they will exercise discretion to ensure that no harassment arises to the officers of the NCCBM on account of their having exercised their authority under the RTI Act, lest this be construed as an attempt to obstruct furnishing of information and thus inviting penalty u/s 20 (1).

10. Ms. Iqbal Kaur (represented through Shri Inderjeet Singh) v. National 136 Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission; DOD:12.12.11

Section 8(1), and 22, In the present appeal, the NCDRC has preferred to take the second approach through its written submissions. By prohibiting or debarring the disclosure of information related to its proceedings to third-parties altogether, the NCDRC has virtually created an inconsistency with the object of the RTI Act. The purpose of the RTI Act is that disclosure of information shall be the norm while exemption shall be the exception. Therefore, in case of such inconsistency between the consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 and the RTI Act, it is the latter which will prevail due to its overriding effect as per Section 22 of the RTI Act.

The Appellant is third-party seeking information relating to court proceedings which involved other individuals or persons who has personal interest in the said case. Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act exempts the disclosure of such information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. Unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, the same cannot be provided under the RTI Act.

11. R S Misra v. Supreme Court of India; DOD: 11.5.2011

Section 7(9), 3, 6(2), and 22, as per the reply provided by the PIO, information can be accessed by the Appellant on the Supreme Court's website. As per Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. The RTI Act mandates that information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought or requested for. It may not be out of place to mention that more than 90% of our country's population does not have access to computers and even where they do, may not understand how to access the same. Therefore, there is a duty cast upon the PIO to ensure that information sought by an applicant is provided in hard copy or in the manner requested by the applicant. Where no specific mention is made as regards the manner in which information must be furnished, it may be presumed that the citizen is seeking information in the form of hard copy. Moreover, even where the PIO has indicated that the information may be accessed from the website, the complete link/ web address at which the requisite information is available, must be furnished.

This Commission respectfully disagrees with the decision of the then Chief Information Commissioner that the PIO, Supreme Court may choose to deny the information sought under the RTI Act and ask an applicant to apply for information under Order XII of the SC Rules. This Bench further rules that all citizens have the right to access information under Section 3 of the RTI Act and PIOs shall provide the information sought to the citizens, subject always to the provisions of the RTI Act only. Where there are methods of giving information by any public authority which were in existence before the advent of the RTI Act, the citizen may insist on invoking the provisions of the RTI Act to obtain the information. It is the citizen's prerogative to decide under which mechanism i.e. under the method prescribed by the public authority or the RTI Act, she would like to obtain the information.

As per Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, an applicant making a request for information under the RTI Act shall not give any reasons for requesting the information. Under Rule 2, in order to determine what is 'good cause', it is necessary to enquire into the purpose/ reasons for which an applicant is seeking information. This is clearly violative of the statutory mandate of Section 6(2) of the RTI Act.

Therefore, this Commission respectfully disagrees with the observations of the then Chief Information Commissioner and holds that Rule 2, Order XII of the SC Rules appears to impose a restriction on access to information held by or under the control of a public authority, which is prima facie inconsistent with the RTI Act. Therefore, in accordance with Section 22 of the RTI Act, the provisions of the RTI Act shall override the SC Rules.

12. Gurvinder Singh Grover v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India; DOD: 11.7.2012

The Commission is of the view that requisite information as held by the public authority has been provided to the appellant. However, the Commission hereby directs the CPIO to provide the name of the person who recorded the aforementioned Audio Cassette, when the audio cassette was destroyed. The CPIO will reply to the appellant regarding his contention that certain vital papers/ documents are not a part of the complaint record and explain to him the reasons thereof. The CPIO will also provide copies of these documents, if any, free of cost, to the appellant.

13. Ashok Kumar Walia v. Ministry of Law & Justice; DOD: 11.7.2012

Section 18 and 19, Appeal for deemed refusal to his RTI request, In order to avoid multiple proceedings under sections 18 and 19 of the RTI Act, viz., complaints and appeals, this case is remitted to CPIO, Ministry of Law & Justice, New Delhi.

14. Ashok Kumar Arora v. Delhi Police, West District; DOD: 13.07.2012

Having considered the submissions of the parties, the Commission is of the view that the appellant has a grievance over the enquiry conducted by the Police into a complaint lodged by a neighbour. It is his contention that the Police have given a report to the MCD without verification of actual facts and without inspection. There is no provision under the RTI Act for redressal of grievances.

15. Kapoor Shankar Maan v. Ministry of Law & Justice; DOD: 12.7.2012

A perusal of the document of the private courier agency, reveals that the letter has not been properly addressed to the Ministry of Law & Justice, which is perhaps the reason why the IPO has not reached the CPIO. A perusal of the CPIO’s letter dated 12.8.2011 shows that the CPIO had requested the appellant to submit an extra amount of Rs. 96/- by way of IPO in favour of CPIO, Legislative Department, Ministry of Law & Justice, New Delhi for obtaining the required documents. The Commission is of the opinion that complete and correct address has not been communicated by the then CPIO. The only reason that the IPO has not reached the respondent is due to the reason that complete address has not been communicated by the CPIO. Under the circumstances, the Commission is of the view that it is not the fault of the appellant that the IPO has not been duly received by the Department. Therefore, the CPIO is hereby directed to provide authenticated copies of the documents to the appellant free of cost within two weeks of receipt of this order.

PART-I

___________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

The Indian Right to Information, Act 2005 is one of the most advanced Information legislations in the world. In India, after many deliberations over the years, the RTI Act was passed by the parliament on October 12, 2005, thus opening up the governance processes of our country to the public. The Act is

based on the principle that all government information is the property of people. It takes democracy to the grass root level and is also a step towards ensuring participatory governance in the country. RTI Act is a source of strength for all citizenry as it would ensure timely response to their information needs on government functioning and lead to greater transparency in governance. ‘Right to Information’ (RTI) refers to the right of every citizen to access information held by or under the control of public authorities. Information is crucial for good governance as it reflects and captures Government activities and processes. It is said that information is the oxygen of democracy. If people do not know what is happening in their society, if the actions of those who rule them are hidden, then they cannot take a meaningful part in the affairs of the society. Access to information not only promotes openness, transparency and accountability in administration, but also facilitates active participation of people in the democratic governance process.

In order to promote transparency and accountability in administration, the Indian Parliament enacted the Freedom of Information Act, 2002, which was repealed later and a new act, The Right to Information Act, came into force on 12 October 2005. The new law empowers Indian citizens to seek information from a Public Authority, thus making the Government and its functionaries more accountable and responsible. The Act has now been in operation for about seven years and has benefited many, including the poor and the underprivileged.

The RTI Act which came into force on 12^thOctober 2005, is one of the most significant legislations enacted by the Parliament of India. The Act recognises that in a democracy like India, all information held by the government ultimately belongs to the people. Making information available to citizens is simply a part of normal government functioning, because the public has a right to know what public officials do with their money. The Act seeks to establish that transparency is the norm and secrecy is an exception in the working of governance institutions.

The main objective of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is to promote

transparency and accountability in the working of every Public Authority in the

country and eliminate the scourge of corruption. The Act mandates a legal-institutional framework for setting out the practical regime of right to information for every citizen to secure access to information held by or under the control of public authorities. It prescribes mandatory disclosure of certain information to citizens and designation of Public Information Officers in all public authorities to attend to requests from citizens for information within stipulated time limits. It provides for appeal to designated appellate officers against the decisions of Public Information Officers in case the information sought for has not been supplied. It also mandates the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions to enquire into complaints, hear second appeals, and guide implementation of the Act. The setting up of Information Commissions at the Central and State levels to ensure the effective implementation of the right to information regime in the country is one of the most important provisions of the Act. Its importance can be judged from the fact that the long title of the Act itself makes a mention about the Commissions. The role played by the respective Commissions is likely to have a significant effect on whether or not the Act is implemented in letter and spirit by the public authorities operating at different levels. Apart from exercising the statutory functions entrusted to them, the Information Commissions are expected to act as ‘friend, philosopher and guide’ to citizens in the exercise of their right to information, and to public authorities in the discharge of their duties to make information accessible to the people.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION – A GLOBAL ASPECT

57 countries in the world have already enacted the Right To information which includes North America, most of the Europe, Colombia, Peru, South Africa, India, Austria and Newzeland. In USA the Right To Information Act of 1966 was amended in 1974 after the ‘Watergate’. It would thus be seen that the Right to Information is a global phenomenon. Most of the democratic countries have Right to Information. It can also be co-related to development. The importance given to the freedom of information is globally accepted, and was reflected in First United Nations General Assembly, which in 1946, adopted Resolution 59(1), as follows:

“Freedom of Information is a Fundamental Human Right and the

touchstone of all the freedoms to which the United Nations is

consecrated”

Further, UN General Assembly resolution 217(III) A of 1948 further

reiterated that;

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Most of the democratic societies all over the world have incorporated this right in their respective legal systems. Even in the Indian perspective, Article 19(Chapter-III) of the Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens, among other things Fundamental Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression. The Right to Information as a Fundamental Right flowing out from Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, is now well settled and an accepted fact. Over the years, the Supreme Court has constantly ruled in favour of the Citizens’ right to know. The nature of this right and the relevant restrictions thereto, has been discussed by the Supreme Court in a series of cases wherein in Bennett Coleman [Bennet Colamen & Others vs Union of India & Others, AIR SCC(2) 788], the right to information was held to be included within the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Art.19 (1) (a) of the Indian Constitution. The apex court explicitly stated in the case of Raj Narayan [State of Uttar Pradesh vs Raj Naraian, AIR 1975 SCR 333] through Justice Mathew that it is not in the interest of the public to cover with a veil of secrecy the common routine business - the responsibility of officials to explain and to justify their acts is the chief safeguard against oppression and corruption. Similarly, in case of S.P. Gupta [S.P Gupta vs Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149], the right of the people to know about every public act, and the details of every public transaction undertaken by public functionaries was described.

PROGRESSION OF RTI ACT, 2005 IN INDIA

The first draft of the Right to Information Bill was presented to Parliament on 22 December 2004. After intense debate, more than a hundred amendments to the draft Bill were made before the bill was finally passed. The Right to Information Act, 2005 received the assent of His Excellency President of India on the 15th June, 2005 and was published in the Official Gazette of India on 21st June, 2005. The Act covers the whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir. It is applicable to all Constitutional Authorities, including the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary and includes any institution or body established or constituted by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature or by order or notification of appropriate Government. In special circumstances, bodies "owned, controlled or substantially financed" by Government and even non-Government organizations "substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds" provided by the Government are also brought under its ambit.

DEFINITION

According to Sec.2(j) of the RTI Act, Right to Information is defined as a right to information accessible under the Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes a right to (i) inspection of work, Documents, records, (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records, (iii) taking separate samples of material, (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device.

The Act specifies that “PUBLIC AUTHORITY” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted:-

(a) by or under the constitution;

(b) by any other law made by Parliament;

(d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any—

(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;

(ii) non-Government organization substantially financed,

Directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government.

Non-Government Organisations substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the Government are also to be considered as “Public Authorities” [Section 2(h) (ii)]. This mandates such NGOs to comply with the Act provisions as applicable to every public authority.

OBLIGATION OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES & DESIGNATION OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

U/s 4(1) (b) of the RTI Act, 2005, all the Public Authorities shall publish within 120 days from the enactment of the Right to Information Act, 2005 the templates showing the details of the 17 items to be prepared, which essentially are in respect of organization, functions, duties, powers etc.

U/s 5(1) Every Public Authority shall within 100 days from the enactment of this Act designate the required number of officers in all administrative units under it as State Public Information Officers so as to provide information under the provisions of this Act.

U/s 5(2) the Govt. Departments (Public Authorities) shall designate within 100 days of enactment of this Act, (i.e., 28th September,2005) State Assistant Public Information Officer(SAPIO) at each sub-divisional level or other sub-district level functioning under their control so as to receive the applications and to forward the same forthwith to the State Public Information Officer(SPIO) or Appellate Authority.

HOW TO ACCESS THE INFORMATION

Section 3 of the RTI Act gives all Indian citizens the right to access information from Public Authorities. A citizen shall submit the application for obtaining information to the Public Information Officer (PIO) or Assistant Public Information Officer of the Public Authority. The PIOs are the designated officers in all administrative units or offices of Public Authorities who have been given the responsibility of providing information to persons requesting information under this Act. In addition, the PIOs must provide all kinds of help to citizens, including helping the illiterate or blind in writing applications for obtaining information.

The application procedure for seeking information is very simple and citizen-friendly (Section 6 of the RTI Act). The application can be written in English or Hindi or the official language of the state. It should be accompanied by the necessary application fees as prescribed under the respective state rules. The application must be submitted to the Public Information Officer (PIO) in the public institution from where the information is sought. The Act clearly sets the time limit of 30 days for disposal of requests by the PIOs, so that citizens do not have to run around the Public Authorities for information endlessly. Section 4 of the RTI Act mandates every public institution to voluntarily disclose all their activities in a manual, so that citizens can get information about important functions of public institutions without filing application.

The Act applies both to Central and State Governments and all public authorities. A public authority as defined under Sec. 2(h) is bound to furnish information means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution, (b) by any other law made by Parliament, (c) by any other law made by State Legislature, (d) by a notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government and includes any (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed, (ii) non-government organization substantially financed - which, in clauses (a) to (d) are all, directly or indirectly funded by the appropriate government. It is important to note that the Act specifies that intelligence and security organizations are exempted from the application of the Act. However, it is provided that in case the demand for information pertains to allegations of corruption and human rights violations, the Act shall apply even to such institutions.

GROUND FOR REJECTIONS OF REQUESTS

The grounds of rejection of information as specified by the Act pertain to the following:

(a) Section 8 (1)(a) to 8 (1)(j): Exemptions from disclosure of information unless there are overriding considerations of public interest.

(b) Section 9 of the Act provides that without prejudice to the provisions of Section 8, a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer may reject a request for information where such a request for providing access would involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the State. This is the only absolute exemption. Here the PIO need not consider the public interest in disclosure.

(c) Section 24 (1) provides that the Act shall not apply to the intelligence and security organisations established by the Central Government. In the case of information sought in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the Central Information Commission, and such information shall be provided within 45 days from the date of the receipt of request for information.

(d) Section 11: Third party information treated as confidential by the concerned and involving the case of trade or commercial secrets protected by law and other third party information where the public interest in disclosure does not outweigh the importance of any possible harm or injury to the interests of such third party.

THIRD PARTY INFORMATION

“Third Party” is defined under the Act to mean a person other than the citizen making a request for information and the public authority to whom the request is made. It could be a private individual or a public authority [Section 2 (n)].

Section 11 of the Act requires that if the information sought by the citizen pertains to a record or part thereof relates to, or has been supplied by a third party and if it is not treated as confidential by that third party, the PIO is at liberty to provide the same to the applicant. If, however such above information is treated as ‘confidential’ by that third party, the following steps will have to be taken:

• The PIO gives a written notice to the third party, within 5 days of receipt of the application, and conveys his intention to disclose the information or record while requiring the third party to make a submission, within 10 days from the date of receipt of such notice, regarding whether the information should be disclosed or not.

• The third party should, within 10 days from the date of receipt of notice from the PIO, make a representation in writing or orally against the proposed disclosure.

• The PIO can, within 40 days after the receipt of application for information if the third party has been given an opportunity to make representation make a decision on disclosure and give a written notice to the third party.

• The third party is entitled to prefer an appeal against the decision of the PIO.

Except in the case of “trade or commercial secrets protected by law”, disclosures involving third party information may be allowed, if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the importance of any possible harm or injury to the interests of such third party. If the third party is a private individual, the PIO has to be very cautious and properly weigh the consequences as privacy of an individual is important and protected under Section 8 (1) (j).

HOW TO FILE AN APPEAL

“Justice delayed is justice denied”. There should not be any undue delay in providing information sought by the public. The Act, therefore, stipulates time limits for supply of information. If the requisite information is not provided to the applicant within the stipulated period, the same will be construed as deemed refusal under the Act and the applicant can prefer an appeal against it.

Section 19 of the RTI Act provides two steps of appeals against the decision of the PIOs on the request for information by an applicant. An applicant who does not receive the information within the stipulated time or is aggrieved by the PIO’s decision, can then file an Appeal, within thirty days from the expiry of such period or from the receipt of such a decision, to the First Appellate Authority, who is usually a designated senior officer of a government department in rank to Public Information Officer, shall deal with and dispose of appeal from any person who, does not receive a decision on request for information within the stipulated time or is aggrieved by a decision of the Public Information Officer If the applicant is not satisfied with the decision of the First Appellate Authority, then he can file a Second Appeal to the Central Information Commission (CIC) or the State Information Commission (SIC), as the case may be, within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received. In case of the decision of the First Appellate Authority under the Central Government, then the second appeal shall lie to Central Information Commission (CIC) and in case of the decision of the First Appellate Authority under the State Government, then the second appeal shall lie to State Information Commission (SIC).

IMPLEMENTATIONS OF DECISIONS ON APPEALS

Section 19 (7) of the Act stipulates that the decisions of the Information Commission on appeals “shall be binding”. Thus, every public authority will be required to implement the decisions of the Information Commission regarding taking steps to secure compliance with the provisions of the Act, compensating the complainant for loss or other detriment suffered, imposing penalties on erring Public Information Officers etc. under Sections 19 and 20.

EXEMPTED INFORMATION

In order to have balance in the implementation of the Act from the possibilities of misuse of the provisions under the law, exemptions are made from seeking information. Section 8 of the Act mentions a list of ten categories of information [Section 8 (1) (a) to 8(1) (j)], which can be denied to the citizens, as there shall be no obligation to give any citizen such information. The exempted information is mainly related to the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the state, trade secrets or intellectual property, private information, and information forbidden by courts. Under Section 8 which exempts from disclosure certain information and contents as stated in Sub-clauses (a) to (j) thereof. Sub-clause(b) exempts information, which is expressly forbidden by any court of law or tribunal or the dispute of which may constitute contempt of court. Sub-clause (g) exempts information the disclosure of which would endanger life, or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purpose. Sub-clause (h) exempts information, which could impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. Sub-clause (i) exempts Cabinet papers. If the information is related to corruption and human rights violations, the exempted clause does not apply.

COMMISSION’S ROLE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE ACT– LEGAL FRAME

The Central/State Information Commission is the apex Appellate Authority at the centre/state level for hearing appeals or complaints from citizens who have not been able to access information due to some reason. The power of enforcement and compliance of the RTI Act has been given to the CIC or SIC. The CIC/SIC can summon and enforce attendance of persons or documents, discovery and inspection of documents, etc. Section 18 of the Act prescribes that the Information Commission shall receive and inquire into a complaint from “any person” in respect of any matter “relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under the Act”. It also empowers the Commission, during the inquiry of any complaint under the Act, to examine “any record to which this Act applies which is under the control of the public authority and no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds”.

Section 19 mandates that the decision of the Information Commission “shall be binding”. Further, the Information Commission, while deciding appeals, can require a public authority “to take any such steps as may be necessary to secure compliance with the provisions of the Act”. Section 19 further mandates that while deciding appeals, the Information Commission is competent to “impose any of the penalties provided under this Act”.

PENALTIES

Section 20 empowers the Commission to impose penalty, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal if it is of the opinion that the Public Information Officer has without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees, and can also recommend disciplinary action against the PIO.

BAR OF JURISDICTIONS OF COURTS

Under Section 23 no court shall entertain any suit, application or other proceedings in respect of any order made under this Act and no such order shall be called in question otherwise than by way of an appeal under this Act.

REPORTING BY INFORMATION COMMISSIONS

Section 25 (3) (g) stipulates that the Information Commission shall recommend every year to the Government reforms on any “matter relevant for operationalising the right to access information”. The various provisions relating to Information Commissions under the Right to Information Act 2005 clearly place a crucial responsibility on the Commissions towards the establishment of the practical regime of right to information for citizens and promotion of transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities in the country. This role encompasses aspects of remedy, education, enforcement and guidance for reforms.

The Right to Information Act 2005 mandates annual reports to be submitted by the Central and State Information Commissions [Section 25 (1), (3) & (4)]. The key provisions in the Act in this regard are the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall, as soon as practicable after the end of each year, prepare a report on the implementation of the provisions of the Act during that year and forward a copy thereof to the appropriate Government; each report shall state in respect of the year to which the report relates —

(a) the number of requests made to each public authority;

(b) the number of decisions where applicants were not entitled to access to the documents pursuant to the requests, the provisions of the Act under which these decisions were made and the number of times such provisions were invoked;

(c) the number of appeals referred to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, for review, the nature of the appeals and the outcome of the appeals;

(d) particulars of any disciplinary action taken against any officer in respect of the administration of this Act;

(e) the amount of charges collected by each public authority under this Act;

(f) any facts which indicate an effort by the public authorities to administer and

implement the spirit and intention of the Act;

(g) recommendations for reform, including recommendations in respect of the particular public authorities, for the development, improvement, modernisation, reform or amendment to the Act or other legislation or common law or any other matter relevant for operationalising the right to access information; the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, may, as soon as practicable after the end of each year, cause a copy of the report of the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be to be laid before each House of Parliament or, as the case may be, before each House of the State Legislature, where there are two Houses, and where there is one House of the State Legislature, before that House. It should be noted that the Act [Section 25 (2)] clearly specifies that each Ministry or Department shall, in relation to the public authorities within their jurisdiction, collect and provide such information to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, as is required by the Commission to prepare its annual report and comply with the requirements concerning the furnishing of that information and keeping of records for the purposes of the Act.

ANNUAL REPORT OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

Section 25 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 casts a mandatory responsibility on the Information Commission at the end of every year to “prepare a report on the implementation of the provisions of this Act during that year and forward a copy thereof to the appropriate government” for placing the same before the concerned Legislature. Subject to this overarching provision, Section 25 (3) provides for the mandatory inclusion of certain aspects in the Annual Report of the Commission. The latter encompass three key areas:

(1) Implementation by Public Authorities

• Disposal of requests for information and first appeals under the Act;

• Particulars of disciplinary action taken by public authorities against officers in respect of administration of the Act;

• Amount of charges collected by each public authority under the Act;

•The facts which indicate efforts by public authorities to administer and implement the spirit and intention of the Act.

(2) Implementation by Information Commission

• Disposal of complaints and second appeals.

(3) Recommendations by Information Commission to Public Authorities/ Departments/ Ministries/Appropriate Government for reforms: (a) over-arching and (b) public authority-specific:

• Development, improvement, modernisation, reform or amendment to the Act or other legislation or common law or

• Any other matter relevant for operationalising the right to access information.

An important matter to consider in the above context is that the Information Commission, apart from discharging its role with regard to being a provider of remedy, educator and enforcer of law, is required to publish its own annual report under Section 4 (1) (b) of the Act, itself being a public authority. Practically the Information Commissions across the globe provide an “as is” picture of their activities, utilization of the resources at their disposal, a statement of their accounts as part of their annual reports and their plans for the coming year. They combine their overview of implementation of the right to freedom of information with their own reports as public authorities, as both are closely inter-connected. They also give accounts of best practices initiated by public authorities / governmental agencies to foster open government as well as instances of default on the part of some other public authorities.

Ministries or Departments shall collect and provide such information in relation to the public authorities within their jurisdiction, to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, as is required by the Commission to prepare its annual report and comply with the requirements concerning the furnishing of that information and keeping of records for the purposes Section 25 (2) of the Act.

Appropriate Government [the Central Government or the State Government, as the case, in relation to a public authority, may be].

• may as soon as practicable after the end of each year, cause a copy of the report of the Information Commission to be laid before each House of Parliament or each House of the State Legislature, as the case may be [Section 25 (4)];

AWARENESS PROGRAMMES & IMPLEMENTATION

The central/state government has a critical role to play in the implementation of the Act. Section 26 of the Act mentions that the government should take steps to develop and organise educational programmes to advance the understanding of the public on RTI, particularly of disadvantaged communities, and to train Public Information Officers and produce relevant training material for use by public institutions. They can make rules related to fees and costs for accessing information. The ministries and departments of the government have the responsibility of preparing the annual report and maintaining records for such purposes. Thus, the central/state government has been allocated the role of taking the message of RTI to the masses through various means.

Section 26 of the Act mandates the Government to:-

(a) develop and organize educational programmes to advance the understanding of the public, in particular of disadvantaged communities as to how to exercise the rights contemplated under this Act;

(b) encourage Public Authorities to participate in the development and organization of programmes referred to in clause (a) and to undertake such programmes themselves;

(d) train State Public Information Officers, as the case may be of Public Authorities and produce relevant training materials for use by the public authorities themselves.

The Appropriate Government shall, within 18 months from the commencement of the Act, compile in its official language a guide containing such guidelines or information, in an easily comprehensible form and manner, as may reasonably be required by a person who wishes to exercise any right specified in the Act and, if necessary, update and publish such guidelines at regular intervals which shall, in particular include—

(a) the objects of the Act;

(b) the postal and street address, the phone and fax number and, if available, electronic mail address of the Public Information Officer of every public authority;

(d) the assistance available from and the duties of the Public Information Officer of a public authority under the Act;

(e) the assistance available from the Information Commission;

(f) all remedies in law available regarding an act or failure to act in respect of a right or duty conferred or imposed by the Act including the manner of filing an appeal to the Commission;

(g) the provisions providing for the voluntary disclosure of categories of records in accordance with Section 4 of the Act;

(h) the notices regarding fees to be paid in relation to requests for access to an information; and

(i) any additional regulations or circulars made or issued in relation to obtaining access to an information in accordance with the Act.

For the effective and purposeful implementation of the RTI Act, the appropriate authorities may consider to take in to account the few recommendations thereby to bridge the gap between the legal provisions and the existing practice. In order to cause much awareness on the benefits of the Act in seeking information, the appropriate authorities shall plan and develop schemes to organize educational programs to enhance the awareness level in the public particularly women, rural mass etc., Qualified persons or such corporate entities may be appointed or authorized to reach information seekers as user guides. The government may maximum utilize the services of print media and electronic media including cinema theatres for

effective propagation of the use of the RTI Act. The government may introduce periodical reviews on effective utilization of the Act at least at District level thereby the information officers may discharge their duties to expectations. Information seekers may be provided with an opportunity to inspect records in the Government offices when they come for seeking information. Necessary policy reforms may be introduced i.e., monitoring the mechanism and the administration nature of the Information Officers and proper audit by such competent authorities regarding the performance of information officers to avoid unwanted litigation in the appropriate forums and to avoid displeasure in the minds of information seekers. Appropriate special forums or tribunals can be established to approach for speed relief in seeking information. Necessary infrastructure facilities may be updated in government offices in order to provide required information to seekers without any difficulty and to avoid delay.

From the above, it is clear that it is the duty and obligation of the Government to create the necessary awareness both on the supply as well as the demand side. For this, it is essential that adequate budgetary allocations are made for conducting seminars, symposiums, workshops as also for the printing of guides and pamphlets. As visual media has expanded rapidly, efforts should be made to effectively use this media. It has been noticed that of all the complaints and appeals received, those obtaining from rural areas are meagre. This fact in itself indicates that awareness is lacking in the rural areas. It has also been noticed that on the supply side the mindset, attitudes and value systems have not yet percolated to large section of the Public Authorities and an application under the RTI Act is at times perceived with hostility. This is clearly unacceptable and has to be changed. The Act which has been passed by the Parliament, assented to by the President and notified, has become the law of the land. It is a major step forward in heralding transparency, accountability, openness and Good Governance, and, denotes a paradigm shift to demystify the Government functioning and bring out all the processes involved into the public domain. Thus, it is mandatory for the effective implementation of the Act that adequate resources should be deployed and sufficient funds are made available to inculcate greater awareness, both in the supply as well as the demand side.

_______

“We know what we are, but know not what we may be.”

William Shakespeare

PART-II

___________________________________________________________________

New Delhi, the 21st June, 2005/Jyaistha 31, 1927 (Saka) The following Act of Parliament received the assent of the President on the 15th June, 2005, and is hereby published for general information:—

THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

No. 22 of 2005

[15th June, 2005.]

An Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

WHEREAS the Constitution of India has established democratic Republic;

AND WHEREAS democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed;

AND WHEREAS revelation of information in actual practice is likely to conflict with other public interests including efficient operations of the Governments, optimum use of limited fiscal resources and the preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information;

AND WHEREAS it is necessary to harmonise these conflicting interests while preserving the paramountcy of the democratic ideal;

NOW, THEREFORE, it is expedient to provide for furnishing certain information to citizens who desire to have it.

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Fifty-sixth Year of the Republic of India as follows:—

CHAPTER I

Preliminary

1. Short title, extent and commencement:- (1) This Act may be called the Right to Information Act, 2005.

(2) It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

(3) The provisions of sub-section (1) of section 4, sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 5, sections 12, 13, 15,16, 24, 27 and 28 shall come into force at once, and the remaining provisions of this Act shall come into force on the one hundred and twentieth day of its enactment.

2. Definitions:- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

(a) “appropriate Government” means in relation to a public authority which is established, constituted, owned, controlled or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly—

(i) by the Central Government or the Union territory administration, the Central Government;

(ii) by the State Government, the State Government;

(b) “Central Information Commission” means the Central Information Commission constituted under sub-section (1) of section 12;

(c) “Central Public Information Officer” means the Central Public Information Officer designated under sub-section (1) and includes a Central Assistant Public Information Officer designated as such under sub-section (2) of section 5;

(d) “Chief Information Commissioner” and “Information Commissioner” mean the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioner appointed under sub-section (3) of section 12;

(e) “competent authority” means—

(i) the Speaker in the case of the House of the People or the Legislative Assembly of a State or a Union territory having such Assembly and the Chairman in the case of the Council of States or Legislative Council of a State;

(ii) the Chief Justice of India in the case of the Supreme Court;

(iii) the Chief Justice of the High Court in the case of a High Court;

(iv) the President or the Governor, as the case may be, in the case of other authorities established or constituted by or under the Constitution;

(v) the administrator appointed under article 239 of the Constitution;

(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic formand information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force;

(g) “prescribed” means prescribed by rules made under this Act by the appropriate Government or the competent authority, as the case may be;

(h) “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self- government established or constituted—

(a) by or under the Constitution;

(b) by any other law made by Parliament;

(c) by any other law made by State Legislature;

(d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any—

(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;

(ii) non-Government organisation substantially financed,

directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;

(i) “record” includes—

(a) any document, manuscript and file;

(b) any microfilm, microfiche and facsimile copy of a document;

(c) any reproduction of image or images embodied in such microfilm (whether enlarged or not); and

(d) any other material produced by a computer or any other device;

(j) “right to information” means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes the right to—

(i) inspection of work, documents, records;

(ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records;

(iii) taking certified samples of material;

(iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device;

(k) “State Information Commission” means the State Information Commission constituted under sub-section (1) of section 15;

(l) “State Chief Information Commissioner” and “State Information Commissioner” mean the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioner appointed under sub-section (3) of section 15;

(m) “State Public Information Officer” means the State Public Information Officer designated under sub-section (1) and includes a State Assistant Public Information Officer designated as such under sub-section (2) of section 5;

(n) “third party” means a person other than the citizen making a request for information and includes a public authority.

Comments

Section 2(h), in case of Shanmuga Patro v. Rajiv Gandhi Foundation; DOD: 15.10.2010, CIC held “It is plain that RGF does not fall in sub clauses (a), (b) & (c) of clause (h). As per sub clause (d), to qualify for Public Authority, an entity should be owned, controlled or substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by the Government. It is nobody’s case that RGF is owned by the Government. Nor is it controlled by the Government in as much as its control vests in a Board of Trustees which is an elected body. Next question comes whether it is ‘substantially financed’ by the Government. As noted herein above, the contribution of the Government is less than 4% of the total average income of RGF since its inception. It, therefore, cannot be said to be ‘substantially financed’ by the Government.”

Section 2(f), 2(j), 2(h), 2,(n) “The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in “Poorna Prajna Public School Vs. Central Information Commission” (Manu/DE/2577/2009) has held that the term 'held by or under the control of any public authority' in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act has to be read in a manner that it effectuates and is in harmony with the definition of the term 'information' as defined in Section 2(f). The said expression used in Section 2(j) of the RTI Act should not be read in a manner that it negates or nullifies definition of the term 'information' in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The Hon’ble High Court held that a private body need not be a public authority and the said term 'private body' has been used to distinguish and in contradistinction to the term 'public authority' as defined in Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. Thus, information which a public authority is entitled to access, under any law, from private body, is `information’ as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and has to be furnished. It was further held by the Hon’ble High Court that the term 'third party' includes not only the public authority but also any private body or person other than the citizen making request for the information. The School is a private body and a third party under Section 2(n) of the RTI Act.” { Ms. Bindu Khanna v. Directorate of Education; DOD: 14.7.2010}

CHAPTER II

Right to information and obligations of public authorities

3. Right to information:- Subject to the provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right to information.

Comments

In case of R S Misra v. Supreme Court Of India; DOD: 11.5.2011, CIC held This Commission respectfully disagrees with the decision of the then Chief Information Commissioner that the PIO, Supreme Court may choose to deny the information sought under the RTI Act and ask an applicant to apply for information under Order XII of the SC Rules. This Bench further rules that all citizens have the right to access information under Section 3 of the RTI Act and PIOs shall provide the information sought to the citizens, subject always to the provisions of the RTI Act only. Where there are methods of giving information by any public authority which were in existence before the advent of the RTI Act, the citizen may insist on invoking the provisions of the RTI Act to obtain the information. It is the citizen's prerogative to decide under which mechanism i.e. under the method prescribed by the public authority or the RTI Act, she would like to obtain the information.

4. Obligations of public authorities:- (1) Every public authority shall—

a) maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated;

b) publish within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this Act,—

(i) the par ticulars of its organisation, functions and duties;

(ii) the powers and duties of its officers and employees;

(iii) the procedure followed in the decision making process, including channels of supervision and accountability;

(iv) the norms set by it for the discharge of its functions;

(v) the rules, regulations, instructions, manuals and records, held by it or under its control or used by its employees for discharging its functions;

(vi) a statement of the categories of documents that are held by it or under its control;

(vii) the particulars of any arrangement that exists for consultation with, or representation by, the members of the public in relation to the formulation of its policy or implementation thereof;

(viii) a statement of the boards, councils, committees and other bodies consisting of two or more persons constituted as its part or for the purpose of its advice, and as to whether meetings of those boards, councils, committees and other bodies are open to the public, or the minutes of such meetings are accessible for public;

(ix) a directory of its officers and employees;

(x) the monthly remuneration received by each of its officers and employees, including the system of compensation as provided in its regulations;

(xi) the budget allocated to each of its agency, indicating the particulars of all plans, proposed expenditures and reports on disbursements made;

(xii) the manner of execution of subsidy programmes, including the amounts allocated and the details of beneficiaries of such programmes;

(xiii) particulars of recipients of concessions, permits or authorisations granted by it;

(xiv) details in respect of the information, available to or held by it, reduced in an electronic form;

(xv) the particulars of facilities available to citizens for obtaining information, including the working hours of a library or reading room, if maintained for public use;

(xvi) the names, designations and other particulars of the Public Information Officers;

(xvii) such other information as may be prescribed; and thereafter update these publications every year;

c) publish all relevant facts while formulating important policies or announcing the decisions which affect public;

d) provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons.

(2) It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of sub-section (1) to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information.

(3) For the purposes of sub-section (1), every information shall be disseminated widely and in such form and manner which is easily accessible to the public.

(4) All materials shall be disseminated taking into consideration the cost effectiveness, local language and the most effective method of communication in that local area and the information should be easily accessible, to the extent possible in electronic format with the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, available free or at such cost of the medium or the print cost price as may be prescribed.

Explanation.—For the purposes of sub-sections (3) and (4), “disseminated” means making known or communicated the information to the public through notice boards, newspapers, public announcements, media broadcasts, the internet or any other means, including inspection of offices of any public authority.

5. Designation of Public Information Officers:- (1) Every public authority shall, within one hundred days of the enactment of this Act, designate as many officers as the Central Public Information Officers or State Public Information Officers, as the case may be, in all administrative units or offices under it as may be necessary to provide information to persons requesting for the information under this Act.

(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), every public authority shall designate an officer, within one hundred days of the enactment of this Act, at each sub-divisional level or other sub-district level as a Central Assistant Public Information Officer or a State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, to receive the applications for information or appeals under this Act for forwarding the same forthwith to the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or senior officer specified under sub-section (1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be:

Provided that where an application for information or appeal is given to a Central Assistant Public Information Officer or a State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, a period of five days shall be added in computing the period for response specified under sub-section (1) of section 7.

(3) Every Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall deal with requests from persons seeking information and render reasonable assistance to the persons seeking such information.

(4) The Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may seek the assistance of any other officer as he or she considers it necessary for the proper discharge of his or her duties.

(5) Any officer, whose assistance has been sought under sub-section (4), shall render all assistance to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, seeking his or her assistance and for the purposes of any contravention of the provisions of this Act, such other officer shall be treated as a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be.

6. Request for obtaining information:- (1) A person, who desires to obtain any information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application is being made, accompanying such fee as may be prescribed, to—

(a) the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of the concerned public authority;

(b) the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, specifying the particulars of the information sought by him or her:

Provided that where such request cannot be made in writing, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable assistance to the person making the request orally to reduce the same in writing.

(2) An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details except those that may be necessary for contacting him.

(3) Where an application is made to a public authority requesting for an information,—

(i) which is held by another public authority; or

(ii) the subject matter of which is more closely connected with the functions of another public authority, the public authority, to which such application is made, shall transfer the application or such part of it as may be appropriate to that other public authority and inform the applicant immediately about such transfer: Provided that the transfer of an application pursuant to this sub-section shall be made as soon as practicable but in no case later than five days from the date of receipt of the application.

Comments

“The Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Khanapuram Gandaiah Vs. Administrative Officer & ors” (AIR 2010 SC615) has held that under Section 6 of the RTI Act, an applicant is entitled to get only such information which can be accessed by the Public Authority under any other law for the time being in force.” {Ms. Bindu Khanna v. Directorate of Education; DOD: 14.7.2010}

In case of R S Misra v. Supreme Court Of India; DOD: 11.5.2011, CIC held “As per Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, an applicant making a request for information under the RTI Act shall not give any reasons for requesting the information. Under Rule 2, in order to determine what is 'good cause', it is necessary to enquire into the purpose/ reasons for which an applicant is seeking information. This is clearly violative of the statutory mandate of Section 6(2) of the RTI Act.”

7. Disposal of request:- (1) Subject to the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 5 or the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 6, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, on receipt of a request undersection 6 shall, as expeditiously as possible, and in any case within thirty days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of such fee as may be prescribed or reject the request for any of the reasons specified in sections 8 and 9:

Provided that where the information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall be provided within forty-eight hours of the receipt of the request.

(2) If the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, fails to give decision on the request for information within the period specified under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have refused the request.

(3) Where a decision is taken to provide the information on payment of any further fee representing the cost of providing the information, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall send an intimation to the person making the request, giving—

(a) the details of further fees representing the cost of providing the information as determined by him, together with the calculations made to arrive at the amount in accordance with fee prescribed under sub-section (1), requesting him to deposit that fees, and the period intervening between the despatch of the said intimation and payment of fees shall be excluded for the purpose of calculating the period of thirty days referred to in that sub-section;

(b) information concerning his or her right with respect to review the decision as to the amount of fees charged or the form of access provided, including the particulars of the appellate authority, time limit, process and any other forms.

(4) Where access to the record or a part thereof is required to be provided under this Act and the person to whom access is to be provided is sensorily disabled, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall provide assistance to enable access to the information, including providing such assistance as may be appropriate for the inspection.

(5) Where access to information is to be provided in the printed or in any electronic format, the applicant shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (6), pay such fee as may be prescribed:

Provided that the fee prescribed under sub-section (1) of section 6 and sub-sections (1) and (5) of section 7 shall be reasonable and no such fee shall be charged from the persons who are of below poverty line as may be determined by the appropriate Government.

(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (5), the person making request for the information shall be provided the information free of charge where a public authority fails to comply with the time limits specified in sub-section (1).

(7) Before taking any decision under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall take into consideration the representation made by a third party under section 11.

(8) Where a request has been rejected under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall communicate to the person making the request,—

(i) the reasons for such rejection;

(ii) the period within which an appeal against such rejection may be preferred; and

(iii) the particulars of the appellate authority.

(9) An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question.

Comments

In case of Ms. Bindu Khanna v. Directorate of Education; DOD: 14.7.2010, the CIC held “The information should be furnished free of cost as per Section 7(6) of the Act, failing which appropriate action would be initiated against the concerned officials.

In case of Mr.R S Misra v. Supreme Court Of India; DOD: 11.5.2011, CIC held “as per the reply provided by the PIO, information can be accessed by the Appellant on the Supreme Court's website. As per Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. The RTI Act mandates that information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought or requested for. It may not be out of place to mention that more than 90% of our country's population does not have access to computers and even where they do, may not understand how to access the same. Therefore, there is a duty cast upon the PIO to ensure that information sought by an applicant is provided in hard copy or in the manner requested by the applicant. Where no specific mention is made as regards the manner in which information must be furnished, it may be presumed that the citizen is seeking information in the form of hard copy. Moreover, even where the PIO has indicated that the information may be accessed from the website, the complete link/ web address at which the requisite information is available, must be furnished.

8. Exemption from disclosure of information:- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen,—

(a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence;

(b) information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court; Exemption from disclosure of information

(d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;

(e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information;

(f) information received in confidence from foreign Government;

(g) information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes;

(h) information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders;

(i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of Ministers, Secretaries and other officers: Provided that the decisions of Council of Ministers, the reasons thereof, and the material on the basis of which the decisions were taken shall be made public after the decision has been taken, and the matter is complete, or over: Provided further that those matters which come under the exemptions specified in this section shall not be disclosed;

(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information:

Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person.

(2) 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.

(3) Subject to the provisions of clauses (a), (c) and (i) of sub-section (1), any information relating to any occurrence, event or matter which has taken place, occurred or happened twenty years before the date on which any request is made under secton 6 shall be provided to any person making a request under that section:

Provided that where any question arises as to the date from which the said period of twenty years has to be computed, the decision of the Central Government shall be final, subject to the usual appeals provided for in this Act.

Comments

The disclosure of certain information has been exempted and the public authority is not bound to give the exempted information to any citizen. The CIC while deciding the appeal of Manish Bhatnagar v. R. N. Mangla, SPIO & Additional Director, Department of Women & Child Development, GNCTD, held “Exemption from disclosure of information: Section 8(2) of the RTI Act mandates that even where disclosure of information is protected by the exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to such protected interests, the information must be disclosed under the RTI Act. This sentiment has resonance in Section 21 of the Juvenile Justice Act which complements this epithet and also allows disclosure of information pertaining to juvenile or the child if such disclosure is in the interest of the juvenile or the child. The menace of child labour has been plaguing the Indian society for a considerable period of time. Though there are several legislations, government policies and schemes in place aimed at prohibition and regulation of child labour and rehabilitation of such children, the implementation of such legislations, policies and schemes continues to remain in shambles. Moreover, despite several court verdicts, child labour still persists in a monstrous manner in our country.

In appeal of Z.U. Alvi v. Ministry of Home Affairs, GOI; DOD: 31.1.2011, CIC held “In our view, while respectfully noting the observations of the Apex Court, it leaves no doubt that the contents of Bhopal Merger Agreement and the enclosures thereto are public documents. Hence, in the spirit of the RTI Act, such documents should also be furnished to the Appellant.

In case of Smt Durgesh Kumari v. Income Tax Department; DOD:28.8.2011, the CIC held “that the word ‘prosecution’, as occurring in section 8 (1) (h), means and implies initiation and continuation of criminal proceedings in the competent court. Termination of proceedings in the trial court can not mean conclusion of proceedings when this very issue has been agitated before a higher judicial forum (High Court in the present case) either by the State or by the accused. In the premises, we hold that the case is still under ‘prosecution’ in terms of section 8 (1) (h).

In case of Ms. Bindu Khanna v. Directorate of Education; DOD: 14.7.2010, the CIC held “Whether the third party, a private school performing public function, can refuse to furnish the information under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, particularly when the FAA of the respondent has ordered for disclosure of information. ……… we hold that the orders passed by the First Appellate Authority directing the third party to provide complete information to the appellant and the decision of the Commission affirming the orders of the First Appellate Authority are perfectly in compliance with the provisions of the Act. The third party is hence obliged to comply with the said orders. The Commission, therefore, directs the Respondent to seek compliance of the aforementioned order from the third party,” Further held “Therefore, we hold that the orders passed by the First Appellate Authority directing the third party to provide complete information to the appellant and the decision of the Commission affirming the orders of the First Appellate Authority are perfectly in compliance with the provisions of the Act. The third party is hence obliged to comply with the said orders.”

In appeal of Ms. Iqbal Kaur (represented through Shri Inderjeet Singh) v. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, CIC held “The Appellant is third-party seeking information relating to court proceedings which involved other individuals or persons who has personal interest in the said case. Section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act exempts the disclosure of such information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. Unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, the same cannot be provided under the RTI Act.

Further held The Appellant, as a third-party to the case decided by the NCDRC, has failed to show how the information in the nature of entire case file of such decided case will yield larger public interest. The Appellant has also failed to show how the disclosure of such case records will have any relationship to any public activity or interest. In fact, it is the view of this Commission that disclosure of such case records to the Appellant will cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of those parties who were directly involved as contesting parties in the said decided case before the NCDRC.”

9. Grounds for rejection to access in certain cases:- Without prejudice to the provisions of section 8, a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may reject a request for information where such a request for providing access would involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the State.

10. Severability:- (1) Where a request for access to information is rejected on the ground that it is in relation to information which is exempt from disclosure, then, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, access may be provided to that part of the record which does not contain any information which is exempt from disclosure under this Act and which can reasonably be severed from any part that contains exempt information.

(2) Where access is granted to a part of the record under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall give a notice to the applicant, informing—

(a) that only part of the record requested, after severance of the record containing information which is exempt from disclosure, is being provided;

(b) the reasons for the decision, including any findings on any material question of fact, referring to the material on which those findings were based;

(c) the name and designation of the person giving the decision;

(d) the details of the fees calculated by him or her and the amount of fee which the applicant is required to deposit; and

(e) his or her rights with respect to review of the decision regarding non-disclosure of part of the information, the amount of fee charged or the form of access provided, including the particulars of the senior officer specified under sub-section (1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, time limit, process and any other form of access.

11. Third party information:- (1) Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information:

Provided that except in the case of trade or commercial secrets protected by law, disclosure may be allowed if the public interest in disclosure outweighs in importance any possible harm or injury to the interests of such third party.

(2) Where a notice is served by the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, under sub-section (1) to a third party in respect of any information or record or part thereof, the third party shall, within ten days from the date of receipt of such notice, be given the opportunity to make representation against the proposed disclosure.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 7, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within forty days after receipt of the request under section 6, if the third party has been given an opportunity to make representation under sub-section (2), make a decision as to whether or not to disclose the information or record or part thereof and give in writing the notice of his decision to the third party.

(4) A notice given under sub-section (3) shall include a statement that the third party to whom the notice is given is entitled to prefer an appeal under section 19 against the decision.

Comments

If the information sought by the citizen pertains to a record or part thereof relates to, or has been supplied by a third party and if it is not treated as confidential by that third party, the PIO is at liberty to provide the same to the applicant. If, however such above information is treated as ‘confidential’ by that third party, then the CPIO/PIO shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give notice to such third party and invite the third party to make written or oral submission in this regard, whether the information should be disclosed, and the submission of the third party shall be considered. The CIC while deciding case of Bombay Stock Exchange {Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd v. Security and Exchange Board of India} held “We may, however, observe that the objections filed by the appellant herein u/s 11 (1) are not binding on the CPIO. These objections are only to be kept in view by the CPIO while taking a decision regarding disclosure of information. We make it clear that this Commission can not fetter the discretion of the CPIO regarding the disclosure of 3rd party information.” Further held “(i) The CPIOs are mandated to send a copies of their orders to the 3rd party u/s 11 (3), from whom objections are sought u/s 11(1). (ii) It is not practical to lay down an inflexible rule that PIOs and AAs will always offer an opportunity of hearing to the parties, let alone to the 3rd party. They may do so as per their discretion, keeping in view the complexity of legal and factual issues involved, without forgetting that timelines are to be adhered to, being the essence of the Act.”

“Whether the third party, a private school performing public function, can refuse to furnish the information under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, particularly when the FAA of the respondent has ordered for disclosure of information. ……… we hold that the orders passed by the First Appellate Authority directing the third party to provide complete information to the appellant and the decision of the Commission affirming the orders of the First Appellate Authority are perfectly in compliance with the provisions of the Act. The third party is hence obliged to comply with the said orders. The Commission, therefore, directs the Respondent to seek compliance of the aforementioned order from the third party,” Further held “Therefore, we hold that the orders passed by the First Appellate Authority directing the third party to provide complete information to the appellant and the decision of the Commission affirming the orders of the First Appellate Authority are perfectly in compliance with the provisions of the Act. The third party is hence obliged to comply with the said orders.” It was held by CIC in appeal of Ms. Bindu Khanna v. Directorate of Education; DOD: 14.7.2010.

CHAPTER III

The Central Information Commission

12. Constitution of Central Information Commission:- (1) The Central Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute a body to be known as the Central Information Commission to exercise the powers conferred on, and to perform the functions assigned to, it under this Act.

(2) The Central Information Commission shall consist of—

(a) the Chief Information Commissioner; and

(b) such number of Central Information Commissioners, not exceeding ten, as may be deemed necessary.

(3) The Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners shall be appointed by the President on the recommendation of a committee consisting of—

(i) the Prime Minister, who shall be the Chairperson of the committee;

(ii) the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha; and

(iii) a Union Cabinet Minister to be nominated by the Prime Minister.

Explanation.—For the purposes of removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where the Leader of Opposition in the House of the People has not been recognised as such, the Leader of the single largest group in opposition of the Government in the House of the People shall be deemed to be the Leader of Opposition.

(4) The general superintendence, direction and management of the affairs of the Central Information Commission shall vest in the Chief Information Commissioner who shall be assisted by the Information Commissioners and may exercise all such powers and do all such acts and things which may be exercised or done by the Central Information Commission autonomously without being subjected to directions by any other authority under this Act.

(5) The Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners shall be persons of eminence in public life with wide knowledge and experience in law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, mass media or administration and governance.

(6) The Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner shall not be a Member of Parliament or Member of the Legislature of any State or Union territory, as the case may be, or hold any other office of profit or connected with any political party or carrying on any business or pursuing any profession.

(7) The headquarters of the Central Information Commission shall be at Delhi and the Central Information Commission may, with the previous approval of the Central Government, establish offices at other places in India.

Comments

In case of Ms. Sarah Cyriac v. Delhi University; DOD: 15.4.2010, CIC held “The stand of respondents that this issue stands settled in a decision of this Commission is correct. It will not be possible for a Bench of this Commission to now rule on the general issue. This Commission has moreover no powers of review unless it is in exercise of general inherent power to review its decision which has erred in fact or in law.

A larger Bench has already ruled only of the applicability in regard to public examinations conducted by institutions established by the Constitution like UPSC or institutions established by any enactment by the Parliament or Rules made there under like CBSE, Staff Selection Commission, Universities., etc, the function of which is mainly to conduct examinations and which have an established system as fool-proof as that can be.”

13. Term of office and conditions of service:- (1) The Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office and shall not be eligible for reappointment:

Provided that no Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office as such after he has attained the age of sixty-five years.

(2) Every Information Commissioner shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office or till he attains the age of sixty-five years, whichever is earlier, and shall not be eligible for reappointment as such Information Commissioner:

Provided that every Information Commissioner shall, on vacating his office under this sub-section be eligible for appointment as the Chief Information Commissioner in the manner specified in sub-section (3) of section 12:

Provided further that where the Information Commissioner is appointed as the Chief Information Commissioner, his term of office shall not be more than five years in aggregate as the Information Commissioner and the Chief Information Commissioner.

(3) The Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner shall before he enters upon his office make and subscribe before the President or some other person appointed by him in that behalf, an oath or affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in the First Schedule.

(4) The Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner may, at any time, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign from his office: Provided that the Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner may be removed in the manner specified under section 14.

(5) The salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of—

(a) the Chief Information Commissioner shall be the same as that of the Chief Election Commissioner;

(b) an Information Commissioner shall be the same as that of an Election Commissioner:

Provided that if the Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner, at the time of his appointment is, in receipt of a pension, other than a disability or wound pension, in respect of any previous service under the Government of India or under the Government of a State, his salary in respect of the service as the Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner shall be reduced by the amount of that pension including any portion of pension which was commuted and pension equivalent of other forms of retirement benefits excluding pension equivalent of retirement gratuity:

Provided further that if the Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner if, at the time of his appointment is, in receipt of retirement benefits in respect of any previous service rendered in a Corporation established by or under any Central Act or State Act or a Government company owned or controlled by the Central Government or the State Government, his salary in respect of the service as the Chief Information Commissioner or an Information Commissioner shall be reduced by the amount of pension equivalent to the retirement benefits:

Provided also that the salaries, allowances and other conditions of service of the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners shall not be varied to their disadvantage after their appointment.

(6) The Central Government shall provide the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners with such officers and employees as may be necessary for the efficient performance of their functions under this Act, and the salaries and allowances payable to and the terms and conditions of service of the officers and other employees appointed for the purpose of this Act shall be such as may be prescribed.

14. Removal of Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner:- (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), the Chief Information Commissioner or any Information Commissioner shall be removed from his office only by order of the President on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after the Supreme Court, on a reference made to it by the President, has, on inquiry, reported that the Chief Information Commissioner or any Information Commissioner, as the case may be, ought on such ground be removed.

(2) The President may suspend from office, and if deem necessary prohibit also from attending the office during inquiry, the Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner in respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court under sub-section (1) until the President has passed orders on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such reference.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the President may by order remove from office the Chief Information Commissioner or any Information Commissioner if the Chief Information Commissioner or a Information Commissioner, as the case may be,—

(a) is adjudged an insolvent; or

(b) has been convicted of an offence which, in the opinion of the President, involves moral turpitude; or

(c) engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his office; or

(d) is, in the opinion of the President, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body; or

(e) has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as the Chief Information Commissioner or a Information Commissioner.

(4) If the Chief Information Commissioner or a Information Commissioner in any way, concerned or interested in any contract or agreement made by or on behalf of the Government of India or participates in any way in the profit thereof or in any benefit or emolument arising therefrom otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company, he shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to be guilty of misbehaviour.

CHAPTER IV

The State Information Commission

15. Constitution of State Information Commission:- (1) Every State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute a body to be known as the .................... (name of the State) Information Commission to exercise the powers conferred on, and to perform the functions assigned to, it under this Act.

(2) The State Information Commission shall consist of—

(a) the State Chief Information Commissioner, and

(b) such number of State Information Commissioners, not exceeding ten, as may be deemed necessary.

(3) The State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners shall be appointed by the Governor on the recommendation of a committee consisting of—

(i) the Chief Minister, who shall be the Chairperson of the committee;

(ii) the Leader of Opposition in the Legislative Assembly; and

(iii) a Cabinet Minister to be nominated by the Chief Minister

Explanation.—For the purposes of removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where the Leader of Opposition in the Legislative Assembly has not been recognised as such, the Leader of the single largest group in opposition of the Government in the Legislative Assembly shall be deemed to be the Leader of Opposition.

(4) The general superintendence, direction and management of the affairs of the State Information Commission shall vest in the State Chief Information Commissioner who shall be assisted by the State Information Commissioners and may exercise all such powers and do all such acts and things which may be exercised or done by the State Information Commission autonomously without being subjected to directions by any other authority under this Act.

(5) The State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners shall be persons of eminence in public life with wide knowledge and experience in law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, mass media or administration and governance.

(6) The State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner shall not be a Member of Parliament or Member of the Legislature of any State or Union territory, as the case may be, or hold any other office of profit or connected with any political party or carrying on any business or pursuing any profession.

(7) The headquarters of the State Information Commission shall be at such place in the State as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify and the State Information Commission may, with the previous approval of the State Government, establish offices at other places in the State.

16. Term of office and conditions of service:- (1) The State Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office and shall not be eligible for reappointment:

Provided that no State Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office as such after he has attained the age of sixty-five years.

(2) Every State Information Commissioner shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office or till he attains the age of sixty-five years, whichever is earlier, and shall not be eligible for reappointment as such State Information Commissioner:

Provided that every State Information Commissioner shall, on vacating his office under this sub-section, be eligible for appointment as the State Chief Information Commissioner in the manner specified in sub-section (3) of section 15:

Provided further that where the State Information Commissioner is appointed as the State Chief Information Commissioner, his term of office shall not be more than five years in aggregate as the State Information Commissioner and the State Chief Information Commissioner.

(3) The State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner, shall before he enters upon his office make and subscribe before the Governor or some other person appointed by him in that behalf, an oath or affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in the First Schedule.

(4) The State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner may, at any time, by writing under his hand addressed to the Governor, resign from his office: Provided that the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner may be removed in the manner specified under section 17.

(5) The salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of—

(a) the State Chief Information Commissioner shall be the same as that of an Election Commissioner;

(b) the State Information Commissioner shall be the same as that of the Chief Secretary to the State Government:

Provided that if the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner, at the time of his appointment is, in receipt of a pension, other than a disability or wound pension, in respect of any previous service under the Government of India or under the Government of a State, his salary in respect of the service as the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner shall be reduced by the amount of that pension including any portion of pension which was commuted and pension equivalent of other forms of retirement benefits excluding pension equivalent of retirement gratuity:

Provided further that where the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner if, at the time of his appointment is, in receipt of retirement benefits in respect of any previous service rendered in a Corporation established by or under any Central Act or State Act or a Government company owned or controlled by the Central Government or the State Government, his salary in respect of the service as the State Chief Information Commissioner or the State Information Commissioner shall be reduced by the amount of pension equivalent to the retirement benefits:

Provided also that the salaries, allowances and other conditions of service of the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners shall not be varied to their disadvantage after their appointment.

(6) The State Government shall provide the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners with such officers and employees as may be necessary for the efficient performance of their functions under this Act, and the salaries and allowances payable to and the terms and conditions of service of the officers and other employees appointed for the purpose of this Act shall be such as may be prescribed.

17. Removal of State Chief Information Commissioner or State Information Commissioner:- (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner shall be removed from his office only by order of the Governor on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after the Supreme Court, on a reference made to it by the Governor, has on inquiry, reported that the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner, as the case may be, ought on such ground be removed.

(2) The Governor may suspend from office, and if deem necessary prohibit also from attending the office during inquiry, the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner in respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court under sub-section (1) until the Governor has passed orders on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such reference.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the Governor may by order remove from office the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner if a State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner, as the case may be,—

(a) is adjudged an insolvent; or

(b) has been convicted of an offence which, in the opinion of the Governor, involves moral turpitude; or

(c) engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his office; or

(d) is, in the opinion of the Governor, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body; or

(e) has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner.

(4) If the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner in any way, concerned or interested in any contract or agreement made by or on behalf of the Government of the State or participates in any way in the profit thereof or in any benefit or emoluments arising therefrom otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company, he shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to be guilty of misbehaviour.

CHAPTER V

Powers and functions of the Information Commissions,

appeal and penalties

18. Powers and functions of Information Commissions:- (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, it shall be the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person,—

(a) who has been unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, either by reason that no such officer has been appointed under this Act, or because the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has refused to accept his or her application for information or appeal under this Act for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer or senior officer specified in sub-section (1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be;

(b) who has been refused access to any information requested under this Act; (c) who has not been given a response to a request for information or access to information within the time limit specified under this Act;

(d) who has been required to pay an amount of fee which he or she considers unreasonable;

(e) who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act; and

(f) in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act.

(2) Where the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter, it may initiate an inquiry in respect thereof.

(3) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall, while inquiring into any matter under this section, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely:—

(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compel them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce the documents or things;

(b) requiring the discovery and inspection of documents;

(c) receiving evidence on affidavit;

(d) requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any court or office;

(e) issuing summons for examination of witnesses or documents; and

(f) any other matter which may be prescribed.

(4) Notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other Act of Parliament or State Legislature, as the case may be, the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may, during the inquiry of any complaint under this Act, examine any record to which this Act applies which is under the control of the public authority, and no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds.

Comments

Appeal for deemed refusal to his RTI request, In order to avoid multiple proceedings under sections 18 and 19 of the RTI Act, viz., complaints and appeals, this case is remitted to CPIO, Ministry of Law & Justice, New Delhi. {Ashok Kumar Walia v. Ministry of Law & Justice; DOD: 11.7.2012 by CIC}

19. Appeal:- (1) Any person who, does not receive a decision within the time specified in sub-section (1) or clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 7, or is aggrieved by a decision of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may within thirty days from the expiry of such period or from the receipt of such a decision prefer an appeal to such officer who is senior in rank to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer as the case may be, in each public authority:

Provided that such officer may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of thirty days if he or she is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.

(2) Where an appeal is preferred against an order made by a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, under section 11 to disclose third party information, the appeal by the concerned third party shall be made within thirty days from the date of the order.

(3) A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission: Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.

(4) If the decision of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, against which an appeal is preferred relates to information of a third party, the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to that third party.

(5) In any appeal proceedings, the onus to prove that a denial of a request was justified shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, who denied the request.

(6) An appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be disposed of within thirty days of the receipt of the appeal or within such extended period not exceeding a total of forty-five days from the date of filing thereof, as the case may be, for reasons to be recorded in writing.

(7) The decision of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall be binding.

(8) In its decision, the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, has the power to—

(a) require the public authority to take any such steps as may be necessary to secure compliance with the provisions of this Act, including—

(i) by providing access to information, if so requested, in a particular form;

(ii) by appointing a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be;

(iii) by publishing certain information or categories of information;

(iv) by making necessary changes to its practices in relation to the maintenance, management and destruction of records;

(v) by enhancing the provision of training on the right to information for its officials;

(vi) by providing it with an annual report in compliance with clause

(b) of sub-section (1) of section 4; (b) require the public authority to compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered;

(c) impose any of the penalties provided under this Act;

(d) reject the application.

(9) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall give notice of its decision, including any right of appeal, to the complainant and the public authority.

(10) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall decide the appeal in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed.

20. Penalties:- (1) Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees:

Provided that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on him:

Provided further that the burden of proving that he acted reasonably and diligently shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be.

(2) Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause and persistently, failed to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall recommend for disciplinary action against the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, under the service rules applicable to him.

Comments

“In light of this, the complaint is hereby dismissed with a word of caution to respondents in the Office of SP, Korba that they will exercise discretion to ensure that no harassment arises to the officers of the NCCBM on account of their having exercised their authority under the RTI Act, lest this be construed as an attempt to obstruct furnishing of information and thus inviting penalty u/s 20 (1).” Held by CIC in case of M. Vasudeva v. Superintendent of Police, Korba, Chattisgarh DOD 9.4.10.

CHAPTER VI

Miscellaneous

21. Protection of action taken in good faith:- No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act or any rule made thereunder.

Comments

“The Commission is also clear that we have no authority to adjudicate upon whether the case registered u/s 304/201 IPC read with Sec. 34 IPC is in keeping with the law since the law in that case is the Indian Penal Code and not the Right to Information Act. The only action that the Commission would be in a position to take would be if it established that action has been taken by the SP, Korba in violation of sec. 21 of RTI Act.” Held by CIC in case of M. Vasudeva v. Superintendent of Police, Korba, Chattisgarh DOD 9.4.10.

22. Act to have overriding effect:- 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 or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act.

Comments

In case of Ms. Iqbal Kaur (represented through Shri Inderjeet Singh) v. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, DOD it was held by CIC “In the present appeal, the NCDRC has preferred to take the second approach through its written submissions. By prohibiting or debarring the disclosure of information related to its proceedings to third-parties altogether, the NCDRC has virtually created an inconsistency with the object of the RTI Act. The purpose of the RTI Act is that disclosure of information shall be the norm while exemption shall be the exception. Therefore, in case of such inconsistency between the consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 and the RTI Act, it is the latter which will prevail due to its overriding effect as per Section 22 of the RTI Act.”

In case of Mr.R S Misra v. Supreme Court Of India; DOD: 11.5.2011, CIC held “Therefore, this Commission respectfully disagrees with the observations of the then Chief Information Commissioner and holds that Rule 2, Order XII of the SC Rules appears to impose a restriction on access to information held by or under the control of a public authority, which is prima facie inconsistent with the RTI Act. Therefore, in accordance with Section 22 of the RTI Act, the provisions of the RTI Act shall override the SC Rules.”

23. Bar of jurisdiction of courts:- No court shall entertain any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any order made under this Act and no such order shall be called in question otherwise than by way of an appeal under this Act.

24. Act not to apply to certain organizations:- (1) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government:

Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section:

Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the Central Information Commission, and notwithstanding anything contained in section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.

(2) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the Schedule by including therein any other intelligence or security organisation established by that Government or omitting therefrom any organisation already specified therein and on the publication of such notification, such organisation shall be deemed to be included in or, as the case may be, omitted from the Schedule.

(3) Every notification issued under sub-section (2) shall be laid before each House of Parliament.

(4) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation being organisations established by the State Government, as that Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify:

Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section:

Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the State Information Commission and, notwithstanding anything contained in section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.

(5) Every notification issued under sub-section (4) shall be laid before the State Legislature.

Comments

The request for information predated the Government notification, whether the applicant had a right to get the information? The Central Government under Section 24(1) of the Right to Information Act had included the CBI in the Second Schedule to the Right to Information Act and, therefore, the provisions of the Act would not apply to the CBI. {Ajay Kumar Aggarwal v. CPIO, Central Bureau of Investigation; DOD 24.8.2011}

25. Monitoring and Reporting:- (1) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall, as soon as practicable after the end of each year, prepare a report on the implementation of the provisions of this Act during that year and forward a copy thereof to the appropriate Government.

(2) Each Ministry or Department shall, in relation to the public authorities within their jurisdiction, collect and provide such information to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, as is required to prepare the report under this section and comply with the requirements concerning the furnishing of that information and keeping of records for the purposes of this section.

(3) Each report shall state in respect of the year to which the report relates,—

(a) the number of requests made to each public authority;

(b) the number of decisions where applicants were not entitled to access to the documents pursuant to the requests, the provisions of this Act under which these decisions were made and the number of times such provisions were invoked;

(c) the number of appeals referred to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, for review, the nature of the appeals and the outcome of the appeals;

(d) particulars of any disciplinary action taken against any officer in respect of the administration of this Act;

(e) the amount of charges collected by each public authority under this Act;

(f) any facts which indicate an effort by the public authorities to administer and implement the spirit and intention of this Act;

(g) recommendations for reform, including recommendations in respect of the particular public authorities, for the development, improvement, modernisation, reform or amendment to this Act or other legislation or common law or any other matter relevant for operationalising the right to access information.

(4) The Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, may, as soon as practicable after the end of each year, cause a copy of the report of the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, referred to in sub-section (1) to be laid before each House of Parliament or, as the case may be, before each House of the State Legislature, where there are two Houses, and where there is one House of the State Legislature before that House.

(5) If it appears to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, that the practice of a public authority in relation to the exercise of its functions under this Act does not conform with the provisions or spirit of this Act, it may give to the authority a recommendation specifying the steps which ought in its opinion to be taken for promoting such conformity.

26. Appropriate Government to prepare programmes:- (1) The appropriate Government may, to the extent of availability of financial and other resources,—

(a) develop and organise educational programmes to advance the understanding of the public, in particular of disadvantaged communities as to how to exercise the rights contemplated under this Act;

(b) encourage public authorities to participate in the development and organisation of programmes referred to in clause (a) and to undertake such programmes themselves;

(d) train Central Public Information Officers or State Public Information Officers, as the case may be, of public authorities and produce relevant training materials for use by the public authorities themselves.

(2) The appropriate Government shall, within eighteen months from the commencement of this Act, compile in its official language a guide containing such information, in an easily comprehensible form and manner, as may reasonably be required by a person who wishes to exercise any right specified in this Act.

(3) The appropriate Government shall, if necessary, update and publish the guidelines referred to in sub-section (2) at regular intervals which shall, in particular and without prejudice to the generality of sub-section (2), include—

(a) the objects of this Act;

(b) the postal and street address, the phone and fax number and, if available, electronic mail address of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of every public authority appointed under sub-section (1) of section 5;

(c) the manner and the form in which request for access to an information shall be made to a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be;

(d) the assistance available from and the duties of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of a public authority under this Act;

(e) the assistance available from the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be;

(f) all remedies in law available regarding an act or failure to act in respect of a right or duty conferred or imposed by this Act including the manner of filing an appeal to the Commission;

(g) the provisions providing for the voluntary disclosure of categories of records in accordance with section 4;

(h) the notices regarding fees to be paid in relation to requests for access to an information; and

(i) any additional regulations or circulars made or issued in relation to obtaining access to an information in accordance with this Act.

(4) The appropriate Government must, if necessary, update and publish the guidelines at regular intervals.

27. Power to make rules by Appropriate Government:- (1) The appropriate Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:—

(a) the cost of the medium or print cost price of the materials to be disseminated under sub-section (4) of section 4;

(b) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 6;

(c) the fee payable under sub-sections (1) and (5) of section 7;

(d) the salaries and allowances payable to and the terms and conditions of service of the officers and other employees under sub-section (6) of section 13 and sub-section (6) of section 16;

(e) the procedure to be adopted by the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, in deciding the appeals under sub-section (10) of section 19; and

(f) any other matter which is required to be, or may be, prescribed.

28. Power to make rules by competent authority:- (1) The competent authority may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:—

(i) the cost of the medium or print cost price of the materials to be disseminated under sub-section (4) of section 4;

(ii) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 6;

(iii) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 7; and

(iv) any other matter which is required to be, or may be, prescribed

29. Laying of rules:- (1) Every rule made by the Central Government under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or both Houses agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be; so, however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that rule.

(2) Every rule made under this Act by a State Government shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is notified, before the State Legislature. .

30. Power to remove difficulties:- (1) If any difficulty arises in giving effect to the provisions of this Act, the Central Government may, by order published in the Official Gazette, make such provisions not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act as appear to it to be necessary or expedient for removal of the difficulty:

Provided that no such order shall be made after the expiry of a period of two years from the date of the commencement of this Act.

(2) Every order made under this section shall, as soon as may be after it is made, be laid before each House of Parliament.

31. Repeal:- The Freedom of Information Act, 2002 (5 of 2003) is hereby repealed.

THE FIRST SCHEDULE

[See sections 13 (3) and 16(3)]

Form of oath or affirmation to be made by the Chief Information Commissioner/the Information Commissioner/the State Chief Information Commissioner/the State Information Commissioner

“I, ..........................., having been appointed Chief Information Commissioner /Information Commissioner / State Chief Information Commissioner / State Information Commissioner swear in the name of God solemnly affirm that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws.”.

THE SECOND SCHEDULE

(See section 24)

Intelligence and security organisation established

by the Central Government

1. Intelligence Bureau.

2. Research and Analysis Wing of the Cabinet Secretariat.

3. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence.

4. Central Economic Intelligence Bureau.

5. Directorate of Enforcement.

6. Narcotics Control Bureau.

7. Aviation Research Centre.

8. Special Prontier Force.

9. Border Security Force.

10. Central Reserve Police Force.

11. Indo-Tibetan Border Police.

12. Central Industrial Security Force.

13. National Security Guards.

14. Assam Rifles.

15. Sashtra Seema Bal

16. Special Branch (CID), Andaman and Nicobar.

17. The Crime Branch-C.I.D.-CB, Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

18. Special Branch, Lakshadweep Police.

19. Special Protection Group.

20. Defence Research and Development Organisation.

21 Boarder Road Development Board.

22. Financial Intelligence Unit, India.

Right to Information - Awareness & Implementation

Saturday, 12 March 2016

Law of Right to Information

No comments:

Post a Comment