HOW TO MASTER THE RTI ACT: A SIMPLE GUIDE

This article is written by Kimaya Anavkar, a T.Y.LL.B. student at Kishinchand chellaram Law College.

Keywords: Right to Information, RTI Act 2005, Public Information Officer (PIO), Transparency, Accountability, RTI Application, First Appeal

Abstract:

The Right to Information Act, 2005 is a cornerstone of Indian democracy, providing a statutory framework for the fundamental right to information. It empowers citizens to seek information from public authorities, thereby enforcing transparency and accountability in government functioning. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the Act’s practical application. It details the process of identifying the correct Public Information Officer (PIO) and explains the legal concept of a “public authority.” It offers strategies for drafting a specific and effective RTI application designed to preempt common grounds for rejection.

Furthermore, it comprehensively breaks down the statutory timelines for responses and provides a detailed roadmap for the crucial two-tier appeal process, covering the First Appeal and the Second Appeal to the Information Commission. This guide equips citizens, particularly law students, with the procedural and substantive knowledge to use this powerful tool for systemic good.

Introduction: Your Right to Know

As students of law, we hold (or bear) the duty to understand and uphold the Constitution. The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, is not merely a statute; it is the practical codification of a fundamental right. The Supreme Court of India, in State of U.P. vs. Raj Narain, established that the people’s right to know flows directly from the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

The RTI Act gives this right its teeth. It transforms citizens from passive recipients of governance to active participants, armed with the power to question, scrutinize, and hold accountable every public authority. For a law student, mastering this Act is not just an academic exercise—it is an essential part of our professional toolkit for promoting justice. This article provides an elaborated guide on wielding this tool with precision and impact.

What is the First Step to Filing an RTI?

Step 1: Identifying the ‘Public Authority’ and the PIO

The first and most critical step is correct jurisdiction. Your application must be addressed to the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the correct public authority.

Section 2(h) of the Act defines a “public authority” as any body or institution of self-government that the Constitution (like Parliament or State Legislatures), any other law, or a government notification establishes. Crucially, this also includes bodies owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government, and even non-governmental organizations that receive substantial government funding.

Every public authority must designate PIOs to receive and process requests.

• Practical Strategy: Before filing, visit the website of the department you believe holds the information. Look for an “RTI” or “PIO List” link. If you are targeting a district-level office (e.g., a Revenue Department for land records or a Municipal Corporation for civic issues ), you will need to find the PIO for that specific office.
• What if I send it to the wrong place? Section 6(3) of the Act provides a remedy. If you make an application to the wrong public authority, the PIO who receives it must transfer it to the correct authority within five days and inform you of the transfer.

How Do I Draft a Clear and Effective RTI Application?

Step 2: Drafting an ‘Exemption-Proof’ RTI Application

Your application is a legal document. Its drafting determines its success. The law states you need not give any reason for your request, but you must be specific about the information you seek.

Key Drafting Principles:

• Be Specific, Not Vague:
  • Bad Query: “I want all information on corruption in the PWD department.” (This is vague and will be rejected).
  • Good Query: “Please provide certified copies of all expenditure reports and work completion certificates for the ‘XYZ Road’ tender (Ref: 123/PWD), sanctioned between April 1, 2023, and March 31, 2024.”
• Ask for Records, Not Reasons: The Act empowers you to ask for existing “information”. This includes documents, reports, data, memos, and emails. Do not ask “why” questions.
  • Bad Query: “Why was my application for a passport rejected?”
  • Good Query: “Please provide me with a copy of the ‘notesheet’ and ‘file notings’ related to my passport application (File No. ABC).” (This will reveal the reasons for the rejection).
• Strategic Framing (Avoiding Section 8): Be mindful of the exemptions under Section 8 of the Act (e.g., information affecting national security, “personal information” with no public interest). If you are asking for information that might be borderline personal, explicitly state the larger public interest.
  • Example: “Please provide the attendance records of all medical officers at the Civil Hospital for May 2024. I seek this information in the public interest to verify the availability of doctors for public service.”

What is the Procedure for Submitting the Application and Fees?

Step 3: The Procedure: Submission, Fees, and Timelines

Submission:

1. Online: This is the most efficient method. For Central Government bodies, use the https://rtionline.gov.in portal. Most states (like Maharashtra, Karnataka, etc.) have their own separate portals.
2. Offline: You can submit a physical application via speed post or hand-delivery to the PIO. Always get a dated acknowledgment receipt.

Fees: The fee is a nominal ₹10. This is a statutory requirement, not a service charge.

• BPL Exemption: Critically, applicants Below the Poverty Line (BPL) are completely exempt from this fee. This is a vital provision to ensure the Act is accessible to all.
• Payment Mode: Online payment is integrated into the portals. For offline applications, applicants pay the fee via Demand Draft, Indian Postal Order, or (in some states) Court Fee Stamps.

What Happens After I Submit My RTI Application?

Statutory Timelines (Your Right to a Reply): The PIO is under a strict legal obligation to respond.

• 30 Days: The standard timeline for the PIO to provide the information or issue a rejection.
• 48 Hours: If the information concerns the life or liberty of a person.
• 35 Days: If the application was submitted to an Assistant PIO (APIO).
• “Deemed Refusal”: If you do not receive any response within this 30-day period, it is considered a “deemed refusal” under the Act. This automatically gives you the right to file a First Appeal.

You must keep copies of your application, the payment receipt, and any postal receipts, as these are crucial if you need to file an appeal.

What Can I Do If I Don’t Get a Reply or I’m Not Satisfied?

Step 4: The Appeal Mechanism (When Your Request is Denied)

Do not let a rejection or silence discourage you. The RTI Act provides a robust, two-stage appeal process that is free of cost.

First Appeal (Section 19(1)): This is your first legal challenge, filed within the same department.

• Who: To the First Appellate Authority (FAA), who is an officer senior to the PIO.
• When: Within 30 days from the date you received the PIO’s reply or from the date the 30-day reply period expired (in case of deemed refusal).
• Grounds for Appeal:
  • No response received (deemed refusal).
  • You are “aggrieved by the decision” (e.g., the PIO wrongly invoked a Section 8 exemption).
  • The PIO provided incomplete, misleading, or false information.
  • The fees charged for information were unreasonable.

Second Appeal (Section 19(3)): This is the final appeal, made to an independent, autonomous body.

• Who: To the Central Information Commission (CIC) or the State Information Commission (SIC), depending on whether the authority is central or state.
• When: Within 90 days from the date of the FAA’s decision (or the date the FAA’s decision was due).
• Powers of the Commission: The Information Commission has quasi-judicial powers. It can conduct a full inquiry, summon and examine witnesses, and, most importantly, impose penalties of ₹250 per day (up to ₹25,000) on the PIO for persistently delaying, denying, or providing false information.

Landmark Judgments: The Judicial Evolution of the RTI Act

The Indian judiciary has powerfully shaped and reinforced the Right to Information Act, 2005. The Supreme Court, in particular, has delivered several judgments that have defined the Act’s scope, its limitations, and its fundamental importance.

1. State of U.P. vs. Raj Narain (1975)
   • The Core Issue: This pre-RTI era case laid the constitutional groundwork for the right to information. The question was whether the government could claim privilege over documents related to the Prime Minister’s election.
   • The Judgment & Impact: The Supreme Court held that in a democracy, the people are the masters and have a “right to know” the workings of the government. It explicitly linked this right to Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution (freedom of speech and expression), stating that one cannot speak freely without being informed. This case is the philosophical bedrock upon which the RTI Act was eventually built.
2. CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011)
   • The Core Issue: Can a student use the RTI Act to access their own evaluated answer sheets? The examining bodies (like CBSE) argued that this was not “information” and that they held it in a “fiduciary capacity.”
   • The Judgment & Impact: The Supreme Court delivered a landmark victory for students, ruling that evaluated answer sheets are “information” under Section 2(f) of the Act. It clarified that the relationship between an examiner and the examining body is not a fiduciary one in this context, thereby preventing the misuse of Section 8(1)(e) to deny information. This judgment brought immense transparency to the educational sector.
3. Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commr. (2013)
   • The Core Issue: Does the RTI Act permit the disclosure of a public servant’s personal service records, including memos, appraisals, and details of minor penalties?
   • The Judgment & Impact: This judgment clarified the limits of the Act. The Supreme Court held that such information qualifies as “personal information” under Section 8(1)(j). It ruled that this personal information cannot be disclosed unless the RTI applicant can demonstrate an overriding “larger public interest.” This case is a crucial reminder that the RTI Act is a tool for accountability, not a tool for indiscriminate intrusion into personal privacy.
4. Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal (2020)
   • The Core Issue: Is the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) a “public authority” under the RTI Act? Can information related to judicial appointments and judges’ assets be disclosed?
   • The Judgment & Impact: In a monumental decision, a Constitution Bench affirmed that the CJI’s office is a “public authority”. The Court masterfully balanced the public’s right to know with the need for judicial independence. It held that transparency does not undermine independence but, in fact, strengthens it. This case powerfully cemented the principle that no institution, not even the highest judicial office, is exempt from public accountability.

Conclusion: From Law Student to Accountability Advocate

The Right to Information Act, 2005, is far more than a mere statute; it represents a fundamental shift in the power dynamic between the citizen and the state. It is the legal embodiment of a move from a culture of official secrecy to one of open and accountable governance. For a law student, this Act is a procedural scalpel, a tool to be wielded with precision to dissect opacity and enforce transparency.

Understanding the Act’s provisions is only the beginning. True empowerment lies in mastering its process—from drafting a specific application that anticipates a PIO’s objections to confidently navigating the First Appeal and Second Appeal mechanisms. The Right to Information is not a passive right; it is a right that must be actively exercised. As future officers of the court and advocates for justice, your ability to use this Act effectively is a direct measure of your commitment to holding power accountable and ensuring that our democracy remains truly “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

References

1. The Right to Information Act, 2005.
2. State of U.P. vs. Raj Narain (1975) AIR 865.
3. CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) 8 SCC 497.
4. Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commr. (2013) 1 SCC 212.
5. Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal (2020) 5 SCC 481.
6. RTI Online Portal: https://rtionline.gov.in

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. Can a PIO refuse to give me information?

Yes, a PIO can deny information that falls under the exemptions listed in Section 8 of the RTI Act. These include information that affects national security, sovereignty, or a third party’s personal information, among others. However, they must provide a valid reason for the denial.

2. Do I have to give a reason for asking for information?

No. Section 6(2) of the RTI Act explicitly states that the applicant is not required to give any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details except those necessary for contacting them.

3. What if the information I need is held by multiple departments?

You should apply to the department you believe is most likely to have the information. If the information is held by another public authority, the PIO is required under Section 6(3) to transfer your application (or the relevant part of it) to that authority within 5 days.

4. Is there a word limit for an RTI application?

While the Act doesn’t specify a word limit, the Central Government (RTI) Rules, 2012, state that an application should ordinarily not exceed 500 words (excluding annexures). It’s always best to be concise and specific.

5. Can I file an RTI about a private company?

No, the RTI Act only applies to “public authorities,” which are government bodies or organizations substantially financed by the government. You cannot use the RTI Act to seek information from a purely private company or individual.