The CIC Full Bench held in 2006 that file notings — the internal notes, remarks, and minutes recorded by officers on official files — are “information” under §2(f) of the RTI Act and must be disclosed under §4(1)(b)(xii) when they relate to administrative or quasi-judicial decisions. They are not automatically exempt as internal deliberation.
This ruling overturned the government's attempt to carve out file notings from the RTI Act's ambit entirely.
The Union Government, through a proposed amendment to the RTI Act in 2006, sought to exempt “file notings” from the definition of “information.” Before the amendment could be enacted, multiple RTI applicants had already received conflicting responses — some PIOs disclosed file notings, others refused on the ground that they were protected internal communications.
The CIC Full Bench took up the issue suo motu and issued a clarificatory order to resolve the inconsistency across departments.
The CIC held: (1) file notings are “information” under §2(f) — they are material in any form including records, documents, opinions, and memos; (2) file notings relating to decisions on administrative or quasi-judicial matters — land acquisition, tender awards, scheme approvals — must be proactively published under §4(1)(b)(xii); (3) the exemption under §8(1)(i) (Cabinet notes and deliberations) applies narrowly to Cabinet-level decisions and does not cover routine departmental file movement; (4) the proposed legislative carve-out was constitutionally suspect as it would undermine the RTI Act's transparency mandate.
The proposed amendment was eventually dropped following public opposition, in part galvanised by this CIC order.
“File notings, being opinions and recommendations recorded by government servants in the course of their official duties, fall squarely within the definition of 'information' under Section 2(f) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. A public authority cannot withhold file notings relating to decisions it has made merely because those notings reflect internal deliberation. Proactive disclosure of such notings under Section 4(1)(b)(xii) is mandatory. The exemption under Section 8(1)(i) applies only to Cabinet deliberations at the highest level and cannot be extended to routine departmental file processing.”
— CIC Full Bench suo motu order on file notings, 2006
Yes. In fact, getting the noting sheet of a pending file is one of the most effective ways to unblock a stalled application — you can see exactly at which desk it is stuck and who recommended what. File the RTI, get the noting, then write to the officer responsible.
Generally yes — “information” includes any material in any form. But the CIC and courts have distinguished between finalised notings (on the official file) and rough/scratch working notes that never entered the official record. If the noting is on the official file, it is “information.”
No. §8(1)(i) applies only to deliberations of the Council of Ministers and Cabinet — not to minutes of PSU boards, regulatory authorities, or statutory committees. Those minutes are disclosable unless another §8 exemption applies.
Parliament can amend the Act, but any amendment restricting the right to information must survive constitutional scrutiny under Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of expression, which includes the right to receive information). The 2006 attempt was dropped; a future attempt would face the same constitutional challenge.
Verified source: CIC Full Bench suo motu order on file notings (2006) · See also indiankanoon.org