Section 10 of the RTI Act 2005 is the severability rule: when part of a record falls under an exemption in Section 8 or Section 9, the PIO must disclose the non-exempt portion after reasonably severing the exempt material. Outright denial of the entire record because some portion is exempt is illegal. The CIC and several High Courts have repeatedly reversed PIO orders that refused entire files when only paragraphs were exempt.
Use this guide whenever an RTI request seeks a record that contains a mix of disclosable and exempt content, eg a vigilance file with both deliberative noting and final order, a procurement file with bid evaluation plus commercially confidential pricing, a personnel file with disciplinary noting plus medical certificate, or a complaint file where the complainant's identity must be redacted but the action taken is disclosable.
The Supreme Court in Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 481 held that severability under Section 10 is a duty of the PIO and the Court approved redaction-and-disclose as the correct path.
The CIC in Anil Bhandari v Ministry of External Affairs (CIC, 2010) and Vikram Bahl v Ministry of Finance (CIC, 2014) has applied severability to financial files, vigilance files and inquiry reports.
A PIO faced with a partly exempt record should follow this sequence.
Sample severance noting and reply.
File noting under Section 10 of the RTI Act, 2005 1. The applicant at point [number] has sought certified copy of file [number] dated [date]. 2. The file contains the following documents: (a) Letter dated [date] (pages 1-3), fully disclosable. (b) Internal noting dated [date] (page 4-7), paragraphs 1, 2, 5 disclosable; paragraphs 3 and 4 contain personal information of a third-party officer relating to medical leave, exempt under Section 8(1)(j); to be severed. (c) Inspection report dated [date] (page 8-12), fully disclosable. (d) Annexure C, bid pricing of L1, L2, L3, exempt under Section 8(1)(d); only the comparative summary disclosable; specific amounts severed. (e) Final order dated [date], fully disclosable. 3. Decision: I have severed paragraphs 3 and 4 of the noting dated [date], and the specific bid amounts in Annexure C, after applying Section 10(1). The reason for each is recorded above. The remaining content is disclosed. 4. Section 11 notice was issued to the third party on [date] in respect of paragraph 3 and 4. After hearing the third party on [date], I have decided to redact those paragraphs. 5. Section 10(2) notice: The applicant is informed in the covering letter that paragraphs 3 and 4 of the noting and the bid amounts in Annexure C have been redacted under Section 10(1) read with Section 8(1)(j) and 8(1)(d). The PIO is [Name and designation]. 6. Total certified pages: [number]. Fee under Section 7(3): Rs. [amount] payable by [date]. [Signature] Public Information Officer
No. Section 10(1) requires reasonable severance. Total denial is reversed.
Severance that does not distort the residual record or make it misleading. If after severance the record is meaningless, the PIO can record this and decline; otherwise must disclose.
The PIO, on the advice of the dealing officer. The reasons must be recorded in the noting. The FAA and CIC review on appeal.
Yes, through the Section 11 process. The PIO is the final decision-maker but must consider the third party's objections.
Severance applies similarly, eg a scaled drawing with a confidential annotation can be supplied with the annotation masked. Where severance is not feasible, the PIO must record reasons.
Yes. Severance applies to all exemptions in Section 8 and Section 9. Pricing can be summarised; trade secrets can be masked.
The fee under Section 7(3) is for the certified copies of the disclosed pages. Redacted pages are still pages, but the disclosed page count is what is charged.
Last reviewed: 9 May 2026.