Landmark RTI Rulings, 2021 to 2026

A curated list of the most significant Supreme Court and High Court rulings on the RTI Act between 2021 and April 2026. Each entry carries the citation, the holding in one sentence, and the section of the Act it engages. For the full practitioner-level analysis of each case, follow the internal link.

Citation: ADR v. Union of India, W.P. (C) 880 of 2017 and connected matters, Supreme Court of India, 15 February 2024. Five-judge Constitution Bench.

Holding in one line. The Electoral Bonds Scheme, 2018 was struck down as unconstitutional; the voter's right to know the source of political funding is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) that cannot be abridged on the ground of donor privacy.

Why it matters for RTI. It is the clearest post-2020 statement from the Supreme Court that informational transparency is an Article 19(1)(a) freedom — the constitutional anchor on which the RTI Act itself sits. See the full case page.

Section engaged. RTI Act Section 3 (animating right); Constitution Article 19(1)(a).

Citation: Anjali Bhardwaj and Ors. v. Union of India, W.P. (C) 436 of 2018 (Supreme Court of India), with subsequent directions through 2021 and later.

Holding in one line. The Court declined to strike down the RTI Amendment Act, 2019 but issued detailed directions on transparent appointment processes at the Central and State Information Commissions — publication of the composition of the Selection Committee, reasons for selection, timelines for filling vacancies.

Why it matters. The Anjali Bhardwaj directions have become the operative framework for every RTI Commissioner appointment through 2026. Non-compliance by States produces periodic contempt-style listings.

Section engaged. RTI Act Sections 12, 13, 15, 16 (constitution and appointment of the Commissions).

Citation: CPIO, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 481. Five-judge Constitution Bench. Reported in 2020; ruling delivered November 2019.

Holding in one line. The Office of the Chief Justice of India is a “public authority” under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, and therefore within the Act's disclosure obligations; but Section 8(1)(j) and the fiduciary-relationship clause apply to specific records.

Why it matters. Read alongside Electoral Bonds, this is the Supreme Court accepting institutional accountability through the RTI regime, including for the higher judiciary itself. Though decided at the cusp of our 2021 window, its authority runs through the entire period.

Section engaged. RTI Act Section 2(h), Section 8(1)(e), Section 8(1)(j).

Holding in one line. PhD theses lodged with a central-university library are public records accessible under the RTI Act; Section 8(1)(j) must be read narrowly; severance under Section 10 is the answer where genuinely personal third-party data is embedded.

Why it matters. The first High Court articulation of the principle for academic research produced at publicly-funded universities. The direction anchors future Commission orders on research, thesis access, and Shodhganga integration. Full practitioner note at the Delhi HC %%PhD%% theses analysis.

Section engaged. RTI Act Section 2(f), Section 8(1)(j), Section 10.

Holding in one line. Annual Property Returns filed by public servants in the ordinary course of duty are disclosable under the RTI Act where a specific public interest is pleaded under Section 8(2); family-member data is redacted under Section 10; the officer's own holdings are released.

Why it matters. Reaffirms the //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande// (2013) line in a post-2020 privacy context. See the full case page.

Section engaged. RTI Act Sections 8(1)(j), 8(2), 10.

Holding in one line. Pre-dating the Electoral Bonds ruling, the Delhi HC established that political donations to parties recognised under the Representation of the People Act are subject to public-interest disclosure through the RTI regime for parties held as “public authorities” by the Central Information Commission.

Why it matters. One of the building blocks the Supreme Court drew on in the 2024 ADR ruling. For the strand of political-funding transparency jurisprudence, see the Electoral Bonds analysis.

Section engaged. RTI Act Section 2(h); Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Citation: Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India and Ors., (2017) 10 SCC 1. Nine-judge Constitution Bench.

Holding in one line. Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and every State infringement must pass a three-part proportionality test — legality, legitimate aim, proportionality (least restrictive alternative).

Why it matters. Although decided in 2017, Puttaswamy is the analytical engine under which every Section 8(1)(j) and Section 8(2) balancing in the 2021-2026 window is now conducted. It is also the framework under which the DPDP Act, 2023 itself was drafted. See the full case page.

Section engaged. RTI Act Section 8(1)(j); Constitution Articles 19(1)(a), 21.

As of April 2026:

• High Court writ challenges to the DPDP substitution of Section 8(1)(j) are reported pending in the Delhi and Madras High Courts. None has resulted in a reported stay; the substitution operates as law.
• CIC orders under the amended Section 8(1)(j) are the working-level jurisprudence being built. Patterns are documented in the PIO reply analysis and the DPDP vs RTI 2026 position.
• Economic Survey 2025-26 RTI re-examination. Reported proposals (ministerial review, deliberative-process exemption) have not become law. Watch the monsoon-session Lok Sabha calendar. See the Economic Survey analysis.

• The RTI Act, 2005 — current text.
• Case law library — full landmark index.
• CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) — the default-disclosure foundation.
• Puttaswamy (2017).
• Electoral Bonds (2024).
• Delhi HC %%PhD%% theses (2024).
• Madras HC public servants' assets (2024).
• Bhagat Singh v. CIC (Delhi HC 2007).
• RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry (2016).
• Information Commissioner tenure and salaries post-2019.
• DPDP Rules, 2025 amendment.
• DPDP Act vs RTI — 2026 position.
• A decade of change, 2015 to 2025.

1. The Right to Information Act, 2005 (No. 22 of 2005).
2. The Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (No. 24 of 2019).
3. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (No. 22 of 2023), Section 44(3).
4. The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025.
5. Constitution of India, Articles 19(1)(a) and 21.
6. Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, Supreme Court of India, 15 February 2024.
7. Anjali Bhardwaj and Ors. v. Union of India, Supreme Court of India, ongoing through 2021-2026.
8. CPIO, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 481.
9. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
10. Delhi High Court direction on RTI access to PhD theses, December 2024.
11. Madras High Court order on RTI access to public servants' Annual Property Returns, 2024.
12. Reserve Bank of India v. Jayantilal N. Mistry, (2016) 3 SCC 525.

Last reviewed on: 20 April 2026 — RTI Wiki editorial team.. Watch Supreme Court and High Court cause-lists for the pending DPDP-substitution writ petitions. Last reviewed: 24 April 2026.