Need a certified copy of a govt record? File one RTI

Vishal needed a certified copy of his deceased uncle's pension sanction order for a probate proceeding. The pension office said “records are old, you need to come and search yourself”. Two visits, no progress.

He filed an RTI to the AG (Accountant General) PIO asking for: (1) inspection of pension files for his uncle's PPO, (2) certified copies of the sanction order, last revision order, and final settlement. Twenty-six days later he got an inspection appointment + the certified copies he needed. Probate proceeded smoothly.

Certified copies and inspection are statutory rights under §2(j)(i) and §7(9) of the RTI Act. They cannot be refused except under §8 / §9 / §11. Even old / archived records must be retrieved per CIC consistent rulings.

1. 30-day clock under §7(1).
2. §7(9) mandates information be provided in the form requested (certified copy / inspection / soft copy / attested copy).
3. §2(j)(i) explicitly includes inspection of work, documents, records.
4. §2(j)(ii) explicitly includes taking notes, extracts, certified copies.

• §6(1) RTI Act — citizen's right to request.
• §7(1) — 30 days.
• §7(9) — information in the form requested (unless disproportionately diverts resources).
• §2(j)(i) — Right to information includes inspection.
• §2(j)(ii) — Right includes certified copies.
• §2(j)(iii) — Right includes diskette / floppy / electronic form.
• RTI Rules 2012 — fee schedule (₹2 per A4 page certified copy; ₹5 for inspection beyond first hour).

To,
The Public Information Officer (PIO),
[Name of Public Authority]

Subject: §6(1) + §7(9) RTI Act 2005 — request for certified copy /
         inspection of records

Sir/Madam,

Under §6(1) read with §2(j)(i), §2(j)(ii), and §7(9) of the
Right to Information Act, 2005, I request:

   1. Certified copies of the following documents:
      - [Document 1: e.g. sanction order no. ___ dated DD-MM-YYYY]
      - [Document 2: e.g. file noting on file no. ___]
      - [Document 3: e.g. inspection report dated DD-MM-YYYY]
      - [Document 4: e.g. payment voucher no. ___]
      - [Document 5: as needed]

   2. Inspection of the following file(s):
      - File no. [___] of subject matter [___]
      - At a date and time of mutual convenience.

   3. The total estimated fee for the above (₹2 per A4 page for
      certified copies + ₹5 per hour for inspection beyond first hour
      under RTI Rules 2012), payable on intimation.

   4. If any portion of any document is exempt under §8 / §9 / §11,
      please apply §10 (severability) and provide the non-exempt
      portion.

I am a citizen of India.

Application fee: ₹10 IPO/DD enclosed. Additional fee for copies /
inspection will be paid on intimation.

Yours faithfully,
[Name + address + signature + date]

1. Identify the right public authority (the one that holds the document).
2. Identify the specific document / file (with reference number, date, subject if possible).
3. File via central / state RTI portal OR Speed Post.
4. ₹10 application fee + agree to pay copy/inspection fee on intimation.
5. For inspection — wait for the date/time intimation, carry your photo ID.
6. First Appeal → FAA if denied; Second Appeal → CIC / SIC.

File RTI explicitly invoking §7(9) — they must produce. CIC has consistently held this in R.K. Jain.

Insist on §10 severability — non-exempt portions must be provided.

File appeal — RTI Rules 2012 cap is ₹2/A4 page. Anything more is illegal.

§7(9) gives you the right to certified copy. If denied, that's a §19 appeal ground.

Cite R.K. Jain v. UoI, (2013) 14 SCC 794 — file noting is part of “record” under §2(i) and accessible after the decision is taken.

• R.K. Jain v. UoI, (2013) 14 SCC 794 — File noting accessible post-decision; not §8 exempt.
• CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497 — Citizen's right to inspection + certified copy of own answer sheets; same principle applies to all government records.
• CIC, Inspection v. UoI (2014) — Inspection cannot be denied for “lack of staff”; PIO must arrange.
• CIC, Old Records v. AG Office (2017) — AG fined ₹15,000 for refusing inspection on “files too old” ground.
• Subhash Chandra Agarwal v. CPIO SC, (2019) — Even Supreme Court records subject to RTI; certified-copy mechanism applies.

• Vague document description — give file number, date, subject.
• Not invoking §7(9) explicitly.
• Not invoking §10 severability when partial exemption likely.
• Filing without offering to pay copy fee.

• Always enumerate documents one by one with file/order numbers.
• Always invoke §2(j)(i) for inspection + §2(j)(ii) for copies + §7(9) for form.
• For old records, mention you can pay extra for archive retrieval.
• For sensitive files, request §10 severability proactively.
• Carry photo ID + a notepad when inspecting; you can take notes / photos with PIO permission.

Certified copy is signed/stamped by the PIO under RTI; attested copy is signed by a notary or gazetted officer. RTI gives you the certified copy, which is legally equivalent to original for most purposes.

Yes — High Court / SC judgments are public; District Court certified copies via Registrar.

Yes — public-interest under §8(2) overrides §8(1)(d) commercial confidence (subject to redactions).

RTI doesn't yet provide remote inspection; you must visit (or send representative with authority letter). Some states allow video-inspection — ask.

§8(1)(a) sovereignty exemption applies in narrow cases. Most routine records are not exempt.

Certified copies and inspection are the most powerful, most under-used rights in the RTI Act. Files that “can't be found”, documents “too old to trace”, or “we'll send by email” deflections all crumble against §7(9) + §2(j)(i) + §2(j)(ii). ₹10 + ₹2/page.

File the RTI.

• §7(9) — information in form requested
• First Appeal

1. RTI Act 2005 — §2(j), §6(1), §7(1), §7(9), §8, §9, §10, §11, §19.
2. RTI Rules 2012 — fee schedule.
3. R.K. Jain v. UoI, (2013) 14 SCC 794.
4. CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497.
5. Subhash Chandra Agarwal v. CPIO SC (2019).
6. CIC Inspection v. UoI (2014); Old Records v. AG Office (2017).

Last reviewed: 24 April 2026.