RTI Application Format: What It Must Contain

Last reviewed: 1 September 2026.

Section 6 of the RTI Act, 2005 requires only that a citizen request information in writing or electronically, with the prescribed fee. The Supreme Court reinforced in *Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative Officer*, (2010) 2 SCC 1, that you may ask for any information that exists in records — so the application's job is to point at records precisely.

Five elements make it valid:

• Addressee — “The Public Information Officer, [office], [address]”.
• The request — specific, numbered points, each pointing at a record or fact.
• Fee — Rs 10 for central public authorities under the Right to Information Rules, 2012 (G.S.R. 603(E)); most states also Rs 10, a few differ — check the state-wise fee table.
• Your signature (or thumb impression).
• Your address — the reply must reach you by post; add phone and email as delivery helps.

To:
The Public Information Officer,
[Office name], [Full address].

Subject: Application under section 6(1) of the
Right to Information Act, 2005.

Sir/Madam,

Please provide the following information held by
your office:

1. [Point at a record: "the date-wise noting on file
   no. ___ from ___ to ___"]
2. [Point at a register: "entries 100-120 of the
   ___ register for 2026, certified copies"]
3. [Point at a fact: "the sanctioned strength and
   the officers in post as on 1 August 2026"]

Fee of Rs 10 paid by [IPO no. ___ / online
registration no. ___ / cash receipt no. ___].

I may be supplied the information in printed form
by post. [Where applicable: I am a BPL cardholder,
copy enclosed, and claim exemption from all fees
under section 7(5).]

Yours faithfully,
[Name]
[Address, phone, email]
[Date]

Build a filled-in version in the AI RTI Drafter or browse the sample RTI applications library.

1. Ask for records, not reasons. “Why was my file rejected” invites silence; “provide the noting by which file ___ was rejected” compels a document. See the records-not-answers drafting guide.
2. One subject per application. Scattered topics give the PIO a §7(9) excuse and muddle the appeal.
3. Say what you want done with it — photocopy, CD, inspection, or email. The central rules price a diskette at Rs 50 but set no email charge, so offices that can email usually send it for the copying fee alone.
4. Claim life-and-liberty only when true. The 48-hour clock of §7(1) proviso is for genuine emergencies; false claims poison later appeals.
5. BPL proof up front — §7(5) exempts every fee; attach the card copy.
6. Keep it short. Long essays create fog; numbered points create deadlines.

• Language — §6(1): English, Hindi or the official language of your area. No PIO can reject a language the office uses.
• No reason required — §6(2): you need not justify asking or give personal details beyond what contact needs.
• No compulsory form — the central rules prescribe none; states that print formats make them optional. Some state portals cap length and attachments — that is a portal rule, not an RTI Act bar.
• Transfer — §6(3): wrong office? It must forward within 5 days and tell you.
• Deadlines — §7(1): 30 days, or 48 hours for life and liberty; §7(6): information delayed beyond the timeline comes free.
• Speaking refusal — a bare “denied under §8” fails *Bhagat Singh v. CIC* (Delhi High Court, 2007): the PIO must apply the exemption to each point and give reasons.

• Opinion-seeking (“is the order correct?”) — outside “information” under §2(f), per *Khanapuram Gandaiah*.
• No address for the reply — the PIO posts nowhere and the file dies politely.
• Wrong fee mode — some offices accept only challan or IPO; the portal always tells you before you pay.
• 40 points across five subjects — split into five clean applications.
• Signing without date — every later deadline is counted from a date you cannot prove.

English, Hindi, or the official language of the area — §6(1). A Kannada application to a Bengaluru office is valid.

No — electronic filing is a recognised mode; rtionline.gov.in serves central public authorities, and most states run their own online RTI portals.

The Act sets none, but the central Right to Information Rules, 2012 keep an application to about 500 words excluding annexures — and bar rejecting it only for running longer. Portals add their own text-field caps. Focus beats length.

Any citizen can apply; the reply goes to the applicant. No lawyer is needed at any stage.

• File RTI online — 12 steps
• State-wise RTI fees
• Sample RTI applications
• Why RTI gets rejected
• The RTI Playbook

• Right to Information Act, 2005 — §2(f), §6, §7.
• Right to Information Rules, 2012 (G.S.R. 603(E), 31 July 2012) — rule 3 fee, rule 5 BPL exemption.
• *Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative Officer*, (2010) 2 SCC 1.
• *Bhagat Singh v. Central Information Commission*, Delhi High Court (2007).