Table of Contents

Need help drafting this RTI? Use our free RTI Assistant — describe your problem, get a ready-to-file Section 6(1) application with your name and address pre-filled. Also handles First Appeal and Second Appeal to the CIC/SIC.

RTI in India 2026: State-wise Data on Applications, Rejections, Speed

RTI state-wise analysis 2026 — RTI Wiki

In one line. The Right to Information Act, 2005, is the most federal of India's transparency laws — every state runs its own Information Commission, its own filing portal, and its own pendency. This flagship analysis maps the state-level picture in 2026: who files, who rejects, who is fastest, and where 4.05 lakh appeals lie pending.

Principal data sources.

  • Central Information Commission (CIC) Annual Reports, 2021–22 and 2024–25.
  • Satark Nagrik Sangathan (SNS) Report Card on the Performance of Information Commissions in India — 2022–23 and 2023–24 editions.
  • Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) independent analyses.
  • Mainstream media reports citing CIC / SIC primary data.
  • Readers are advised to consult the SNS Report Card PDF and each SIC's annual report for the primary source.

Did you know? India has 29 Information Commissions — one Central (CIC) and 28 state-level (SICs). As of 30 June 2024, 4,05,509 RTI appeals and complaints were pending across the 29 Commissions combined — up from 3.21 lakh a year earlier, a 26% year-on-year rise.

Introduction

The RTI Act, 2005 is a single statute — but its implementation is 29 systems, one Central and 28 state. Each system receives applications, denies some, resolves others, and accumulates its own backlog. The quality of citizen experience varies sharply between states.

State-level analysis matters to three audiences:

  1. Citizens — know where your RTI is most likely to get a timely answer and what the expected wait is.
  2. Activists and researchers — identify which states need structural reform.
  3. Policymakers — use the gaps as a roadmap.

This article pulls together the most recent verified data to answer the core questions: which state files most, which is fastest, which rejects most, where appeals pile up, and where the backlog has reached crisis proportions.

Key highlights — executive summary

Why state-level analysis matters

Three factors drive sharp inter-state variation:

  1. Governance complexity. Industrialised, urbanised states (Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Delhi) have large citizen–state interfaces; RTI volumes rise.
  2. Awareness. States with active civil society (Rajasthan, Delhi, Maharashtra, Kerala) produce more RTIs and more appeals.
  3. Institutional health. A full-strength, adequately resourced Information Commission disposes quickly; vacancies and long appointment gaps cause pendency.

Read together, these factors explain why filing an RTI in Andhra Pradesh feels very different from filing one in West Bengal.

1. Which state receives the most RTI applications

Exact state-by-state “applications received” data for 2023–24 is published with delay and varying completeness. The best proxy available is the Appeals + Complaints registered with the State Information Commission — a strong correlate of the underlying RTI volume.

Top SICs by appeals/complaints registered, July 2023 – June 2024:

= Rank = State = Appeals & Complaints Registered
1 Maharashtra 57,754
2 Uttar Pradesh 27,089
3 Karnataka 24,014
4 Bihar 10,548
5 Kerala 3,887

(At the CIC, approx 29,000 second appeals were filed in 2024–25 for central-government matters.)

Why these states top the list.

Key longitudinal observations from the SNS Report Cards and CHRI analyses:

3. Fastest vs slowest states in RTI appeals

Disposal speed varies dramatically across SICs. The SNS 2023–24 Report Card calculates estimated disposal time using each SIC's monthly disposal rate and current backlog.

Fastest SICs (fastest published 2022 data for southern states):

= State = Estimated Disposal Time
Andhra Pradesh 4 months
Tripura (data limited, short)
Nagaland (small volume, typically short)
Punjab ~8–10 months
Telangana 1 year (where functional)

Slowest SICs (projected 2023–24):

= State = Estimated Disposal Time
West Bengal 24 years 1 month
Chhattisgarh 5 years 2 months
Bihar 4 years 6 months
Odisha ~4 years
Maharashtra ~2+ years (highest backlog)

Key caveat. “Disposal time” is calculated mathematically — (pending / monthly disposal rate). A spike in disposal or a reduction in filing can change these projections quickly. But the directional gap — Andhra at 4 months, West Bengal at 24 years — is genuine and stark.

Why West Bengal takes so long. Low institutional capacity + periods of near-defunct functioning + commissioner vacancies. The 24-year projection means an RTI appeal filed in July 2023 would be disposed of — at the current monthly rate — only in 2047.

Why Andhra Pradesh is fastest. Small pendency base, full commissioner strength for most of the review period, and a high disposal rate relative to registrations.

4. States with maximum RTI rejections — and the hidden "return without order"

At the central level, rejection rates have dropped — from 7.21% in 2013–14 to 3.26% in 2024–25. But SNS's analysis surfaces a more subtle pattern: many cases are returned without disposal at SICs, which does not count as a formal rejection but leaves the applicant without a remedy.

Top “return without order” rates (2023–24):

= Commission = Cases Returned = Cases Registered (same period)
Bihar SIC 11,807 10,548
Kerala SIC 1,224 3,887
CIC (for context) 42% of received

At central ministries — highest adjusted rejection rates:

Why rejections happen (Section 8 exemption-wise, per SNS and CIC analyses):

  1. Section 8(1)(j) — personal information / privacy: most common ground, especially after DPDP Rules, 2025.
  2. Section 8(1)(e) — fiduciary (banking, CBI inputs).
  3. Section 8(1)(a) — security / strategic.
  4. Section 8(1)(h) — ongoing investigation.
  5. Section 7(9) — disproportionate diversion of resources.

What applicants can control.

Detailed subject-wise data is not published uniformly, but SNS's and CHRI's analyses indicate the following broad pattern:

States with high subject-specific rejections. Maharashtra and Karnataka show higher Section 8(1)(j) rejections (service-record queries); Uttar Pradesh shows higher Section 7(9) returns (broad applications); Punjab and Haryana show high show-cause-notice-to-PIO counts (suggesting strong SIC enforcement rather than high rejection).

6. States with maximum appeals filed

Top SICs by appeals + complaints registered in 2023–24:

= Rank = State = Registered
1 Maharashtra 57,754
2 Uttar Pradesh 27,089
3 Karnataka 24,014
4 Bihar 10,548
5 Kerala 3,887
6 Andhra Pradesh (relatively lower, fast disposal)
7 Haryana (high penalty and SCN counts)

Why appeals rise.

  1. Dissatisfaction with PIO reply. The higher the state's RTI volume, the higher the absolute number of appeals.
  2. Commissioner availability. Where the SIC is functioning, appellants pursue through the system; where defunct (Jharkhand, Telangana, Goa, Tripura), appeals do not get filed at all during defunct months.
  3. Civic awareness. States with active RTI circles see better follow-through.

7. States with minimum appeals filed

At the other end, low appeal volumes typically signal one of two things:

  1. Institutional efficiency — first-level PIO replies are adequate, so citizens do not need to appeal. (Rare.)
  2. Low awareness / access barriers — citizens do not know the appeal route, or the SIC is defunct.

Low-volume SICs in 2023–24 included Nagaland, Tripura, Meghalaya, Sikkim, Goa, and some UT commissions. The causes are a mix of small population base (North-eastern states) and institutional dysfunction (Tripura, Goa were defunct for periods in 2023–24).

A low number is not automatically “good” — the denominator matters.

8. States with maximum backlog

This is the transparency crisis indicator. Backlog = (Registered – Disposed) accumulated over time.

Top SICs by backlog (pending appeals + complaints, June 2024):

= Rank = State = Backlog
1 Maharashtra ~1,10,000
2 Karnataka 50,000+
3 Uttar Pradesh (high, with 27,089 fresh filings added)
4 Bihar 25,000+
5 Odisha (large, with projected 4-year disposal)
6 Chhattisgarh (large, with projected 5-year 2-month disposal)

Why the crisis is deepening.

Governance implications. An SIC with multi-year pendency effectively nullifies the RTI Act's 30-day guarantee. Citizens who file today must wait 4–24 years for a Second Appeal decision. This is the single most urgent reform challenge in the RTI system.

9. Penalties and enforcement — the other side of the coin

State action on defaulting PIOs varies widely. SNS data for 2023–24:

Total penalties imposed (top-5 states):

= State = Penalty (Rs.)
Uttar Pradesh 4.85 crore
Chhattisgarh 1.83 crore
Karnataka 93.95 lakh
Haryana 38.18 lakh
Punjab (smaller but active)

Show-cause notices issued (top-3):

= State = Show-Cause Notices
Haryana 3,412
Punjab 691
Andhra Pradesh 138

Reading the data. High penalty + high show-cause counts = an SIC that uses Section 20 vigorously. This correlates (though not perfectly) with faster disposal and better PIO behaviour.

What this means for citizens

Universal tips.

  1. Quote file / reference numbers.
  2. One subject per application.
  3. Ask for records, not opinions.
  4. Use First Appeal aggressively — it is free and resolves many cases.
  5. Invoke the 30-day reply statutory deadline and Section 4 proactive-disclosure argument.

For a practical filing walk-through, see our 12-step guide, and the RTI Mastery pillar.

Strategic insights

Limitations of the data

Treat the numbers in this article as directional, not as precision statistics.

FAQs

Q1. Which state files the most RTI applications in India?
Maharashtra, consistently — it registered 57,754 appeals and complaints with its SIC in 2023–24, the highest in India. This is a proxy for the underlying application volume.

Q2. Which state is fastest in RTI reply?
Andhra Pradesh SIC leads the southern-states comparison, with an estimated 4-month disposal time for Second Appeals / complaints (2022 data). At the First-Appeal level, states with active PIOs (Andhra, Punjab, Delhi for central matters) tend to be faster.

Q3. Why do RTI applications get rejected?
Leading grounds are Section 8(1)(j) (personal information), Section 8(1)(e) (fiduciary), Section 7(9) (disproportionate diversion), Section 8(1)(a) (security), and Section 8(1)(h) (investigation). Many “rejections” are in fact procedural returns under Section 7(9) for over-broad RTIs.

Q4. How can I avoid RTI rejection?
File one subject per application; quote reference numbers; ask for specific records; avoid opinion-style questions; check Section 4 (proactive disclosure) before filing; be prepared to cite CIC case law.

Q5. Which state has the biggest RTI backlog?
Maharashtra, with ~1,10,000 appeals pending at its SIC as of June 2024.

Q6. Which SIC would take longest to dispose my appeal today?
At current rates, the West Bengal SIC's projected disposal time is 24 years 1 month, followed by Chhattisgarh (5 years 2 months), Bihar (4 years 6 months), and Odisha (~4 years).

Q7. Is the rejection rate at the central level high?
No — it has fallen to 3.26% in 2024–25 from 7.21% in 2013–14. But SNS notes that central ministries differ: Finance (~24%) and PMO (~12%) have markedly higher rejection rates.

Q8. Where do I get primary data?
Satark Nagrik Sangathan — RTI Assessments, cic.gov.in/reports/annual-reports, and your state SIC's annual report at cic.gov.in/links-to-state-information-commissions.

Conclusion

The state-level story of RTI in India 2026 is a study in contrasts. A citizen in Andhra Pradesh and a citizen in West Bengal operate under the same Act — but face radically different realities. Some states dispose appeals in months; others will need decades at current rates.

This variation is not inevitable. It reflects choices: to keep Commissioner posts filled, to use Section 20 penalties where warranted, to publish Section 4 proactive disclosures faithfully, and to digitise filing. States that make these choices deliver transparency; states that delay them accumulate dysfunction.

For citizens, the practical takeaway is straightforward: know your state's Commission profile before filing, choose the correct authority, file precisely, and escalate confidently — because the data shows that where citizens persist, the system responds.

Sources


Last reviewed: 24 April 2026. Figures are drawn from SNS Report Card 2023–24, CIC Annual Reports, and independent analyses by CHRI. Readers are advised to cross-verify with primary sources for formal citation. Data is directional, not precision-statistical, given well-documented self-reporting caveats.