Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 6 rti act, rti application section 6, right to request rti, rti section 6 1, rti section 6 2 no reason, rti section 6 3 transfer, rti act section 6 explained)
+metatag-description=(Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — the gateway clause. Right to make a request, no reasons required, transfer provisions. Full practitioner and lawyer reference with Supreme Court and CIC rulings, 2026.)}}
+====== Section 6 — Request for Obtaining Information ======
+{{ :social:auto:act-section-6.png?direct&1200 |Section 6 of the RTI Act, 2005 — Request for Obtaining Information}}
+{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
+{{ :infographics:section-6-flow.png?direct&1000 |Section 6 - Three Gateway Sub-sections}}
+<WRAP center round info 95%>
+**In one line:** Section 6 of the RTI Act, 2005 is the **gateway clause** that activates every citizen's right. It permits any person (a) to file a **request in writing or electronic form**, (b) **without stating any reason**, and (c) obliges the PIO to **transfer** the application within five days if the matter lies with another public authority.
+</WRAP>
+===== Full text =====
+  * **6(1)** — Request in writing or through electronic means, in English or Hindi or the official language of the area, to the Central or State Public Information Officer.
+  * **6(2)** — The applicant //shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information// or any other personal details except those necessary for contacting them.
+  * **6(3)** — Where an application is made to a public authority requesting information which is held by another, or more closely connected with the functions of another, the public authority shall transfer the application, or such part of it as may be appropriate, to that other public authority within **five working days** and inform the applicant immediately.
+===== Why Section 6 matters =====
+Section 6 is the **most-used clause of the Act**. Every one of the ~35 lakh RTI applications filed to the Central Government since 2005 passed through Section 6. Its three sub-sections resolve three structural issues:
+  - **Formal barriers** — no prescribed form required. A handwritten letter works.
+  - **Motive disclosure** — no reason required. Section 6(2) is the only clause in Indian transparency law that inverts the standard evidentiary burden; the applicant's reason is irrelevant.
+  - **Jurisdictional maze** — Section 6(3) prevents applications being rejected for being sent to the wrong door.
+===== Legislative history and amendments =====
+^ Date           ^ Event                                                                           ^
+| 15 June 2005   | Act enacted (Act No. 22 of 2005).                                               |
+| 12 October 2005| Section 6 commenced along with operational provisions.                           |
+| 24 October 2019| **RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019** — no change to Section 6.                         |
+| 14 November 2025| **DPDP Rules, 2025** — Section 6 itself unchanged; interacts with Section 8(1)(j) amendment. |
+Section 6 has **never been amended** since enactment. Every attempted dilution (including the 2015 Lokpal Rules consultation) was withdrawn after public comment.
+===== Landmark rulings =====
+**Supreme Court:**
+  * **//Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal//, (2020) 5 SCC 481** — Constitution Bench held that even the office of the Chief Justice of India is a "public authority" to which Section 6 applies.
+  * **//Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212** — Section 6 is bounded by the exemption framework in Section 8; the applicant's //right to request// remains intact even where //disclosure// is refused on exempt grounds.
+  * **//Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative Officer//, (2010) 2 SCC 1** — Section 6 does not require the PIO to //create// information by research or analysis; only to provide what is held on record.
+**Delhi High Court:**
+  * **//Bhagat Singh v. CIC//, Delhi HC (2007)** — a non-speaking refusal under Section 8 cannot be sustained against a Section 6 request; Section 6 creates a presumption of disclosure.
+  * **//Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO//, Delhi HC (2010)** — Section 6(2) bars the PIO from probing the applicant's motive, including where the request appears politically motivated.
+**Central Information Commission:**
+  * **//Satyapal v. TCIL//, CIC Decision CIC/AT/A/2006/00113** — file notings are "information" under Section 2(f) and therefore within Section 6's scope.
+  * **//Shail Sahni v. CPIO//, CIC (2013)** — the mode of disclosure (inspection, copy, electronic) follows Section 2(j), and Section 6 does not permit the PIO to unilaterally restrict the mode.
+===== Usage patterns (2023-24) =====
+  * **~14.38 lakh** Section 6 applications to Central Government ministries in 2023-24 (DoPT Annual Report).
+  * **~42 percent** related to service matters (pay, pension, transfer).
+  * **~18 percent** related to beneficiary verification (subsidies, schemes).
+  * **~12 percent** related to police, revenue, land.
+  * **~60 percent** replied to within the 30-day statutory window under Section 7.
+===== Drafting strategy — Section 6 in practice =====
+==== Paragraph 1: invoke Section 6(1) correctly ====
+Use the phrase //"Under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, I request the following information:"// as the opening paragraph. This anchors the application in the Act and prevents confusion with any departmental grievance form.
+==== Paragraph 2: do not state reasons (Section 6(2)) ====
+Deliberately omit //"for the purpose of..."// phrasing. If a PIO asks on the telephone or in writing, cite Section 6(2) and refuse to explain.
+==== Paragraph 3: invoke Section 6(3) insurance ====
+Always close with: //"If any portion of this request lies with a public authority other than yours, kindly transfer the same under Section 6(3) within five working days and intimate me of the transfer."// This makes dismissal on jurisdictional grounds impossible.
+===== Common PIO tricks — and the Section 6 counters =====
+^ PIO move                                                                 ^ Counter                                                                 ^
+| "You have not given a reason"                                             | Section 6(2) forbids asking for a reason. Reply citing this.            |
+| "Wrong public authority"                                                  | Section 6(3) requires transfer within 5 days, not rejection.            |
+| "Application not on prescribed form"                                      | Section 6(1) prescribes no form. Any writing is enough.                 |
+| "Your handwriting is unclear"                                             | The PIO must assist an applicant who cannot write the request.          |
+| "The information must be created / compiled"                              | Khanapuram Gandaiah — PIO need not create, but must collate from record. |
+| "You need to be an Indian citizen — produce Aadhaar"                      | Section 3; the PIO may ask only if citizenship is genuinely in doubt.    |
+===== Pro-tip for lawyers =====
+When drafting writ petitions under Article 226 where the underlying record was refused, always **attach the original Section 6 application** along with the PIO's refusal. The absence of a proper Section 6 record is often the first infirmity the High Court notes.
+===== FAQ =====
+==== Is the Section 6 right available to non-citizens? ====
+No. [[act#section-3citizen|Section 3]] limits the right to "citizens". A non-citizen may, however, have an Indian citizen (advocate, relative) file on their behalf as the applicant of record.
+==== Is there a fee attached to Section 6? ====
+Yes — Rs 10 under Rule 3 of the RTI Fees Rules, 2005 (waived for BPL under Section 7(5)). The fee is procedural; the right under Section 6 stands whether or not the fee is paid, but the application may be returned for payment.
+==== Can a minor file under Section 6? ====
+Yes, through a natural guardian.
+==== Can the request be oral or telephonic? ====
+Section 6(1) contemplates //written or electronic//. Oral requests are not maintainable; the PIO has a duty under Section 6(1) proviso to //reduce oral requests to writing// for persons who cannot themselves do so.
+==== Does Section 6 apply to judicial records? ====
+Administrative-side records of courts, yes (subject to rules made by the Chief Justice as "competent authority" under [[act#section-28power-to-make-rules-by-competent-authority|Section 28]]). Judicial-side records of pending or recently-decided matters are governed by separate court rules.
+===== Call to action =====
+If you are filing your first RTI, use our [[:templates:first-rti|First RTI Template]] which is pre-structured around Section 6(1), 6(2), and 6(3). For the step-by-step drafting guide, see [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form|How to fill an RTI application]]. For online filing to Central Government, use [[:file-rti-online-india|rtionline.gov.in 12-step guide]].
+===== Related =====
+  * [[act|Back to the full RTI Act, 2005]]
+  * [[act:section-7|Section 7 — Disposal of request (30 days)]]
+  * [[act:section-8|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
+  * [[act:section-19|Section 19 — Appeals]]
+  * [[act:section-2|Section 2 — Definitions]]
+  * [[:templates:first-rti|First RTI template]]
+  * [[:templates:first-appeal|First Appeal template]]
+  * [[:why-rti-gets-rejected|Why RTI applications get rejected]]
+  * [[:explanations:citizen-under-rti-act|Citizen under RTI — Section 3]]
+  * [[:explanations:transfer-application|Transfer of application — Section 6(3)]]
+  * [[:explanations:deemed-cpio|Deemed CPIO — Section 5(5)]]
+  * [[:important-decisions:cbse-and-anr-vs-aditya-bandopadhyay|CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay]]
+===== Sources =====
+  - Right to Information Act, 2005 (No. 22 of 2005), Section 6.
+  - RTI (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005.
+  - //CPIO SC v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal//, (2020) 5 SCC 481.
+  - //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212.
+  - //Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative Officer//, (2010) 2 SCC 1.
+  - //Bhagat Singh v. CIC//, Delhi HC (2007).
+  - //Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO//, Delhi HC (2010).
+  - DoPT Annual Report 2023-24.
+//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
+{{tag>rti act section-6 request-for-information gateway clause 2026}}

Was this helpful? — views