After 21 years of the RTI Act 2005, citizens still under-use the most powerful provisions. Here are five rights that change outcomes — most PIOs are not actively volunteering them.

File notings — the internal memos that show how a decision was made — are routinely refused as “not part of records”. The Supreme Court in R.K. Jain v. Union of India (2013) 8 SCC 1 confirmed they are disclosable after the decision is taken (post-decisional). Cite the case verbatim in your application.

Whenever a public authority rejects anything — your application, your tender, your scholarship — Section 4(1)(d) gives you the right to a reasoned order. This is separate from §6 RTI. PIOs cannot fob you off with “rejected as per rules”. Demand the written reasons and the rule citation.

For information concerning life or liberty, the PIO must reply in 48 hours, not 30 days. Examples: a delayed organ-transplant queue; a missing person police complaint; a passport for emergency travel; a hospital's drug-stock during an outbreak. Open your application with a clear statement: “This concerns life/liberty under §7(1) proviso. 48-hour disposal sought.”

If the public authority has not put a piece of information proactively under §4(1)(b), you can file an RTI challenging the gap — and the CIC has consistently held that §4 lapses attract penalty. Use this for budget data, scheme beneficiary lists, vacancies, contracts above ₹25 lakh, audit objections.

BPL applicants are exempt — but §7(5) does not stop there. If the PIO misses the 30-day deadline, the information must be supplied free. Many PIOs collect Rs. 2/page anyway. Quote §7(6): “fee waived where information not provided within prescribed time”.

These five rights are the difference between getting a polite refusal and getting actionable disclosure. Print this list, paste it inside your RTI folder, and use it.

1. RTI Act 2005 §2(f), §4, §6, §7.
2. R.K. Jain v. Union of India (2013) 8 SCC 1.
3. DoPT Master Circular on RTI 2024 update.

Last reviewed: 25 April 2026.