Right to Information Wiki
D S Nakara v. Union of India (1983)

SC 1983: arbitrary classification of pensioners violates Article 14. The doctrine that govt schemes must apply equally to similarly-placed citizens — used in.

D S Nakara v. Union of India (1983)

The 1983 Supreme Court ruling that arbitrary classification of citizens violates Article 14 of the Constitution. The Government cannot give one group of pensioners a benefit and deny it to similarly-situated others without a “rational and objective” basis. This principle is widely used in RTI matters when the Government applies §8 exemptions to one citizen but not another in identical circumstances.

D S Nakara v. Union of India

, , , , ,

The issue

The Government had a pension liberalisation scheme that benefited only those who retired after a cut-off date. D S Nakara, who retired before that date, challenged the cut-off as arbitrary under Article 14.

The holding

A 5-judge Constitution Bench held:

  1. Article 14 forbids arbitrary classification — the Government must show a rational basis for differential treatment.
  2. The pension cut-off was arbitrary — there was no rational nexus between the date of retirement and entitlement to a higher rate.
  3. The classification was struck down and the benefit extended to all eligible pensioners.
  4. The doctrine of “reasonable classification” requires (a) intelligible differentia and (b) rational nexus to the object sought.

Why this matters for RTI

Apply Nakara to RTI in two scenarios:

  1. When a public authority answers one applicant's RTI fully but stonewalls another with identical query — the differential treatment is challengeable under Article 14.
  2. When a department applies §8(1)(j) selectively — denying an asset disclosure to citizen A but disclosing to citizen B under the same facts. The selective application is arbitrary.

Citation

D S Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305, AIR 1983 SC 130. Decided 17 December 1982 by a 5-judge Constitution Bench (CJI Y V Chandrachud, D A Desai, V D Tulzapurkar, O Chinnappa Reddy, B Eradi JJ).

Use this case in your RTI appeal

If the same PIO's office disclosed similar information to another applicant but denied it to you, cite D S Nakara to argue the classification is arbitrary. Demand the prior disclosures via RTI to establish the comparator.

Sources

  • Supreme Court of India, D S Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305.
  • Constitution of India, Article 14.
  • Right to Information Act, 2005, §8 + §10. Full text.

Last reviewed: 4 May 2026.

, , , , , ,