Right to Information Wiki
Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India

Section 4 is a continuing obligation; Rajasthan and other States directed to improve proactive disclosure. Proactive disclosure under §4 is a continuing duty;.

no way to compare when less than two revisions

Differences

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


—cases:mazdoor-kisan-shakti-sangathan-v-uoi-2018-sc [2026/05/03 08:28] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 1: Line 1:
 +{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India,Supreme Court of India RTI,RTI §4,§4,proactive disclosure,suo motu,MKSS)&metatag-description=(Section 4 is a continuing obligation; Rajasthan and other States directed to improve proactive disclosure. Proactive disclosure under §4 is a continuing duty;.)}}
 +
 +====== Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India ======
 +
 +<WRAP center round info 95%>
 +**Supreme Court of India** · 2018-07-23 · (2018) 17 SCC 324 · **★ Landmark**
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +//Proactive disclosure under §4 is a continuing duty; governments cannot substitute it with §6 responses.//
 +
 +===== Case details =====
 +
 +^ Court | Supreme Court of India |
 +^ Decided | 2018-07-23 |
 +^ Citation | (2018) 17 SCC 324 |
 +^ Bench | A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan |
 +^ Petitioner | Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan & Anr. |
 +^ Respondent | Union of India |
 +^ RTI Act sections | §4(1)(b), §4(2) |
 +^ Outcome | Applicant allowed |
 +
 +===== Outcome =====
 +
 +Section 4 is a continuing obligation; Rajasthan and other States directed to improve proactive disclosure.
 +
 +===== Ratio decidendi =====
 +
 +The obligation under §4 to proactively disclose information is a continuing one, not a one-time exercise. Suo motu disclosure in accessible local language is the rule; it cannot be substituted by responses only upon §6 application.
 +
 +===== Keywords =====
 +
 +§4, proactive disclosure, suo motu, MKSS
 +
 +===== Similar cases in the corpus =====
 +
 +//These rulings have the closest editorial ratio to this case — computed by tf-idf cosine similarity over ratio, keywords and Act sections. Useful starting points if you are researching the same point of law.//
 +
 +  * [[/cases/sc-section-4-disclosure-continuity-2019|§4 disclosure continuity — SC directive line]] (SC 2019)
 +  * [[/cases/allahabad-hc-rti-land-records-2017|Land records & mutation — Allahabad HC]] (HC-UP 2017)
 +  * [[/cases/sic-maharashtra-corporator-records-2019|Corporator funds utilisation — Maharashtra SIC]] (SIC-MH 2019)
 +  * [[/cases/sc-section-2-h-ngo-receipt-2014|§2(h) applied to grant-receiving NGO]] (SC 2014)
 +  * [[/cases/sic-kerala-ration-card-records-2020|Ration card / PDS records — Kerala SIC]] (SIC-KL 2020)
 +
 +===== Related =====
 +
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?court=SC|All Supreme Court of India rulings in the corpus]]
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?section=4|All RTI cases turning on §4]]
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?landmark=1|All landmark rulings]]
 +  * [[:cases:search|Full case-law search]]
 +  * [[:cases|Case-Law Database — overview]]
 +  * [[:pio-rti-reply-guide|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
 +  * [[:act|The RTI Act, 2005 — annotated]]
 +  * [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/196070064/|External reported text →]]
 +
 +<WRAP center round alert 95%>
 +**Editorial summary, not a certified report.** The ratio here is an editorial compression. Before citing this ruling in a PIO order, FAA speaking order, or any appellate filing, **verify against the full reported decision**. RTI Wiki is not a legal service.
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +
 +
 +//Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.//
 +
 +{{tag>case-law court-sc section-4 landmark}}