Right to Information Wiki - act

Download RTI Act

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2018/06/17 04:19		current
Line 1:		Line 1:
	====== Download RTI Act ======		====== Download RTI Act ======
-	Download the RTI Act 2005 for various States and Union Territory. RTI Act 2005 can also be read [[act:\|online here]]	+
-	<html>	+	{{ :social:auto:act-languages.png?direct&1200 \|act / languages — RTI Wiki}}
-	<script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>	+
-	<ins class="adsbygoogle"	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(act languages rti right to information india)
-	style="display:block; text-align:center;"	+	metatag-description=(Download the RTI Act 2005 for various States and Union Territory. RTI Act 2005 can also be read online here)}}
-	data-ad-layout="in-article"	+
-	data-ad-format="fluid"	+
-	data-ad-client="ca-pub-3082882621726443"	+	Download the RTI Act 2005 for various States and Union Territory. RTI Act 2005 can also be read [[:act:\|online here]]
-	data-ad-slot="9529004960"></ins>	+
-	<script>	+
-	(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle \|\| []).push({});	+
-	</script>	+
-	</html>	+

	- {{:pages:rti-act-english.pdf\|RTI Act English}}		- {{:pages:rti-act-english.pdf\|RTI Act English}}
Line 28:		Line 23:

	====== RTI Rules ======		====== RTI Rules ======
-	<html>	+
-	<script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>	+
-	<ins class="adsbygoogle"	+
-	style="display:block; text-align:center;"	+
-	data-ad-layout="in-article"	+
-	data-ad-format="fluid"	+
-	data-ad-client="ca-pub-3082882621726443"	+
-	data-ad-slot="9529004960"></ins>	+
-	<script>	+
-	(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle \|\| []).push({});	+
-	</script>	+
-	</html>	+

	- {{:pages:rti-rules-english.pdf\|RTI Rules English}}		- {{:pages:rti-rules-english.pdf\|RTI Rules English}}
Line 45:		Line 29:
	====== RTI Circulars & Rules ======		====== RTI Circulars & Rules ======

-	- [[act:circulars\|Download RTI Circulars]]	+	- Download RTI Circulars
-	- [[act:\|RTI Act Online]]	+	- [[:act:\|RTI Act Online]]
-	- [[rules:\|Download all RTI Rules]]	+	- [[:rules:\|Download all RTI Rules]]
		+
		+	//Last reviewed on: 20 April 2026//
		+
		+	{{tag>rti act}}

Section 1 — Short Title, Extent and Commencement

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 1 rti act, commencement extent, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 1 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Short Title, Extent and Commencement. Section 1 names the Act, fixes its geographical extent to the whole of India, and prescribes the commencement date — 12 October 2005 for most operative provisions, 15 June 2005 for...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 1 — Short Title, Extent and Commencement ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-1.png?direct&1200 \|Section 1 of the RTI Act — Short Title, Extent and Commencement}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 1 names the Act, fixes its geographical extent to the whole of India, and prescribes the commencement date — 12 October 2005 for most operative provisions, 15 June 2005 for certain preliminary provisions.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 1(1) — Act may be called the Right to Information Act, 2005.
	+	* 1(2) — Extends to the whole of India (originally excluded Jammu and Kashmir; that exception ceased on 31 October 2019 with the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act).
	+	* 1(3) — Provisions of sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of section 4, sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 5, sections 12, 13, 15, 16, 24, 27 and 28 shall come into force at once (i.e., 15 June 2005). The remaining provisions shall come into force on the one hundred and twentieth day of enactment (i.e., 12 October 2005).
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	Commenced 12 October 2005. Extent updated on 31 October 2019 when J&K reorganisation brought the Union Territory within the Central RTI regime. No other amendments to Section 1.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //S.P. Gupta v. President of India//, AIR 1982 SC 149 — Article 19(1)(a) foundation.
	+	* //PUCL v. UoI//, (2003) 4 SCC 399 — Right to know predated the Act.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Referenced in every constitutional challenge to the Act to fix its scope. For J&K residents, Section 1 is the anchor for their post-2019 right to file Central RTIs.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 1.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-1 commencement extent 2026}}

Section 2 — Definitions

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 2 rti act, definitions information public-authority record, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 2 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Definitions. Section 2 supplies the operative vocabulary of the Act — what counts as 'information' (2(f)), 'public authority' (2(h)), 'record' (2(i)), 'right to information' (2(j)), 'third part...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 2 — Definitions ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-2.png?direct&1200 \|Section 2 of the RTI Act — Definitions}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 2 supplies the operative vocabulary of the Act — what counts as 'information' (2(f)), 'public authority' (2(h)), 'record' (2(i)), 'right to information' (2(j)), 'third party' (2(n)) and the definitions of PIOs and Commissions. Every litigated RTI matter begins with a Section 2 question.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 2(a) — 'appropriate Government' — Centre or State depending on which level set up the public authority.
	+	* 2(c) — 'Central Public Information Officer' — officer designated under Section 5(1).
	+	* 2(e) — 'competent authority' — Speaker of Lok Sabha, Chairman Rajya Sabha, CJI, Governors etc.
	+	* 2(f) — 'information' — any material in any form including records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in electronic form and information relating to private bodies accessible by public authority.
	+	* 2(h) — 'public authority' — body of self-government established by the Constitution, Parliament, State Legislature, or notified under government notification, or owned/controlled/substantially financed by the Government.
	+	* 2(i) — 'record' — document, manuscript, file, microfilm, microfiche, computer data.
	+	* 2(j) — 'right to information' — right under the Act, including (i) inspection, (ii) taking notes/extracts/copies, (iii) taking samples, (iv) obtaining in electronic form.
	+	* 2(n) — 'third party' — person other than applicant or public authority.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments to Section 2 since enactment.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497 — scope of 'information' under 2(f) is broad; covers answer sheets.
	+	* //Thalappalam Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala//, (2013) 16 SCC 82 — governing test for 'public authority' under 2(h); substantial financing.
	+	* //CPIO SC v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal//, (2020) 5 SCC 481 — office of the CJI is a public authority.
	+	* //DAV College Trust v. DPI//, (2019) 9 SCC 185 — private colleges receiving government aid are public authorities.
	+	* //Satyapal v. TCIL//, CIC (2007) — file notings are 'information' under 2(f).
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Cite the exact sub-clause in every RTI. 'Information' is broader than 'record'. 'Right to information' under 2(j) includes the right to //inspect// — a powerful lever when photocopies are refused as 'voluminous'.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 2.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-2 definitions information public-authority record 2026}}

Section 3 — Right to Information

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 3 rti act, citizenship right-to-information, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 3 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Right to Information. Section 3 is the substantive grant — 'Subject to the provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right to information.' It is the entitlement; Section 6 is the procedure; S...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 3 — Right to Information ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-3.png?direct&1200 \|Section 3 of the RTI Act — Right to Information}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 3 is the substantive grant — 'Subject to the provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right to information.' It is the entitlement; Section 6 is the procedure; Section 8 the exceptions.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* The right vests in 'citizens' — read with the Citizenship Act, 1955.
	+	* 'Subject to the provisions of this Act' means bounded by Sections 8, 9 and 24.
	+	* Not available to: foreign nationals, OCI/PIO-card holders, corporations as juristic persons, unregistered associations (with exceptions for representative filing).
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments. The one constitutional challenge — Commissioner's remuneration review in //Namit Sharma// — did not touch Section 3.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //S.P. Gupta v. President of India//, AIR 1982 SC 149 — right to know is part of Article 19(1)(a).
	+	* //State of U.P. v. Raj Narain//, (1975) 4 SCC 428 — foundational right-to-know jurisprudence.
	+	* //Raj Sharma v. CIC//, Delhi HC (2016) — foreign citizens cannot file directly; but can through a citizen proxy.
	+	* CIC orders — Aadhaar, passport, or voter-ID proof of citizenship may be asked only if genuinely in doubt.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Sign your RTI yourself if you are a citizen. If a non-citizen, an Indian citizen (relative, advocate) must sign. For public-interest litigation under Section 6(2), no reason needed, so citizenship rather than purpose is the only threshold.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 3.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-3 citizenship right-to-information 2026}}

Section 4 — Obligations of Public Authorities

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 4 rti act, section 4 1 b rti, 17 categories rti, proactive disclosure rti, suo motu rti, anjali bhardwaj rti)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 4 of the RTI Act — proactive disclosure by public authorities. 17 mandatory categories under 4(1)(b), 4(2) dissemination, 4(3) media. Full reference with case law, 2026.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 4 — Obligations of Public Authorities ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-4.png?direct&1200 \|Section 4 — Obligations of Public Authorities}}
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 4 places a proactive duty on every public authority to publish information on its own — without waiting for RTI applications. The core is Section 4(1)(b) with 17 categories. Sub-sections 4(1)(c)-(d) require pre-decision publication and reasoned orders. Section 4(2)-(4) require electronic dissemination in local language.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Why Section 4 matters =====
	+
	+	A compliant Section 4 disclosure eliminates 60-70 percent of potential RTIs. The Supreme Court in //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 treated non-compliance as a contributor to Information Commission backlogs. A fully-functional Section 4 page on every department's website is the Act's preventive medicine.
	+
	+	===== The 17 categories (Section 4(1)(b)) =====
	+
	+	See our full [[:explanations:suo-moto-disclosure-under-rti\|Suo Motu Disclosure explainer]] with the 17-category table + flow diagram. Summary:
	+
	+	* Organisation, functions, duties, decision-making, rules, documents held, public-consultation arrangements, committees/boards with minutes, directory of officers, monthly pay, budget, subsidy execution, beneficiary list, electronic information, citizen facilities, PIO contact.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	* 12 October 2005 — commenced.
	+	* 2006, 2013 DoPT OMs — operational guidance issued.
	+	* 2019 amendment — no change to Section 4.
	+	* DPDP 2025 — indirectly touches Section 4 to the extent beneficiary-list publication under 4(1)(b)(xiii) must respect the amended Section 8(1)(j) privacy test.
	+
	+	===== Landmark rulings =====
	+
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 — SC directions on Commission oversight of Section 4 implementation.
	+	* //State of U.P. v. Raj Narain//, (1975) 4 SCC 428 — foundational right-to-know jurisprudence later crystallised in Section 4.
	+	* CIC Decision //CIC/SA/A/2013/000132// — Commission can direct time-bound publication with monthly progress reports.
	+	* //S.P. Gupta v. President of India//, AIR 1982 SC 149 — right of citizens to know the functioning of government.
	+
	+	===== Enforcement under 4 =====
	+
	+	Two routes when a public authority is non-compliant:
	+	- File an RTI under Section 6 seeking the 17 categories. If refused, 19(1) then 19(3).
	+	- File a Section 18 complaint directly to the Information Commission — no RTI needed.
	+
	+	Section 19(8)(a)(vi) empowers the Commission to direct compliance with Section 4(1)(b).
	+
	+	===== Drafting =====
	+
	+	Template in your RTI to trigger Section 4 audit:
	+
	+	<code>
	+	1. A copy of the Section 4(1)(b) information published by
	+	[department] as on [date], sub-clauses (i) to (xvii),
	+	with URLs and last-updated dates for each.
	+
	+	2. A copy of the Section 4 compliance report filed by
	+	[department] with the Information Commission for the
	+	last three financial years.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request]]
	+	* [[:act:section-18\|Section 18 — Complaint]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations:suo-moto-disclosure-under-rti\|Detailed explainer — Suo motu disclosure]]
	+	* [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 4.
	+	- //Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India//, (2020) 11 SCC 345.
	+	- //State of U.P. v. Raj Narain//, (1975) 4 SCC 428.
	+	- //S.P. Gupta v. President of India//, AIR 1982 SC 149.
	+	- DoPT OM No. 1/6/2011-IR dated 15 April 2013.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-4 suo-motu 17-categories obligations 2026}}

Section 5 — Designation of Public Information Officers

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 5 rti act, designation pio deemed-cpio, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 5 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Designation of Public Information Officers. Section 5 obliges every public authority to designate Central/State Public Information Officers (CPIOs/SPIOs) and Assistant PIOs within 100 days of commencement. Sub-sections 5(4) ...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 5 — Designation of Public Information Officers ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-5.png?direct&1200 \|Section 5 of the RTI Act — Designation of Public Information Officers}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 5 obliges every public authority to designate Central/State Public Information Officers (CPIOs/SPIOs) and Assistant PIOs within 100 days of commencement. Sub-sections 5(4) and 5(5) create the 'deemed CPIO' doctrine — any officer whose assistance the PIO seeks becomes personally liable.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 5(1) — every public authority to designate CPIOs within 100 days of enactment.
	+	* 5(2) — APIOs at sub-divisional level to receive applications and forward.
	+	* 5(3) — CPIO shall deal with requests and assist applicants.
	+	* 5(4) — CPIO may seek assistance of any other officer.
	+	* 5(5) — Any officer whose assistance has been sought shall be 'deemed to be a CPIO' for the purposes of any contravention of the Act.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //CIC F.No.CIC/OK/A/2006/00163// — deemed CPIO personally liable for delays.
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 — supervisory duty of Commissions extends to ensuring proper designation under 5(1).
	+	* DoPT Circular F.No.1/8/2007-IR — Section 5(5) liability.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	The deemed-CPIO rule is the counter to 'file is with another officer' refusals. Always ask for the file movement register to identify who actually held your file; that officer becomes the Section 5(5) deemed CPIO and is the target for Section 20 penalty.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations:deemed-cpio\|Deemed CPIO — detailed explainer]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 5.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-5 designation pio deemed-cpio 2026}}

Section 6 — Request for Obtaining Information

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
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}}

Section 7 — Disposal of Request

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 7 rti act, rti 30 day reply, rti section 7 1, rti section 7 5 bpl, rti section 7 9 voluminous, 48 hour rti life liberty, rti disposal request)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 7 of the RTI Act — the 30-day response rule, 48-hour life-and-liberty proviso, BPL fee waiver, voluminous-change-of-form under 7(9). Full lawyer and practitioner reference with SC/CIC rulings.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 7 — Disposal of Request ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-7.png?direct&1200 \|Section 7 of the RTI Act, 2005 — Disposal of Request}}
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 7 is the clock of the RTI Act. It binds the PIO to reply within 30 days (48 hours for life and liberty, 40 days for third-party information under Section 11). It also governs fees, BPL waiver, speaking-order requirements, and the "voluminous" escape clause in 7(9).
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key sub-sections =====
	+
	+	* 7(1) — reply within 30 days; 48 hours for information concerning life or liberty.
	+	* 7(1) proviso — if the information //concerns the life or liberty of a person//, reply within 48 hours.
	+	* 7(3) — fee intimation must be given before further fee is charged.
	+	* 7(5) — BPL applicants pay no fee.
	+	* 7(6) — if reply is delayed, information must be given free (fee waiver as penalty for delay).
	+	* 7(7) — representation by applicant on fee is to be considered.
	+	* 7(8) — any rejection must be a speaking order with sub-clause, reasons, and appellate details.
	+	* 7(9) — information must be provided //in the form in which it is sought// unless it would //disproportionately divert the resources// or be detrimental to safety of records.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	* 12 October 2005 — commenced.
	+	* No amendment to Section 7 since.
	+	* 2019 amendment and DPDP 2025 did not touch Section 7.
	+
	+	===== Landmark rulings =====
	+
	+	Supreme Court:
	+	* //CBSE and Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497 — Section 7(9) permits //change of form// (e.g. inspection instead of copies) but does not permit outright refusal. Voluminous records are still disclosable.
	+	* //Chief Information Commissioner v. State of Manipur//, (2011) 15 SCC 1 — Section 7(8) requires application of mind and reasoned speaking order for each refusal.
	+
	+	High Courts:
	+	* //Registrar, Supreme Court of India v. R.S. Misra//, Delhi HC (2017) — Section 7 deadlines apply to all public authorities including the Supreme Court (administrative side).
	+
	+	CIC:
	+	* //Vasudev Pillai v. CPIO, CBEC//, CIC (2015) — the first hour of inspection remains free even if the applicant stays for less than one hour; only subsequent full hours attract Rs 5.
	+	* //Ajay Kumar v. CBSE//, CIC (2012) — Section 7(6) operates automatically; the PIO cannot refuse the free-of-cost disclosure after 30-day lapse.
	+	* //Shail Sahni v. CPIO//, CIC (2013) — inspection under Section 2(j)(i) flows from Section 7; denial is appealable.
	+
	+	===== The 48-hour proviso =====
	+
	+	Life-and-liberty information — e.g. a patient seeking their own medical records from a government hospital, an undertrial seeking their own case record, a family tracing a missing person through police records — must be provided within 48 hours under Section 7(1) proviso.
	+
	+	Draft the subject line as: //"RTI Application under Section 7(1) proviso — URGENT, information concerns life and liberty of [name]"//. Include a paragraph explaining why.
	+
	+	===== The 7(9) "voluminous" defeat =====
	+
	+	PIOs routinely refuse by citing Section 7(9) — "disproportionate diversion of resources". Post //CBSE v. Aditya//, this is not a refusal ground. Section 7(9) only allows the PIO to //change the form// of disclosure — typically, offer inspection rather than photocopies.
	+
	+	Your counter-paragraph in the first appeal:
	+
	+	<code>
	+	The PIO's reply purports to rely on Section 7(9) to refuse.
	+	Per CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497, Section
	+	7(9) does not authorise refusal; only a change of form. The
	+	appellant agrees to inspection under Section 2(j)(i) and will
	+	identify pages for certified copies at Rs 2 per A4.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	===== Fee structure under Section 7 =====
	+
	+	* Rs 10 application fee (Rule 3 of RTI Fees Rules, 2005).
	+	* Nil for BPL applicants under 7(5).
	+	* Rs 2 per A4 photocopy (Rule 4(a)).
	+	* First hour inspection free, Rs 5 per subsequent hour (Rule 4(b)).
	+	* Rs 50 per diskette or CD (Rule 4(c)).
	+	* Fee waived if PIO exceeds 30-day deadline (Section 7(6)).
	+
	+	See [[:rti-fees-by-state\|RTI Fees by State]] for State-specific variations.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	If your RTI has crossed day 30, invoke Section 7(6) and demand the information free of charge. Template paragraph in your first appeal:
	+
	+	<code>
	+	The PIO has failed to respond within 30 days as required by
	+	Section 7(1). By operation of Section 7(6), the information
	+	is to be provided free of any further charge. The appellant
	+	is entitled to the same remedy AND to costs under Section
	+	19(8)(b) for the delay.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	See the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]].
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act, 2005]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:act:section-11\|Section 11 — Third-party information (40-day timeline)]]
	+	* [[:rti-fees-by-state\|RTI Fees by State]]
	+	* [[:guide:applicant:application:procedure-for-inspection-under-rti\|Inspection procedure]]
	+	* [[:explanations:justification-for-denial-under-rti\|Speaking-order requirement — Section 7(8)]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:cbse-and-anr-vs-aditya-bandopadhyay\|CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 7.
	+	- RTI (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005.
	+	- //CBSE and Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497.
	+	- //CIC v. State of Manipur//, (2011) 15 SCC 1.
	+	- //Vasudev Pillai v. CPIO CBEC//, CIC (2015).
	+	- //Ajay Kumar v. CBSE//, CIC (2012).
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-7 disposal timeline 30-days 48-hour bpl voluminous 2026}}

Section 8 — Exemptions from Disclosure

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 8 rti act, rti exemptions, rti section 8 1 j, rti privacy, rti section 8 1 e fiduciary, rti section 8 2 public interest, rti section 8 3 20 years, dpdp 2025 section 8)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 8 of the RTI Act — the exemption clause. All 10 sub-clauses (a)-(j) explained with post-DPDP 2025 analysis, Supreme Court and CIC rulings, and practitioner counter-strategies for each.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 8 — Exemptions from Disclosure ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-8.png?direct&1200 \|Section 8 of the RTI Act — Exemptions}}
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	{{ :infographics:section-8-exemptions.png?direct&1000 \|Section 8 - 10 Exemption Grounds}}
	+
	+
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 8 lists 10 exemption grounds (a)-(j) that a PIO can invoke to refuse. It is the most contested clause of the Act — over 60 percent of RTI refusals cite Section 8, and 80 percent of those cite Section 8(1)(j) (privacy). Section 8(2) contains a public-interest override, and Section 8(3) unlocks most exemptions after 20 years.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== The 10 exemption grounds =====
	+
	+	^ Clause ^ Protects ^ Typical wrong use ^
	+	\| 8(1)(a) \| Sovereignty, integrity, security, strategic, scientific, economic interests \| Over-used for any "sensitive"-sounding matter \|
	+	\| 8(1)(b) \| Information expressly forbidden to be published by court or tribunal \| Used to block //sub judice// matters that are not actually forbidden \|
	+	\| 8(1)(c) \| Breach of privilege of Parliament or State Legislature \| Rare and narrow \|
	+	\| 8(1)(d) \| Commercial confidence, trade secrets, intellectual property \| Shield for tender / contractor details; overcome via public interest \|
	+	\| 8(1)(e) \| Information available in fiduciary relationship \| Most litigated; see //RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry// \|
	+	\| 8(1)(f) \| Foreign government information received in confidence \| Narrow \|
	+	\| 8(1)(g) \| Endanger life or physical safety of a person \| Legitimate shield for informants \|
	+	\| 8(1)(h) \| Impede investigation, apprehension, prosecution \| //Bhagat Singh// requires //how// it impedes; bare assertion fails \|
	+	\| 8(1)(i) \| Cabinet papers (opens after decision taken / matter complete) \| Often over-broadly claimed \|
	+	\| 8(1)(j) \| Personal information, no public interest (narrowed by DPDP 2025) \| The most-invoked exemption \|
	+
	+	===== Two override mechanisms =====
	+
	+	* Section 8(2) — disclosure is permitted if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interest. Applies to every 8(1) sub-clause except (a) and (e).
	+	* Section 8(3) — after 20 years, most 8(1) exemptions drop away. Exceptions: (a) sovereignty/security, (c) Parliament privilege, (i) Cabinet papers (but only so long as matter is live).
	+
	+	===== The 14 November 2025 DPDP amendment =====
	+
	+	Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, 2023 substituted the proviso to Section 8(1)(j) on the date the DPDP Rules, 2025 were notified (14 November 2025). The earlier proviso — //"information which cannot be denied to Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person"// — stands removed. Privacy analysis under Section 8(1)(j) now operates purely through the Section 8(2) public-interest override, and through the proportionality test laid down in //K.S. Puttaswamy v. UoI//, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
	+
	+	See the full [[:blog:dpdp-rules-2025-amendment-to-rti-act\|DPDP 2025 practitioner note]] and [[:blog:pio-reply-section-8-1-j-after-dpdp-2025\|PIO reply after DPDP 2025]].
	+
	+	===== Flagship rulings by clause =====
	+
	+	==== 8(1)(a) — Sovereignty / security ====
	+	* //People's Union for Civil Liberties v. UoI//, (2003) 4 SCC 399 — Article 19(1)(a) right to know overlaps with 8(1)(a); sovereignty claim requires specific factual basis.
	+
	+	==== 8(1)(d) — Commercial confidence ====
	+	* //S.N. Deshmukh v. UoI//, CIC — tender evaluations are disclosable once the contract is awarded; pre-award confidentiality is temporal.
	+
	+	==== 8(1)(e) — Fiduciary ====
	+	* //RBI v. Jayantilal N. Mistry//, (2016) 3 SCC 525 — RBI is not in a fiduciary relationship with banks it regulates; supervisory reports are disclosable.
	+	* //ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya//, (2011) 8 SCC 781 — exam-related materials in certain professional contexts can fall under 8(1)(e).
	+
	+	==== 8(1)(h) — Investigation ====
	+	* //Bhagat Singh v. CIC//, Delhi HC (2007) — bare claim that investigation is ongoing does not trigger 8(1)(h); PIO must show //how// disclosure would impede.
	+
	+	==== 8(1)(j) — Privacy ====
	+	* //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212 — the foundational test; information unrelated to any public activity is presumptively personal.
	+	* //K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. UoI//, (2017) 10 SCC 1 — privacy as a fundamental right; proportionality test (legitimate aim, suitability, necessity, balancing).
	+	* //Madras HC judgment on public servants assets (2024)// — assets of public servants disclosable through 8(2) public interest.
	+
	+	==== 8(2) — Public interest override ====
	+	* //Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizvi//, (2012) 13 SCC 61 — public-interest test requires balancing exercise by the PIO and review by the Commission.
	+
	+	==== 8(3) — 20-year sunset ====
	+	* Rarely litigated; generally accepted per the text. Old Cabinet and security records become disclosable unless specifically re-protected.
	+
	+	===== Drafting counter-strategies (per clause) =====
	+
	+	Every refusal under Section 8 must satisfy the [[:explanations:justification-for-denial-under-rti\|speaking-order requirement under 7(8)]] — name the sub-clause, apply to your facts, consider severance under [[:act#section-10severability\|Section 10]], and weigh Section 8(2). Absent any of these, the refusal is non-speaking and appealable.
	+
	+	For the 8(1)(j)-specific counter after DPDP 2025, see the [[:blog:pio-reply-section-8-1-j-after-dpdp-2025\|5-question test for PIOs]].
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	When faced with a Section 8 refusal:
	+	- Identify the sub-clause invoked.
	+	- Check if the refusal applies the test to your facts.
	+	- Check if Section 8(2) public interest was weighed.
	+	- Check Section 10 severance was considered.
	+	- If any answer is "no", file a first appeal using the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]] with the non-speaking-order ground.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal (7(8) speaking order)]]
	+	* [[:act:section-9\|Section 9 — Grounds for rejection]]
	+	* [[:act:section-10\|Section 10 — Severability]]
	+	* [[:act:section-11\|Section 11 — Third-party procedure]]
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for rejection (each 8(1) clause)]]
	+	* [[:explanations:public-interest\|Public interest override — 8(2)]]
	+	* [[:explanations:privacy\|Privacy under RTI — 8(1)(j)]]
	+	* [[:explanations:fiduciary-relationship\|Fiduciary relationship — 8(1)(e)]]
	+	* [[:explanations:third-party\|Third-party information — Section 11]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:court:girish-ramchandra-deshpande\|Girish Deshpande case note]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:k-s-puttaswamy-vs-union-of-india\|Puttaswamy privacy ruling]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:rbi-vs-jayantilal-mistry\|RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry]]
	+	* [[:blog:pio-reply-section-8-1-j-after-dpdp-2025\|PIO reply after DPDP 2025]]
	+	* [[:blog:dpdp-rules-2025-amendment-to-rti-act\|DPDP amendment note]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 8.
	+	- DPDP Act, 2023, Section 44(3); DPDP Rules, 2025 (notified 14 Nov 2025).
	+	- //K.S. Puttaswamy v. UoI//, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
	+	- //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212.
	+	- //RBI v. Jayantilal N. Mistry//, (2016) 3 SCC 525.
	+	- //ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya//, (2011) 8 SCC 781.
	+	- //Bhagat Singh v. CIC//, Delhi HC (2007).
	+	- //Bihar PSC v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizvi//, (2012) 13 SCC 61.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-8 exemptions privacy fiduciary public-interest dpdp-2025 2026}}

Section 9 — Grounds for Rejection to Access in Certain Cases

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 9 rti act, rejection copyright, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 9 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Grounds for Rejection to Access in Certain Cases. Section 9 is a narrow, copyright-specific exemption. The PIO may reject a request if disclosure would 'involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the St...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 9 — Grounds for Rejection to Access in Certain Cases ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-9.png?direct&1200 \|Section 9 of the RTI Act — Grounds for Rejection to Access in Certain Cases}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 9 is a narrow, copyright-specific exemption. The PIO may reject a request if disclosure would 'involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the State'.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Protects third-party copyright only — not State copyright.
	+	* Usually invoked against patent specifications, proprietary software, published works not in government domain.
	+	* Overlaps with Section 8(1)(d) commercial confidence; Section 9 is narrower.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya//, (2011) 8 SCC 781 — limited copyright recognition in professional examination materials.
	+	* CIC decisions — Section 9 does not apply to copies of tender documents authored by public authorities themselves.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	If Section 9 is invoked, ask: who owns the copyright? If the State, Section 9 does not apply. If a third party, consider inspection (Section 2(j)(i)) as an alternative — reading is not infringement.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 9.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-9 rejection copyright 2026}}

Section 10 — Severability

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 10 rti act, severability rti, rti redaction, partial disclosure rti, section 10 1 rti, section 10 2 rti)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 10 of the RTI Act — severability. Even when part of a record is exempt under Section 8/9, the non-exempt portion must be disclosed. Full reference with rulings and drafting counters.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 10 — Severability ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-10.png?direct&1200 \|Section 10 — Severability}}
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 10 prevents the common PIO move of refusing a whole record because part of it is exempt. If any part can be severed, it must be disclosed. Section 10(1) requires a reasoned decision stating what is severed and why. Section 10(2) requires that the reasons be given to the applicant.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Full text =====
	+
	+	* 10(1) — Where a request for access is rejected, the PIO may give access to that part of the record which does not contain any exempt information and which can reasonably be severed.
	+	* 10(2) — The applicant shall be given a notice stating: (a) only part is disclosed, (b) reasons, (c) name and designation of the person making the decision, (d) fee details, (e) appeal rights.
	+
	+	===== Why it matters =====
	+
	+	Without Section 10, PIOs would refuse entire tender files because one signature was "personal". With Section 10, the entire file must be disclosed with names redacted where privacy genuinely attracts Section 8(1)(j). It is the anti-blanket-refusal clause.
	+
	+	===== Landmark rulings =====
	+
	+	* //CBSE and Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497 — implicitly endorsed severance as the default mode when any exemption is claimed.
	+	* //Bhagat Singh v. CIC//, Delhi HC (2007) — if Section 8(1)(h) investigation exemption is invoked, only investigation-impeding portions can be withheld; rest must be severed.
	+	* //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212 — personal information should be severed, not used to refuse the whole record.
	+	* CIC in //Subhash Agarwal v. Ministry of Finance// — severance analysis must appear in the PIO's speaking order, not as an afterthought.
	+
	+	===== Common non-severance patterns =====
	+
	+	^ Refusal pattern ^ Why it fails Section 10 ^
	+	\| "The whole file contains personal information" \| Generic claim. Section 10 requires identification of each exempt portion. \|
	+	\| "Commercial confidence — cannot be partially disclosed" \| Contract numbers, dates, amounts are severable; only genuinely confidential terms exempt. \|
	+	\| "Would require too much editing" \| Effort is not a Section 10 exemption; Section 7(9) change-of-form applies. \|
	+	\| "File is one integrated document" \| Every document is severable at some level. The PIO must attempt. \|
	+
	+	===== Drafting the severance clause =====
	+
	+	Always include in your RTI:
	+
	+	<code>
	+	If any portion of the above information is exempt under
	+	Section 8 or Section 9, kindly apply Section 10(1) and
	+	disclose the non-exempt portion with reasons stated under
	+	Section 10(2) for each severance.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	And in your first appeal if the PIO refuses wholesale:
	+
	+	<code>
	+	The PIO's refusal violates Section 10(1), which requires
	+	disclosure of non-exempt portions with reasons for severance.
	+	A bare claim of exemption over the whole record, without
	+	identifying the specific exempt portions and attempting
	+	severance, is a non-speaking order appealable on that
	+	ground alone.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-9\|Section 9 — Grounds for rejection]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations:severability\|Severability — detailed explainer]]
	+	* [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 10.
	+	- //CBSE and Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497.
	+	- //Bhagat Singh v. CIC//, Delhi HC (2007).
	+	- //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-10 severability redaction 2026}}

Section 11 — Third-Party Information

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 11 rti act, third party rti, section 11 notice rti, 40 days rti third party, rti third party consent, rti trade secret)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 11 of the RTI Act — third-party information procedure. 5-day PIO notice, 10-day objection, 40-day decision, third-party appeal rights. Full reference, 2026.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 11 — Third-Party Information ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-11.png?direct&1200 \|Section 11 — Third-Party Information}}
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: When the requested record has been supplied by a third party and treated as confidential, Section 11 prescribes a 40-day procedure: PIO notice to third party within 5 days, 10-day objection window, PIO decision after considering objections, and the third party's own appeal right under Section 19(2).
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== The Section 11 procedure =====
	+
	+	- Day 1: RTI received.
	+	- Day 5: PIO gives written notice to the third party under 11(1) — attaching the request and inviting objections.
	+	- Day 15: Third party has 10 days to submit written objections.
	+	- Day 40: PIO decides after considering objections. Must be a reasoned order under Section 7(8).
	+	- Day 40 + 30: Third party can file first appeal under Section 19(2) if decision adverse to them.
	+
	+	===== Who is a "third party"? =====
	+
	+	Section 2(n) — a person other than the applicant and the public authority. Typically:
	+	* A tenderer whose bid documents were submitted
	+	* A petitioner who filed a complaint now asked under RTI
	+	* A contractor whose contract terms are requested
	+	* An individual named in a personnel file (rarely triggers — 8(1)(j) more common)
	+
	+	===== Public interest override (Section 11(1) proviso) =====
	+
	+	Crucial: the third party's objection is not decisive. Section 11(1) proviso says //"except in the case of trade or commercial secrets protected by law, disclosure may be allowed if the public interest in disclosure outweighs in importance any possible harm or injury to the interests of such third party"//.
	+
	+	So the PIO weighs:
	+	* Public interest in disclosure — e.g. accountability for public money
	+	* versus Harm to the third party — e.g. competitive disadvantage, reputational harm
	+
	+	===== Landmark rulings =====
	+
	+	* //Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizvi//, (2012) 13 SCC 61 — the Section 11 proviso requires a clear balancing exercise by the PIO, with reasoned findings on both sides.
	+	* //Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO//, Delhi HC (2010) — third-party objection alone does not defeat disclosure if public interest is made out.
	+	* CIC in //Subhash Agarwal v. ITBP// — Section 11 is not a veto; it is a procedural safeguard.
	+
	+	===== Common PIO / third-party moves =====
	+
	+	^ Move ^ Counter ^
	+	\| "Third party has objected. We cannot disclose." \| 11(1) proviso — PIO must weigh public interest against harm; not automatic veto. \|
	+	\| "Your request involves 50 third parties; we cannot process." \| Section 7(9) permits change of form (inspection). Section 11 still applies. \|
	+	\| PIO does not issue 11(1) notice \| Appealable — process is mandatory. \|
	+	\| Third party's objection is procedural/delay \| PIO's decision must be on merits, not on receipt of objection. \|
	+
	+	===== Drafting for third-party matters =====
	+
	+	If your RTI necessarily involves a third party, anticipate in the body:
	+
	+	<code>
	+	If the above information involves a third party under
	+	Section 11, kindly issue the five-day notice and decide
	+	after 40 days. In weighing objections, the applicant
	+	submits that the public interest in disclosure of
	+	[reason] outweighs any commercial or personal harm,
	+	per Section 11(1) proviso.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Timelines]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals (including 19(2))]]
	+	* [[:explanations:third-party\|Third-party information — detailed explainer]]
	+	* [[:templates:pio-third-party-notice\|Third-party notice template]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 11.
	+	- //BPSC v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizvi//, (2012) 13 SCC 61.
	+	- //Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO//, Delhi HC (2010).
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-11 third-party 40-days public-interest 2026}}

Section 12 — Constitution of the Central Information Commission

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 12 rti act, cic constitution commission, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 12 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Constitution of the Central Information Commission. Section 12 creates the Central Information Commission (CIC) — one Chief Information Commissioner and up to ten Information Commissioners, appointed by the President on recommendati...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 12 — Constitution of the Central Information Commission ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-12.png?direct&1200 \|Section 12 of the RTI Act — Constitution of the Central Information Commission}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 12 creates the Central Information Commission (CIC) — one Chief Information Commissioner and up to ten Information Commissioners, appointed by the President on recommendation of a Committee comprising the Prime Minister (Chair), Leader of Opposition, and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 12(1) — Commission constituted.
	+	* 12(2) — One Chief + up to 10 Information Commissioners.
	+	* 12(3) — Appointment by the President on recommendation of the three-member Committee.
	+	* 12(5) — Eminence in public life, knowledge of law/science/management/journalism/mass media/admin/governance/social service.
	+	* 12(6) — Shall not be a Member of Parliament, State Legislature, or hold any office of profit.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments to Section 12 itself. Tenure and service conditions moved to rules by RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //Namit Sharma v. UoI//, (2013) 1 SCC 745 — qualifications for ICs.
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 — SC directions on timely filling of vacancies.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	The CIC's composition affects appeal outcomes. A fully-staffed Commission (10+1) clears appeals faster; vacancies cause backlogs. The December 2025 full-strength restoration (Chief IC Raj Kumar Goyal + 10 ICs) was the first in 9 years — see the Live Tracker.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 12.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-12 cic constitution commission 2026}}

Section 13 — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (CIC)

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 13 rti act, term-office cic amendment-2019 service-conditions, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 13 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (CIC). Section 13 was substantially substituted by the RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019. Earlier, a fixed 5-year term and Supreme Court Judge-equivalent salary. Now, the Central Government presc...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 13 — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (CIC) ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-13.png?direct&1200 \|Section 13 of the RTI Act — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (CIC)}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 13 was substantially substituted by the RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019. Earlier, a fixed 5-year term and Supreme Court Judge-equivalent salary. Now, the Central Government prescribes the term and conditions of service through rules.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 13(1), (2), (5) substituted in 2019 — term and service conditions to be 'as may be prescribed by the Central Government'.
	+	* Current rules: RTI Rules, 2019 — term of 3 years, salary equivalent to Secretary to Government.
	+	* The 2019 changes were challenged in //Anjali Bhardwaj//; not struck down but SC directed procedural safeguards.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	* 2005 — Original Section 13: fixed 5-year term; salary of Supreme Court Judge.
	+	* 24 October 2019 — RTI (Amendment) Act No. 24 of 2019 substituted 13(1), 13(2), and 13(5).
	+	* 2019 — RTI Rules, 2019 notified — 3-year term, Secretary-level salary.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 — upheld 2019 amendment but imposed transparency obligations on appointment process.
	+	* Justice A.P. Shah letter (2019) — open letter criticising the 2019 amendments.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Whether a Commissioner is on a 3-year or 5-year term matters for how they handle long-pending appeals. Practitioners note that 3-year tenures have accelerated some decision-making but also increased turnover.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 13.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-13 term-office cic amendment-2019 service-conditions 2026}}

Section 14 — Removal of Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 14 rti act, removal cic, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 14 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Removal of Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner. Section 14 prescribes the removal process for CIC Commissioners — only by the President, after a reference to the Supreme Court that proves misbehaviour or incapacity. This makes r...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 14 — Removal of Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-14.png?direct&1200 \|Section 14 of the RTI Act — Removal of Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 14 prescribes the removal process for CIC Commissioners — only by the President, after a reference to the Supreme Court that proves misbehaviour or incapacity. This makes removal substantially difficult, protecting Commissioners from political pressure.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Grounds: proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
	+	* Procedure: President refers the matter to Supreme Court for inquiry.
	+	* SC holds inquiry; reports back to the President.
	+	* President then removes if SC upholds the ground.
	+	* Interim suspension possible pending inquiry.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* Section 14 has not been the basis of a completed removal in 20 years — a testament to the protection it affords.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Citizens cannot directly invoke Section 14. It is a structural safeguard, not a citizen remedy. If a Commissioner acts with bias, the remedy is a review petition or writ under Article 226.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 14.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-14 removal cic 2026}}

Section 15 — Constitution of the State Information Commission

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 15 rti act, sic constitution state, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 15 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Constitution of the State Information Commission. Section 15 is the State-level mirror of Section 12. Each State constitutes its own State Information Commission (SIC) — State Chief IC + up to 10 State ICs, appointed by the Govern...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 15 — Constitution of the State Information Commission ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-15.png?direct&1200 \|Section 15 of the RTI Act — Constitution of the State Information Commission}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 15 is the State-level mirror of Section 12. Each State constitutes its own State Information Commission (SIC) — State Chief IC + up to 10 State ICs, appointed by the Governor on recommendation of a committee comprising the Chief Minister (Chair), Leader of Opposition in the State Assembly, and a State Cabinet Minister.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Same qualification standard as Section 12(5).
	+	* Same office-of-profit restrictions as Section 12(6).
	+	* State rules govern working conditions.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments to Section 15 itself. Tenure moved to rules by 2019 amendment (Section 16).
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //Namit Sharma//, (2013) — State ICs' qualifications subject to same standards.
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj//, (2020) — directions apply to State Commissions; many SICs had large vacancies at the time of judgment.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Every State SIC has a different backlog and quality. Kerala and Tamil Nadu SICs are faster; Bihar and UP SICs have multi-year pendency. See the SIC performance notes on the Live Tracker.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 15.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-15 sic constitution state 2026}}

Section 16 — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (SIC)

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 16 rti act, term-office sic amendment-2019, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 16 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (SIC). Section 16, substituted in 2019, delegates tenure and service conditions of State Information Commissioners to Central Government rules. Before 2019, fixed 5-year term....)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 16 — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (SIC) ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-16.png?direct&1200 \|Section 16 of the RTI Act — Term of Office and Conditions of Service (SIC)}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 16, substituted in 2019, delegates tenure and service conditions of State Information Commissioners to Central Government rules. Before 2019, fixed 5-year term.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 16(1), (2), (5) substituted in 2019 — term and salary as prescribed by the Central Government.
	+	* Current rules: RTI Rules, 2019 — 3-year term, State Secretary-level salary.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	* 2005 — Original Section 16: fixed 5-year term.
	+	* 24 October 2019 — 2019 Amendment substituted 16(1), 16(2), 16(5).
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* See //Anjali Bhardwaj//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 discussion on Section 16.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	The States tried to retain longer tenures under their own State Rules; the Centre's rules prevail per Article 254 inconsistency doctrine.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 16.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-16 term-office sic amendment-2019 2026}}

Section 17 — Removal of State Chief Information Commissioner or State Information Commissioner

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 17 rti act, removal sic, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 17 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Removal of State Chief Information Commissioner or State Information Commissioner. Section 17 is the SIC equivalent of Section 14 — removal only by the Governor after a reference to the Supreme Court proving misbehaviour or incapacity. Same high threshold....)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 17 — Removal of State Chief Information Commissioner or State Information Commissioner ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-17.png?direct&1200 \|Section 17 of the RTI Act — Removal of State Chief Information Commissioner or State Information Commissioner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 17 is the SIC equivalent of Section 14 — removal only by the Governor after a reference to the Supreme Court proving misbehaviour or incapacity. Same high threshold.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Grounds: proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
	+	* Procedure mirrors Section 14 but ends with the Governor, not the President.
	+	* Some States have attempted political removals; none has succeeded under Section 17 since enactment.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* No substantive jurisprudence — the protection is strong.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	As with Section 14, citizens cannot invoke Section 17 directly. Structural safeguard.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 17.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-17 removal sic 2026}}

Section 18 — Powers and Functions of Information Commissions

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 18 rti act, rti complaint, rti information commission complaint, section 18 vs section 19, rti complaint procedure)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 18 of the RTI Act — complaint directly to Information Commission. When to use it versus Section 19 appeal. Full reference with grounds and procedure, 2026.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 18 — Powers and Functions of Information Commissions ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-18.png?direct&1200 \|Section 18 — Complaints to the Information Commission}}
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 18 gives any person the right to complain directly to the Information Commission (CIC or SIC) about specified procedural and systemic failures — without going through the first-appeal stage. It is the alternative to Section 19 appeals, used when the PIO's failure is procedural rather than substantive.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Grounds for a Section 18 complaint =====
	+
	+	* 18(1)(a) — CPIO/SPIO not designated.
	+	* 18(1)(b) — Refusal to receive an RTI application.
	+	* 18(1)(c) — Not given a response within the time specified.
	+	* 18(1)(d) — Required to pay an unreasonable amount as fee.
	+	* 18(1)(e) — Given incomplete, misleading, or false information.
	+	* 18(1)(f) — Any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining information.
	+
	+	===== Section 18 vs Section 19 — which to use =====
	+
	+	^ Scenario ^ Use ^
	+	\| PIO gave a reasoned refusal you disagree with \| Section 19 first appeal \|
	+	\| PIO refused to accept the application \| Section 18 complaint (18(1)(b)) \|
	+	\| PIO gave knowingly false information \| Section 18 complaint (18(1)(e)) \|
	+	\| Department has no designated PIO \| Section 18 complaint (18(1)(a)) \|
	+	\| Fee demanded is excessive \| Either, but 18(1)(d) is faster \|
	+	\| Systemic non-compliance with Section 4 \| Section 18 complaint \|
	+	\| PIO reply is non-speaking on merits \| Section 19 — speaking-order is a Section 7(8) issue \|
	+
	+	===== Powers of the Commission under Section 18 =====
	+
	+	Section 18(2) grants the Commission powers of a civil court for inquiry:
	+	* Summoning and enforcing attendance (18(3)(a))
	+	* Requiring discovery and inspection of documents (18(3)(b))
	+	* Receiving evidence on affidavit (18(3)(c))
	+	* Requisitioning public records from any court or office (18(3)(d))
	+	* Issuing summons for examination of witnesses (18(3)(e))
	+
	+	These are substantive powers. Use Section 18 when the Commission needs to investigate, not just review.
	+
	+	===== Landmark rulings =====
	+
	+	* //Chief Information Commissioner v. State of Manipur//, (2011) 15 SCC 1 — clarified the distinction between Section 18 (complaint) and Section 19 (appeal).
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 — Commission's Section 18 powers support supervisory jurisdiction.
	+
	+	===== Drafting a Section 18 complaint =====
	+
	+	<code>
	+	Complaint under Section 18(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 to the
	+	[Central / State] Information Commission against
	+	[public authority / officer].
	+
	+	Grounds:
	+	(i) [18(1)(a)/(b)/(c)/(d)/(e)/(f) — cite specific clause]
	+	(ii) [Facts with dates and documents referenced]
	+	(iii) [Systemic concern, if any]
	+
	+	Prayer:
	+	(a) An inquiry under Section 18(2) into the above.
	+	(b) Direction to produce records under Section 18(3).
	+	(c) Appropriate relief including Section 20 penalty on
	+	the erring officer, if mala fides are established.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals (alternative route)]]
	+	* [[:act:section-20\|Section 20 — Penalties]]
	+	* [[:rti-vs-complaint\|RTI vs Complaint — when RTI is not the right tool]]
	+	* [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 18.
	+	- //CIC v. State of Manipur//, (2011) 15 SCC 1.
	+	- //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) 11 SCC 345.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-18 complaint information-commission 2026}}

Section 19 — Appeals

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 19 rti act, rti first appeal, rti second appeal, rti appeal timeline, section 19 1 rti, section 19 3 rti, section 19 8 compensation, rti appeal procedure)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 19 of the RTI Act — the appeal architecture. First appeal (19(1)), second appeal to Information Commission (19(3)), remedies (19(8)), burden of proof (19(5)). Full lawyer reference, 2026.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 19 — Appeals ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-19.png?direct&1200 \|Section 19 of the RTI Act — Appeals}}
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 19 creates a two-tier appeal system. The first appeal under 19(1) is to an officer senior to the PIO within 30 days. The second appeal under 19(3) is to the Information Commission within 90 days. Section 19(5) places the burden of proving denial was justified on the PIO. Section 19(8) gives the Commission expansive remedial powers including compensation.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	{{ :infographics:section-19-appeal-ladder.png?direct&1000 \|Section 19 — Three-Stage Appeal Ladder: PIO reply, First Appeal, Second Appeal}}
	+
	+
	+	===== Key sub-sections =====
	+
	+	* 19(1) — first appeal to the First Appellate Authority (FAA) within 30 days of the PIO's reply (or deemed refusal on day 31).
	+	* 19(2) — third party may appeal within 30 days of the PIO's Section 11 notice.
	+	* 19(3) — second appeal to Information Commission within 90 days of the FAA's order (or deemed refusal).
	+	* 19(4) — Commission gives notice to affected parties.
	+	* 19(5) — burden of proving denial was justified is on the PIO, not the appellant.
	+	* 19(6) — Commission should dispose of the appeal in 30 days // as far as possible//; in practice, 400+ days average.
	+	* 19(7) — Commission's decision is binding.
	+	* 19(8) — Commission can (a) require compliance with the Act, (b) award compensation to appellant, (c) impose Section 20 penalty, (d) reject the appeal.
	+
	+	===== First appeal — 30-day window =====
	+
	+	The first appeal is intra-departmental — heard by an officer senior in rank to the PIO (usually a Deputy Secretary or Director). No fee for the first appeal on Central matters; some States charge a nominal fee. Grounds:
	+
	+	* PIO failed to reply within 30 days (deemed refusal).
	+	* PIO's reply is non-speaking (no sub-clause, no reasons — see [[:act:section-7\|7(8)]]).
	+	* PIO's reply is inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading.
	+	* PIO charged incorrect fee.
	+
	+	Use the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]].
	+
	+	===== Second appeal — 90-day window to Information Commission =====
	+
	+	If the FAA has rejected or not responded, second appeal lies to the Central or State Information Commission. Grounds are the same as the first appeal. The Commission conducts its own hearing, often virtual.
	+
	+	Typical timeline (2024-25):
	+	* CIC hearing roster: 12-18 months from filing.
	+	* Some SICs: 6-24 months depending on backlog.
	+	* See [[:tracking-your-appeal-via-ai\|Tracking your appeal via AI]] for monitoring tools.
	+
	+	===== Landmark rulings =====
	+
	+	Supreme Court:
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India//, (2020) 11 SCC 345 — SC directions on timely appointment of Information Commissioners and their working conditions.
	+	* //Chief Information Commissioner v. State of Manipur//, (2011) 15 SCC 1 — Commission has supervisory duty to ensure reasoned orders at every tier.
	+
	+	High Courts:
	+	* //Namit Sharma v. UoI//, Delhi HC (2012) — interpreted scope of Commission's powers under 19(8).
	+
	+	CIC:
	+	* //Mujibur Rahman v. CIC//, Delhi HC — the Commission must afford reasonable opportunity of hearing before imposing Section 20 penalty.
	+	* //CBEC v. Mange Ram//, CIC — Section 19(8)(b) compensation should be specific to the harm.
	+
	+	===== Section 19(8) — the Commission's remedial toolkit =====
	+
	+	* 19(8)(a)(i) — require disclosure of information.
	+	* 19(8)(a)(ii) — require the public authority to appoint a CPIO if none.
	+	* 19(8)(a)(iii) — publish certain information.
	+	* 19(8)(a)(iv) — make necessary changes to practice relating to record management.
	+	* 19(8)(a)(v) — enhance training for officials on the Act.
	+	* 19(8)(a)(vi) — provide annual report under Section 4(1)(b).
	+	* 19(8)(b) — award compensation for any loss or detriment.
	+	* 19(8)(c) — impose penalties under Section 20.
	+
	+	===== Drafting strategy =====
	+
	+	==== First appeal — paragraph template ====
	+
	+	<code>
	+	To the First Appellate Authority under Section 19(1) of the
	+	Right to Information Act, 2005.
	+
	+	1. The PIO's reply dated [X] is non-speaking in that it does
	+	not cite any sub-clause of Section 8 or Section 9, does not
	+	apply the exemption to the facts, and does not consider
	+	severance under Section 10 or the Section 8(2) public
	+	interest override.
	+
	+	2. Per Section 19(5), the onus of proving denial was justified
	+	lies on the PIO. The PIO has not discharged that burden.
	+
	+	3. The appellant prays that the FAA set aside the reply and
	+	direct full disclosure within seven days. In the alternative,
	+	direct the PIO to show cause why Section 20 penalty should
	+	not be imposed.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	==== Second appeal template ====
	+
	+	See our [[:templates:second-appeal\|Second Appeal template]] — pre-structured for Section 19(3) with evidence annexure list.
	+
	+	===== Tracking your CIC appeal =====
	+
	+	Once the second appeal is filed, track via:
	+	* cic.gov.in/case-status — enter registration number.
	+	* Email alerts — register a verified email.
	+	* AI summarisation of each order — see [[:tracking-your-appeal-via-ai\|full guide]].
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	If your RTI has been refused or delayed, follow the 30 → 90 → hearing path:
	+	- Day 31: file first appeal using [[:templates:first-appeal\|our template]].
	+	- Day 30 after FAA order (or day 75 if no FAA order): file second appeal using [[:templates:second-appeal\|our template]].
	+	- Track proceedings via [[:tracking-your-appeal-via-ai\|AI-assisted monitoring]].
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-18\|Section 18 — Complaints (alternative remedy)]]
	+	* [[:act:section-20\|Section 20 — Penalties]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7(8) — speaking-order requirement]]
	+	* [[:act:section-12\|Section 12 — CIC constitution]]
	+	* [[:act:section-15\|Section 15 — SIC constitution]]
	+	* [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]
	+	* [[:templates:second-appeal\|Second Appeal template]]
	+	* [[:explanations:justification-for-denial-under-rti\|Speaking-order requirement]]
	+	* [[:explanations:vicarious-liability\|Vicarious liability — Section 20]]
	+	* [[:tracking-your-appeal-via-ai\|Tracking your CIC appeal]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:k-s-puttaswamy-vs-union-of-india\|Puttaswamy privacy ruling]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 19.
	+	- //Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India//, (2020) 11 SCC 345.
	+	- //CIC v. State of Manipur//, (2011) 15 SCC 1.
	+	- //Mujibur Rahman v. CIC//, Delhi HC.
	+	- CIC Annual Report 2023-24 (timelines).
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-19 appeals first-appeal second-appeal cic sic 2026}}

Section 20 — Penalties

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 20 rti act, rti penalty, rs 25000 rti penalty, pio personal liability, rti disciplinary action)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 20 of the RTI Act — personal penalty on erring Public Information Officer up to Rs 25,000. Full reference with enforcement trends, recovery, and drafting strategy, 2026.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 20 — Penalties ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-20.png?direct&1200 \|Section 20 — Penalties on the PIO]]
	+
	+	{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 20 empowers the Information Commission to impose a personal penalty of Rs 250 per day up to a ceiling of Rs 25,000 on the Public Information Officer for wilful refusal, mala fide denial, persistent delay, destruction of records, or knowingly giving false information. The penalty is ad personam — payable from the officer's salary, not the department budget.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== When Section 20 applies =====
	+
	+	* Refused to receive an application.
	+	* Not furnished information within the time specified.
	+	* Malafide denied the request.
	+	* Knowingly given incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information.
	+	* Destroyed information which was the subject of the request.
	+	* Obstructed in any manner the furnishing of the information.
	+
	+	===== Penalty arithmetic =====
	+
	+	Rs 250 per day from the day the information was due, capped at Rs 25,000. For a 30-day delay, the daily penalty capped at Rs 7,500; for a 100-day delay, the full ceiling applies.
	+
	+	===== Section 20(2) — disciplinary action =====
	+
	+	The Commission "may recommend disciplinary action" against the PIO under the service rules. This is a separate consequence — it goes on the officer's permanent service file. Some Commissions use it to signal seriousness even when the monetary penalty has been avoided (e.g. where the officer shows cause).
	+
	+	===== Enforcement trends (2023-24) =====
	+
	+	* CIC imposed 2,341 personal penalty orders aggregating over Rs 3.8 crore.
	+	* Only ~35 percent recovered from officer salaries; rest stuck in departmental processing.
	+	* CIC in //Subhash Chandra Agarwal v. CPIO SC//, (2020) 5 SCC 481 noted the need for officer-wise recovery reports.
	+
	+	===== Landmark rulings =====
	+
	+	* //Mujibur Rahman v. CIC//, Delhi HC — reasonable opportunity of hearing is mandatory before imposing Section 20 penalty.
	+	* //Manohar Parrikar v. Shripad Balkrishna Desai//, SC (2013) — confirms personal liability.
	+	* CIC practice directions have repeatedly clarified that the penalty cannot be recovered from the public exchequer.
	+
	+	===== Drafting a Section 20 prayer =====
	+
	+	In the second appeal:
	+
	+	<code>
	+	The CPIO, Shri [Name], Designation [X], has persistently
	+	failed to dispose of the appellant's RTI application and
	+	has given evasive, non-speaking replies. The pattern
	+	demonstrates mala fides under Section 20(1).
	+
	+	The appellant prays that:
	+	(a) The maximum penalty of Rs 25,000 be imposed on the
	+	CPIO personally under Section 20(1);
	+	(b) Disciplinary action be recommended to the cadre-
	+	controlling authority under Section 20(2);
	+	(c) The recovery be made from the CPIO's salary directly,
	+	with a recovery certificate placed on record.
	+	</code>
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-5\|Section 5 — Deemed CPIO chain]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Timelines]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations:vicarious-liability\|Vicarious liability — detailed]]
	+	* [[:explanations:deemed-cpio\|Deemed CPIO — Section 5(5)]]
	+	* [[:templates:second-appeal\|Second Appeal template (with Section 20 prayer)]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- RTI Act, 2005, Section 20.
	+	- //Mujibur Rahman v. CIC//, Delhi HC.
	+	- //Manohar Parrikar v. Shripad Balkrishna Desai//, SC (2013).
	+	- //CPIO SC v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal//, (2020) 5 SCC 481.
	+	- CIC Annual Report 2023-24.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-20 penalty enforcement cic 2026}}

Section 21 — Protection of Action Taken in Good Faith

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 21 rti act, good-faith immunity, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 21 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Protection of Action Taken in Good Faith. Section 21 protects officers from civil/criminal proceedings for actions taken in good faith under the Act. It is narrow — good faith is a high bar, and mala fide conduct under Sec...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 21 — Protection of Action Taken in Good Faith ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-21.png?direct&1200 \|Section 21 of the RTI Act — Protection of Action Taken in Good Faith}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 21 protects officers from civil/criminal proceedings for actions taken in good faith under the Act. It is narrow — good faith is a high bar, and mala fide conduct under Section 20 is not good faith.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything done in good faith.
	+	* 'Good faith' requires honest belief in lawfulness, not merely absence of bad intent.
	+	* Section 20 penalty for mala fide conduct is not barred by Section 21.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* CIC decisions — officers who follow Commission directions in good faith are protected; those who ignore directions and later claim good faith are not.
	+	* //State of A.P. v. N. Venugopal//, AIR 1964 SC 33 — good faith interpretation in statutory immunity context.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Used as a defence in rare civil suits by third parties aggrieved by disclosure. Not available to the PIO whose delay or refusal is under Section 20 scrutiny.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 21.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-21 good-faith immunity 2026}}

Section 22 — Act to Have Overriding Effect

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 22 rti act, overriding-effect section-22 official-secrets, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 22 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Act to Have Overriding Effect. Section 22 is one of the most powerful clauses in Indian transparency law. The provisions of the RTI Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent in the Official Sec...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 22 — Act to Have Overriding Effect ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-22.png?direct&1200 \|Section 22 of the RTI Act — Act to Have Overriding Effect}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 22 is one of the most powerful clauses in Indian transparency law. The provisions of the RTI Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent in the Official Secrets Act, 1923, or any other law or instrument. In six lines, it dismantles a century of secrecy-by-default.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 'Notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923...'
	+	* Also overrides the Indian Evidence Act 1872 Section 123 (state privilege), service rules, and any executive instructions.
	+	* Constitutional provisions and statutes expressly carved out (like RTI Act exemptions themselves) apply.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //RBI v. Jayantilal N. Mistry//, (2016) 3 SCC 525 — Section 22 overrides RBI Act confidentiality of bank inspection reports.
	+	* //Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs v. MCD//, Delhi HC — overrides conflicting Central instructions.
	+	* Multiple CIC decisions — Section 22 overrides confidentiality marks put by departments themselves.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	When a PIO cites an older law or an internal circular, respond: 'Section 22 of the RTI Act has overriding effect and renders that provision inoperative to the extent of inconsistency.' Cite RBI v. Jayantilal.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 22.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-22 overriding-effect section-22 official-secrets 2026}}

Section 23 — Bar of Jurisdiction of Courts

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 23 rti act, jurisdiction courts writ, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 23 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Bar of Jurisdiction of Courts. Section 23 bars courts from entertaining suits, applications, or proceedings in respect of orders made under the Act. Constitutional writs under Article 226/32 remain available. Th...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 23 — Bar of Jurisdiction of Courts ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-23.png?direct&1200 \|Section 23 of the RTI Act — Bar of Jurisdiction of Courts}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 23 bars courts from entertaining suits, applications, or proceedings in respect of orders made under the Act. Constitutional writs under Article 226/32 remain available. The bar pushes dispute resolution into the Act's own appeal architecture (Section 19).
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* No suit, application, or proceeding shall lie before any court in respect of orders under the Act.
	+	* Civil courts cannot review an Information Commission's decision by way of suit.
	+	* High Courts retain Article 226 writ jurisdiction; Supreme Court retains Article 32.
	+	* Appeal architecture under Section 19 is the exclusive statutory route.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //Rashtriya Sahara v. UoI//, Delhi HC — Section 23 does not bar Article 226 jurisdiction.
	+	* High Court decisions — writs against Commission orders routinely entertained.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	File writ in High Court against Commission order; civil suit will be dismissed at threshold.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 23.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-23 jurisdiction courts writ 2026}}

Section 24 — Act Not to Apply to Certain Organisations

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 24 rti act, section-24 intelligence exemption corruption human-rights, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 24 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Act Not to Apply to Certain Organisations. Section 24 exempts specified intelligence and security organisations listed in the Second Schedule from the full operation of the Act — EXCEPT allegations of corruption and human r...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 24 — Act Not to Apply to Certain Organisations ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-24.png?direct&1200 \|Section 24 of the RTI Act — Act Not to Apply to Certain Organisations}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 24 exempts specified intelligence and security organisations listed in the Second Schedule from the full operation of the Act — EXCEPT allegations of corruption and human rights violations, which remain disclosable.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Second Schedule lists bodies: Intelligence Bureau, RAW, Central Bureau of Intelligence, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Directorate of Enforcement (partial), and several paramilitary organisations.
	+	* Exception clause: corruption allegations and human rights violations. These remain within the Act.
	+	* For HR violations, CIC/SIC approval is required before disclosure (Section 24(1) proviso).
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	Second Schedule amended by notifications adding organisations.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //UoI v. CPIO IB//, Delhi HC — Section 24 bar applies only to the listed organisations; general intelligence claims by others do not invoke it.
	+	* CIC on Army courts-martial — disciplinary proceedings involving corruption or HR abuses must be disclosed even from exempted bodies.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	If you want information from an IB/RAW-like body, anchor the request in 'allegations of corruption' or 'human rights violations' in the opening paragraph. Without that, Section 24 defeats the request.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 24.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-24 section-24 intelligence exemption corruption human-rights 2026}}

Section 25 — Monitoring and Reporting

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 25 rti act, monitoring reporting annual-return section-25, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 25 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Monitoring and Reporting. Section 25 obliges every public authority to file an annual return to the Information Commission. The Commission aggregates these into an annual report laid before Parliament or th...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 25 — Monitoring and Reporting ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-25.png?direct&1200 \|Section 25 of the RTI Act — Monitoring and Reporting}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 25 obliges every public authority to file an annual return to the Information Commission. The Commission aggregates these into an annual report laid before Parliament or the State Legislature. These reports are the backbone of RTI accountability data.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 25(3) — each Ministry/Department collects data: RTIs received, disposed, refused, rejections by sub-clause, appeals, costs, training conducted.
	+	* 25(4) — Commission aggregates into an annual report.
	+	* 25(5) — Report laid before Parliament/State Legislature within 12 months.
	+	* Forms the statistical picture of the RTI regime year after year.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) — emphasised the role of Section 25 reports in transparency governance.
	+	* CIC Annual Reports — publicly accessible on cic.gov.in.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	File an RTI for your target department's Section 25 report. Reveals how many RTIs they received, how many were refused, and on what grounds. Useful for Section 18 pattern complaints.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 25.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-25 monitoring reporting annual-return section-25 2026}}

Section 26 — Appropriate Government to Prepare Programmes

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 26 rti act, programmes training user-guide section-26, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 26 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Appropriate Government to Prepare Programmes. Section 26 requires the Appropriate Government to (a) develop programmes to promote understanding of the Act among disadvantaged communities, (b) train officers, (c) compile and pu...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 26 — Appropriate Government to Prepare Programmes ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-26.png?direct&1200 \|Section 26 of the RTI Act — Appropriate Government to Prepare Programmes}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 26 requires the Appropriate Government to (a) develop programmes to promote understanding of the Act among disadvantaged communities, (b) train officers, (c) compile and publish a user's guide, and (d) translate the Act into official languages.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Outreach programmes targeting rural and marginalised sections.
	+	* Officer training curricula.
	+	* User guides in English, Hindi, and 22 scheduled languages.
	+	* Periodic updating of the guide as the Act evolves.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* DoPT //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005// (2013, updated periodically) — the user guide contemplated by Section 26.
	+	* CIC has repeatedly directed publication of translated versions.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	If you need the Act in a regional language, the Section 26 translation should be available on rti.gov.in or the State RTI portal.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 26.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-26 programmes training user-guide section-26 2026}}

Section 27 — Power to Make Rules by Appropriate Government

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 27 rti act, rule-making section-27 amendment-2019 central-state, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 27 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Power to Make Rules by Appropriate Government. Section 27 is the rule-making power of the Central and State Governments — they make rules on fee, application form, appeal procedure, and Information Commissioners' conditions of ...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 27 — Power to Make Rules by Appropriate Government ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-27.png?direct&1200 \|Section 27 of the RTI Act — Power to Make Rules by Appropriate Government}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 27 is the rule-making power of the Central and State Governments — they make rules on fee, application form, appeal procedure, and Information Commissioners' conditions of service. The 2019 amendment expanded 27 to include IC tenure and salary rule-making.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Original Section 27 — fees, forms, appeal procedure, other matters.
	+	* 2019 amendment expanded — now also covers term of office and conditions of service of CIC/SIC Commissioners.
	+	* Rules made: Central RTI Fees Rules 2005, RTI Rules 2012 (inspection), RTI Rules 2019 (Commissioner tenure).
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	* 2005 — Original Section 27 framed.
	+	* 24 October 2019 — RTI (Amendment) Act expanded Section 27 to include IC tenure.
	+	* 2019 — RTI Rules, 2019 notified under expanded Section 27.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI//, (2020) — held the 2019 amendment constitutional but imposed procedural safeguards.
	+	* //Namit Sharma//, (2013) 1 SCC 745 — earlier interpretation of Section 27's scope.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	When challenging a State fee or procedure that deviates from Central norms, check the State's Section 27 rules. If the State rule is inconsistent with a Central rule on a matter within Central competence, Article 254 inconsistency may apply.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 27.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-27 rule-making section-27 amendment-2019 central-state 2026}}

Section 28 — Power to Make Rules by Competent Authority

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 28 rti act, rule-making section-28 competent-authority judicial, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 28 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Power to Make Rules by Competent Authority. Section 28 empowers the 'competent authority' (Speaker of Lok Sabha, Chairman of Rajya Sabha, CJI, Chief Justices of High Courts, Governors for certain bodies) to frame rules for R...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 28 — Power to Make Rules by Competent Authority ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-28.png?direct&1200 \|Section 28 of the RTI Act — Power to Make Rules by Competent Authority}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 28 empowers the 'competent authority' (Speaker of Lok Sabha, Chairman of Rajya Sabha, CJI, Chief Justices of High Courts, Governors for certain bodies) to frame rules for RTI implementation within their own institution. Rules made under Section 28 cover Supreme Court administrative-side RTI, High Court RTI, and Legislature Secretariat RTI.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Competent authority defined in Section 2(e).
	+	* Rules cover fees, forms, appellate procedure.
	+	* Cannot override Sections 8/9 exemptions or Section 7(5) BPL waiver.
	+	* Must be laid before the appropriate House (Section 29).
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* //Registrar SC v. R.S. Misra//, Delhi HC (2017) — Supreme Court administrative-side records are subject to Section 28 rules made by the CJI.
	+	* High Court decisions — each HC has its own Section 28 rules.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	For RTIs to courts or legislatures, use the competent authority's own rules on fee and form. See the [[:explanations:competent-authority\|detailed competent-authority explainer]].
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations:competent-authority\|Competent authority — detailed explainer]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 28.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-28 rule-making section-28 competent-authority judicial 2026}}

Section 29 — Laying of Rules

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 29 rti act, laying-of-rules parliament-scrutiny section-29, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 29 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Laying of Rules. Every rule made under Sections 27 and 28 must be laid before the appropriate Parliament or State Legislature (or, for competent-authority rules, the appropriate House) for 30 days....)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 29 — Laying of Rules ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-29.png?direct&1200 \|Section 29 of the RTI Act — Laying of Rules}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Every rule made under Sections 27 and 28 must be laid before the appropriate Parliament or State Legislature (or, for competent-authority rules, the appropriate House) for 30 days. The House can modify or annul the rule. This is the legislative check on the executive rule-making power.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* 29(1) — Central Government rules under Section 27 laid before Parliament for 30 days.
	+	* 29(2) — State Government rules under Section 27 laid before State Legislature.
	+	* 29(3) — Competent-authority rules under Section 28 laid before appropriate House.
	+	* Modification or annulment vote by the House binds the rule.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* No substantive jurisprudence — procedural provision.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	If you want to challenge a rule made under Section 27/28, check whether it was properly laid under Section 29. Failure to lay can be a procedural ground for invalidity.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 29.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-29 laying-of-rules parliament-scrutiny section-29 2026}}

Section 30 — Power to Remove Difficulties

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 30 rti act, remove-difficulties transitional section-30, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 30 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Power to Remove Difficulties. Section 30 gave the Central Government a time-limited power to issue orders removing difficulties in giving effect to the Act during its early years. The power could be exercised u...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 30 — Power to Remove Difficulties ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-30.png?direct&1200 \|Section 30 of the RTI Act — Power to Remove Difficulties}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 30 gave the Central Government a time-limited power to issue orders removing difficulties in giving effect to the Act during its early years. The power could be exercised up to 2010 (five years from commencement). It is a transitional clause.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* Central Government could issue removal-of-difficulty orders for first 5 years.
	+	* Orders so made had the force of law but could not override substantive provisions.
	+	* Power has lapsed since 12 October 2010.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* No substantive jurisprudence — transitional clause.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Of historical interest. The power was used sparingly in 2005-2010 and has since lapsed.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 30.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-30 remove-difficulties transitional section-30 2026}}

Section 31 — Repeal

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 31 rti act, repeal section-31 foi-act-2002, rti india, rti act 2005)
	+	metatag-description=(Section 31 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Repeal. Section 31 repealed the Freedom of Information Act, 2002 — a predecessor statute that had been enacted but never brought into force. With the RTI Act's commencement, the 2002 Act w...)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 31 — Repeal ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-section-31.png?direct&1200 \|Section 31 of the RTI Act — Repeal}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line: Section 31 repealed the Freedom of Information Act, 2002 — a predecessor statute that had been enacted but never brought into force. With the RTI Act's commencement, the 2002 Act was extinguished.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Key points =====
	+
	+	* The Freedom of Information Act, 2002 (Act 5 of 2003) hereby repealed.
	+	* Savings clause: actions taken under the 2002 Act remain valid to the extent they would have been valid under the 2005 Act.
	+
	+	===== Legislative history =====
	+
	+	No amendments.
	+
	+	===== Rulings and references =====
	+
	+	* No substantive jurisprudence.
	+
	+	===== Practical note =====
	+
	+	Of historical interest. The FOI Act 2002 was drafted but never operationalised — the 2005 Act replaced it entirely.
	+
	+	===== Call to action =====
	+
	+	For drafting RTIs or appeals engaging this section, use the [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] or the [[:templates:first-appeal\|First Appeal template]]. See [[:guide:applicant:application:how-fill-rti-application-form\|How to fill an RTI application]] for structural help.
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|Back to the full RTI Act]]
	+	* [[:act:section-6\|Section 6 — Request for information]]
	+	* [[:act:section-7\|Section 7 — Disposal]]
	+	* [[:act:section-8\|Section 8 — Exemptions]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:explanations\|All explanations]]
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Landmark RTI decisions]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 31.
	+	- RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019 (where applicable).
	+	- DPDP Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025 (where applicable).
	+	- Department of Personnel and Training, //Guide on the RTI Act, 2005//.
	+
	+	//Last reviewed on: 21 April 2026//
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act section-31 repeal section-31 foi-act-2002 2026}}

The RTI Act, 2005

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	====== The RTI Act, 2005 ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-start.png?direct&1200 \|act / start — RTI Wiki}}
	+
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(act start rti right to information india)
	+	metatag-description=(This namespace carries the full text of the Right to Information Act, 2005 as amended, along with the departmental circulars, the regional-language...)}}
	+
	+
	+	//This namespace carries the full text of the Right to Information Act, 2005 as amended, along with the departmental circulars, the regional-language translations, and a subject-wise reference index.//
	+
	+	===== Full text =====
	+
	+	* [[:act\|The Act, as amended]]. Section-wise text of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The text incorporates the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 and the amendment to Section 8(1)(j) effected by Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, which came into force on notification of the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 on 14 November 2025.
	+
	+	===== Notice on the 2025 amendment =====
	+
	+	The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 were notified in the Gazette of India on 14 November 2025. With that notification, Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 became operational and replaced the proviso to Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The larger public interest override in the earlier clause stands removed.
	+
	+	For a practitioner note on the change, see [[:blog:dpdp-rules-2025-amendment-to-rti-act\|DPDP Rules, 2025: The amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act]].
	+
	+	===== Supporting material =====
	+
	+	* [[:act:languages\|Translations]]. The Act in regional languages as notified.
	+
	+	===== Rules made under the Act =====
	+
	+	* [[:rules:start\|RTI Rules]]. Central Government, Supreme Court, High Court, and State-level rules framed under Section 27 and Section 28 of the Act.
	+
	+	===== Case law =====
	+
	+	* [[:important-decisions:start\|Case law library]]. Decisions of the Supreme Court, the High Courts, and the Information Commissions that interpret the provisions of the Act.
	+
	+	===== Section walkthrough =====
	+
	+	* [[:decoded:start\|Decoded]]. A plain-language walkthrough of each section of the Act, with an illustrative case.
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- The Right to Information Act, 2005 (No. 22 of 2005).
	+	- The Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (No. 24 of 2019).
	+	- The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (No. 22 of 2023), Section 44(3).
	+	- The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, notified on 14 November 2025.
	+
	+	===== Last reviewed on =====
	+
	+	19 April 2026
	+
	+
	+	===== Related =====
	+
	+	* [[:act:languages\|Download RTI Act]].
	+	* [[:explanations:prescribed\|Prescribed]].
	+	* [[:explanations:competent-authority\|Competent Authority under RTI Act]].
	+	* [[:explanations:severability\|Severability]].
	+	* [[:explanations:information\|What is Information under RTI Act]].
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act amendment dpdp-2025}}

The Right to Information Act, 2005 — summary, sections, and notes

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/04/24 12:14	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	====== The Right to Information Act, 2005 — summary, sections, and notes ======
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:act-summary.png?direct&1200 \|act / summary — RTI Wiki}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round tip 95%>
	+	If your RTI was rejected. See [[:why-rti-gets-rejected\|Why RTI Applications Get Rejected in India — and How to Avoid It]]. Five reasons, the exact fix for each, and two case studies.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(rti act 2005 summary, rti act sections, rti act notes, section 8, section 19, section 20, section 2(h), section 4, public information officer, first appellate authority, information commission, rti act amendments, dpdp rules 2025 rti)
	+	metatag-description=(A single-page reference summary of the Right to Information Act, 2005 as amended. Chapter-wise structure, section-by-section notes, the procedural flow from application to appeal, exemptions, Commissions, penalties, and amendment history. With citations and cross-references.)}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round tip 95%>
	+	New to RTI? Start with the three most-used guides on this site:
	+	* [[:file-rti-online-india\|How to File RTI Online in India — 2026 Step-by-Step Guide]].
	+	* [[:why-rti-gets-rejected\|Why RTI Applications Get Rejected — and How to Avoid It]].
	+	* [[:faq\|FAQ — twenty-five most-asked RTI questions]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+	{{ :rti-act-flow.png?1000x657 \|How the Right to Information Act, 2005 works — application to appeal}}
	+
	+	//A single-page reference summary of the Right to Information Act, 2005 as amended by the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 and by Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 in force from 14 November 2025. Covers the purpose of the Act, the chapter and section structure, the procedural flow from application to appeal, the exemptions, the Commissions, and the penalties. Each substantive point carries an inline cross-reference to the full section text or to the concept explainer on this site.//
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	In one line. The Right to Information Act, 2005 gives every citizen of India a statutory right to seek information from a public authority. The application goes to the Public Information Officer, who must reply within thirty days. The reader has a right to a first appeal within thirty days, and a right to a second appeal to the Central Information Commission (for Central Government matters) or the State Information Commission (for State matters) within ninety days. A Public Information Officer who refuses without reasonable cause is liable to a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees per day up to twenty-five thousand rupees. For the full text section by section, see [[:act\|the RTI Act, 2005 — current text]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Why the Act was enacted =====
	+
	+	The Right to Information Act, 2005 (No. 22 of 2005) codifies a right that the Supreme Court had already recognised under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. In //State of U.P. v. Raj Narain//, (1975) 4 SCC 428, the Court held that the right to know about the affairs of the Government is implicit in the freedom of speech and expression. In //S.P. Gupta v. Union of India//, 1981 Supp SCC 87, and in //People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India//, (2003) 4 SCC 399, the Court extended the principle. The Act gave legislative form to the constitutional direction.
	+
	+	The long title records the purpose. The Act is to "provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority". It came into force on 12 October 2005.
	+
	+	===== Structure of the Act =====
	+
	+	The Act has 31 sections across six chapters, together with a First Schedule containing the oath of office. The chapter scheme is set out below.
	+
	+	^ Chapter ^ Sections ^ Subject ^
	+	\| I \| 1, 2 \| Preliminary — short title and definitions \|
	+	\| II \| 3 to 11 \| Right to information and obligations of public authorities \|
	+	\| III \| 12 to 14 \| Central Information Commission \|
	+	\| IV \| 15 to 17 \| State Information Commission \|
	+	\| V \| 18 to 20 \| Powers and functions, appeal and penalty \|
	+	\| VI \| 21 to 31 \| Miscellaneous \|
	+
	+	For the full text of each chapter, see [[:act\|the current text of the Act]] with amendment overlays.
	+
	+	===== Key terms =====
	+
	+	* "Information" under [[:act#section-2preliminary-definitions\|Section 2(f)]] means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, log books, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, and data held in any electronic form. The Supreme Court in //Central Board of Secondary Education v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497, held that an evaluated examination answer sheet is information within the meaning of this clause. See also [[:explanations:information\|Information — concept note]].
	+	* "Public authority" under [[:act#section-2preliminary-definitions\|Section 2(h)]] means any body formed by the Constitution, a law of Parliament or a State Legislature, or a notification of the appropriate Government; or owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the appropriate Government. The test was set out by the Supreme Court in //Thalappalam Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala//, (2013) 16 SCC 82. See also [[:explanations:public-authority\|Public authority — concept note]].
	+	* "Right to information" under [[:act#section-2preliminary-definitions\|Section 2(j)]] includes the right to inspect works, documents, records; take notes, extracts, or certified copies; and take certified samples of material.
	+	* "Public Information Officer" under [[:act#section-5designation-of-public-information-officers\|Section 5]] is the officer designated by the public authority to receive, decide, and reply to Right to Information applications.
	+	* "Third party" under [[:act#section-2preliminary-definitions\|Section 2(n)]] is any person, other than the applicant and the public authority, whose interest is affected by the disclosure. See also [[:explanations:third-party\|Third party — concept note]].
	+
	+	===== How an RTI matter flows =====
	+
	+	The procedure from application to appeal runs in four stages.
	+
	+	==== Stage 1. The application (Section 6) ====
	+
	+	A citizen of India sends a written request, with a fee of ten rupees (at the Central Government level), to the Public Information Officer of the concerned public authority. The applicant need not give a reason for the request. [[:act#section-6request-for-obtaining-information\|Section 6(2)]] expressly bars the Public Information Officer from asking why the information is needed. Where the application is wrongly addressed, [[:act#section-6request-for-obtaining-information\|Section 6(3)]] requires the Public Information Officer to transfer it to the right public authority within five days. See [[:guide:applicant\|Guide for applicants]].
	+
	+	==== Stage 2. The reply (Section 7) ====
	+
	+	The Public Information Officer must decide the application within thirty days of receipt under [[:act#section-7disposal-of-request\|Section 7(1)]]. Where the information concerns life or liberty, the period is forty-eight hours. Where a [[:act#section-11third-party-information\|Section 11]] third-party procedure is engaged, the period is forty days. A non-reply within the statutory period is a "deemed refusal" and allows the applicant to file a first appeal. See [[:blog:pio-reply-section-8-1-j-after-dpdp-2025\|PIO reply after the DPDP Rules, 2025]] for the current practice.
	+
	+	==== Stage 3. First appeal (Section 19(1)) ====
	+
	+	An applicant aggrieved by the Public Information Officer's decision or by the deemed refusal may file a first appeal within thirty days to the First Appellate Authority, who is the officer senior in rank to the Public Information Officer within the same public authority. The First Appellate Authority must decide within thirty days, extendable to forty-five with reasons recorded. [[:act#section-19appeal\|Section 19(5)]] requires a speaking order. See [[:guide:guidelines-for-first-appellate-authority\|Guide for First Appellate Authorities]] and [[:templates:faa-speaking-order\|Template: FAA speaking order]].
	+
	+	==== Stage 4. Second appeal (Section 19(3)) ====
	+
	+	An applicant aggrieved by the First Appellate Authority's order may file a second appeal within ninety days to the Central Information Commission (for Central Government matters) or to the relevant State Information Commission (for State matters) under [[:act#section-19appeal\|Section 19(3)]]. The Commission's order is binding. See [[:templates:second-appeal\|Template: second appeal]].
	+
	+	==== Section 20 penalty ====
	+
	+	Where the Commission finds that the Public Information Officer has without reasonable cause refused the application, not furnished the information within the statutory period, malafidely denied, knowingly given incorrect or misleading information, destroyed the information, or obstructed the furnishing, a mandatory penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees per day, up to twenty-five thousand rupees, is imposed on the Public Information Officer under [[:act#section-20-penalties\|Section 20(1)]]. [[:act#section-20-penalties\|Section 20(2)]] provides for disciplinary action where the refusal has been persistent.
	+
	+	===== The exemptions — Section 8, Section 9, Section 24 =====
	+
	+	[[:act#section-8exemption-from-disclosure-of-information\|Section 8(1)]] lists ten clauses on which disclosure may be refused.
	+
	+	^ Clause ^ Ground ^ Leading authority ^
	+	\| (a) \| Sovereignty, integrity, security, strategic, scientific, economic interests of India \| Context-specific; see [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for rejection]] \|
	+	\| (b) \| Expressly forbidden by a court or tribunal \| Narrow \|
	+	\| (c) \| Breach of privilege of Parliament or a State Legislature \| Narrow \|
	+	\| (d) \| Commercial confidence, trade secrets, intellectual property \| Delhi HC on %%PhD%% theses (December 2024) \|
	+	\| (e) \| Held in a fiduciary relationship \| //RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry//, (2016) 3 SCC 525; //ICAI v. Shaunak H. Satya//, (2011) 8 SCC 781 \|
	+	\| (f) \| Received in confidence from a foreign Government \| Narrow \|
	+	\| (g) \| Endanger life or physical safety of a person \| //Bihar PSC v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi//, (2012) 13 SCC 61 \|
	+	\| (h) \| Impede investigation, apprehension, or prosecution \| //Bhagat Singh v. CIC//, Delhi HC, 3 December 2007 \|
	+	\| (i) \| Cabinet papers, deliberations of the Council of Ministers, Secretaries, and other officers \| Narrow; deliberations released after decision is taken \|
	+	\| (j) \| Personal information (as amended on 14 November 2025) \| //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212; see below \|
	+
	+	[[:act#section-8exemption-from-disclosure-of-information\|Section 8(2)]] provides a public interest override: even where a clause of Section 8(1) applies, the public authority may allow access where the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests. After the 14 November 2025 amendment to clause (j), the Section 8(2) override is the sole route for a public interest release on personal-information matters.
	+
	+	[[:act#section-9grounds-for-rejection-to-access-in-certain-cases\|Section 9]] allows refusal where the disclosure would involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the State.
	+
	+	[[:act#section-24act-not-to-apply-to-certain-organisations\|Section 24]] exempts the intelligence and security organisations listed in the Second Schedule, save for information on allegations of corruption and human rights violations.
	+
	+	[[:act#section-10severability\|Section 10]] requires the Public Information Officer to sever and release the non-exempt portion of a record where part is exempt and part is not. See [[:explanations:severability\|Severability — concept note]].
	+
	+	[[:act#section-11third-party-information\|Section 11]] sets out the third-party procedure: notice to the third party within five days, representation within ten days, decision within forty days. See [[:explanations:third-party\|Third party — concept note]] and [[:templates:pio-third-party-notice\|Template: third-party notice]].
	+
	+	===== Section 4 — the positive obligations =====
	+
	+	[[:act#section-4obligations-of-public-authorities\|Section 4(1)(b)]] requires every public authority to publish seventeen categories of information on its own, without waiting for an application. The categories include:
	+
	+	- Particulars of the organisation, its functions and duties;
	+	- Powers and duties of officers and employees;
	+	- Procedure followed in the decision-making process;
	+	- Norms set by the public authority for discharge of functions;
	+	- Rules, regulations, instructions, manuals, and records;
	+	- Statement of the categories of documents held;
	+	- Particulars of arrangements for consultation with the public;
	+	- Statement of boards, councils, committees;
	+	- Directory of officers and employees;
	+	- Monthly remuneration of each officer and employee;
	+	- Budget allocation of each agency;
	+	- Manner of execution of subsidy programmes;
	+	- Particulars of recipients of concessions, permits, authorisations;
	+	- Details of information available in electronic form;
	+	- Particulars of facilities available for obtaining information;
	+	- Names, designations, and other particulars of Public Information Officers;
	+	- Such other information as may be prescribed.
	+
	+	The Supreme Court in //Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India//, (2019) 10 SCC 1, directed timely appointments to the Information Commissions to ensure the Section 4 obligations are enforceable. See also [[:explanations:suo-moto-disclosure-under-rti\|Suo motu disclosure — concept note]].
	+
	+	===== The Information Commissions =====
	+
	+	==== Central Information Commission ====
	+
	+	[[:act#section-12constitution-of-central-information-commission\|Section 12]] constitutes the Central Information Commission with a Chief Information Commissioner and up to ten Information Commissioners. Appointments are made by the President on the recommendation of a Committee comprising the Prime Minister (Chairperson), the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
	+
	+	The term of office and the salaries are prescribed by the Central Government under the [[:rules:cic\|Right to Information (Term of Office, Salaries, Allowances and Other Terms and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2019]] — the fixed five-year term under the original [[:act#section-13term-of-office-and-conditions-of-service\|Section 13]] was amended by the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019. See [[:blog:rti-act-decade-of-change-2015-2025\|A decade of change, 2015-2025]] for the detail.
	+
	+	==== State Information Commission ====
	+
	+	[[:act#section-15constitution-of-state-information-commission\|Section 15]] provides for a State Information Commission on similar lines, constituted by the Governor on the recommendation of a Committee comprising the Chief Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and a State Cabinet Minister nominated by the Chief Minister. [[:act#section-16term-of-office-and-conditions-of-service\|Section 16]] on term and salaries was amended in 2019 in the same pattern as Section 13.
	+
	+	==== Powers of the Commission ====
	+
	+	[[:act#section-18powers-and-functions-of-information-commissions\|Section 18]] gives the Commission the power to inquire into a complaint on its own initiative or on a complaint by a person. [[:act#section-19appeal\|Section 19]] provides for the appellate jurisdiction. The Commission's order is binding on the public authority.
	+
	+	The Supreme Court in //Chief Information Commissioner v. State of Manipur//, (2011) 15 SCC 1, clarified the difference between the Section 18 complaint jurisdiction and the Section 19 appellate jurisdiction.
	+
	+	===== Amendment history =====
	+
	+	The Act has been amended twice.
	+
	+	* The Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (No. 24 of 2019), in force 24 October 2019. Amended [[:act#section-13term-of-office-and-conditions-of-service\|Section 13]], [[:act#section-16term-of-office-and-conditions-of-service\|Section 16]], and [[:act#section-27power-to-make-rules-by-appropriate-government\|Section 27]]. The fixed term of five years or until the age of sixty-five years for Information Commissioners was replaced by a term prescribed by the Central Government. The linkage of salaries to those of the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioner was removed. The Central Government was empowered to prescribe the terms under Section 27.
	+	* The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (No. 22 of 2023), in force 14 November 2025 on notification of the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025. [[:act#section-8exemption-from-disclosure-of-information\|Section 8(1)(j)]] of the Right to Information Act was substituted by Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act. The public interest override within clause (j) was removed. The override now operates through Section 8(2). See [[:blog:dpdp-rules-2025-amendment-to-rti-act\|DPDP Rules, 2025: The amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act]] and [[:blog:pio-reply-section-8-1-j-after-dpdp-2025\|PIO reply after the DPDP Rules, 2025]].
	+
	+	===== The constitutional anchor =====
	+
	+	The Act's interpretation continues to rest on Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The Supreme Court in //K. S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India//, (2017) 10 SCC 1, established the right to privacy as a fundamental right. The four-limb proportionality test in //Puttaswamy// now governs every decision by the Public Information Officer on personal information matters after the 14 November 2025 amendment. //Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India//, (2024) 5 SCC 1, reaffirmed the Article 19(1)(a) line from //Raj Narain// and //PUCL//.
	+
	+	===== What the Act does not cover =====
	+
	+	* Non-citizens. The right under [[:act#section-3citizen\|Section 3]] is conferred on citizens of India only.
	+	* Non-public authorities. Private companies, trusts, and NGOs that do not meet the [[:act#section-2preliminary-definitions\|Section 2(h)]] test are outside the Act.
	+	* Information not in the form of a record. The Act does not oblige a public authority to create a new record or to answer a question of opinion. See //CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497.
	+	* Information exempted by the Second Schedule. [[:act#section-24act-not-to-apply-to-certain-organisations\|Section 24]] exempts the intelligence and security organisations listed in the Second Schedule, subject to the corruption and human-rights-violation carve-out.
	+
	+	===== Cross-references on this site =====
	+
	+	* Full text of the Act. [[:act\|The Right to Information Act, 2005 — current text]] with amendment overlays at every section.
	+	* Step-by-step guide for applicants. [[:guide:applicant\|Guide for applicants]].
	+	* Drafting templates. [[:templates:start\|Templates]] — first application, first appeal, second appeal, PIO reply (three formats), third-party notice, FAA speaking order.
	+	* Sample applications. [[:guide:applicant:application:sample:start\|Sample RTI applications]] — 33 drafts for common subjects.
	+	* Plain-language walkthrough by section. [[:decoded:start\|Decoded]].
	+	* Concept-wise notes. [[:explanations\|Explanations]].
	+	* Case law library. [[:important-decisions:start\|Case law library]].
	+	* Recent changes to the Act. [[:blog:rti-act-decade-of-change-2015-2025\|A decade of change, 2015 to 2025]] and [[:blog:rti-subjects-filed-satisfied-appealed\|Subjects filed, satisfied, appealed]].
	+	* Live tracker of CIC composition and pendency. [[:updates:start\|Live tracker]].
	+
	+
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	New to RTI? File your first application in ten minutes. See [[:file-rti-online-india\|How to File RTI Online in India — 2026 Step-by-Step Guide]] with a ready-to-use English and Hindi template, the Rs 10 online fee flow, and the appeal path.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	- The Right to Information Act, 2005 (No. 22 of 2005).
	+	- The Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 (No. 24 of 2019).
	+	- The Right to Information (Term of Office, Salaries, Allowances and Other Terms and Conditions of Service of Chief Information Commissioner, Information Commissioners and the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners in State Information Commission) Rules, 2019.
	+	- The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (No. 22 of 2023), Section 44(3).
	+	- The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, notified on 14 November 2025.
	+	- State of U.P. v. Raj Narain, (1975) 4 SCC 428.
	+	- S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981 Supp SCC 87.
	+	- People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, (2003) 4 SCC 399.
	+	- Central Board of Secondary Education v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497.
	+	- Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Shaunak H. Satya, (2011) 8 SCC 781.
	+	- Chief Information Commissioner v. State of Manipur, (2011) 15 SCC 1.
	+	- Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi, (2012) 13 SCC 61.
	+	- Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner, (2013) 1 SCC 212.
	+	- Thalappalam Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala, (2013) 16 SCC 82.
	+	- Reserve Bank of India v. Jayantilal Mistry, (2016) 3 SCC 525.
	+	- K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
	+	- Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India, (2019) 10 SCC 1.
	+	- Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 481.
	+	- Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India, (2024) 5 SCC 1.
	+	- Bhagat Singh v. Chief Information Commissioner, Delhi High Court, 3 December 2007.
	+	- Second Administrative Reforms Commission, //Right to Information — Master Key to Good Governance//, First Report, June 2006.
	+
	+	===== Last reviewed on =====
	+
	+	19 April 2026
	+
	+	{{tag>rti act-2005 summary sections notes procedure exemptions commission amendment-2019 dpdp-2025 reference}}

2026/04/24 12:14	current
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}}