Third party in RTI Act, 2005 — Section 11 rules, example, notice procedure, 5-step process, disclosure table, and FAQs. What PIOs, FAAs and applicants must know.

</WRAP>

Under Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005, a “third party” is any person — other than the RTI applicant — whose confidential information is held by a public authority. Before disclosure, the Public Information Officer must issue a written notice to that third party within five days. Disclosure requires either the third party's consent or a finding that public interest outweighs possible harm.

Part of the PIO / FAA Knowledge Base. ===== Quick Answer: Third Party in RTI ===== * Definition — A third party is any person (individual, company or body) whose confidential information is held by a public authority, who is not the RTI applicant. * Statutory basis — Section 11, Right to Information Act, 2005. * When it applies — The PIO intends to disclose information supplied by, or relating to, a third party, and that party has treated the information as confidential. * Is consent mandatory? — No. Consent is preferred but the PIO can still disclose if the public interest outweighs the third party's interest. * Key decision rule — Written notice within 5 days. Third party gets 10 days to object. PIO decides the matter within 40 days in total, recording reasons. ===== Featured Snippet: What is third party in RTI? ===== Under Section 11 of the RTI Act, a “third party” is any person other than the RTI applicant whose confidential information is held by a public authority. Before disclosure, the PIO must give that person a written notice within 5 days. Disclosure is then decided by weighing public interest against the harm of disclosure. ===== When Can Third-Party Information Be Disclosed? ===== ^ Situation ^ Disclosure Allowed? ^ Reason ^ | Third party consents in writing | Yes | Consent removes the §11 bar. | | Third party objects and no clear public interest | No | Confidentiality preserved under §11 read with §8(1)(d)/(j). | | Third party objects but public interest outweighs the harm | Yes | §11(1) proviso — larger public interest override. | | Trade secret or commercial confidence, no overriding public interest | No | Section 8(1)(d) — commercial confidence. | | Personal information of a private individual, no public interest | No | Section 8(1)(j) — personal information, post-DPDP 2025. | | Information about a public servant's official conduct | Yes | Deshpande and CIC rulings — official acts are not personal. | | PIO skips §11 notice altogether | Invalid order | Procedural illegality. FAA will set aside the reply. | ===== Process under Section 11 of RTI Act ===== - RTI application received. The PIO logs the application under §6 and checks the subject matter. - PIO identifies third-party information. If records were supplied by, or relate to, a person other than the applicant and are treated as confidential, §11 is triggered. - Notice issued to third party within 5 days. A written notice is sent to the third party describing the request and inviting objections. - Third party submits objections within 10 days. Representation can be written, oral, or both. The PIO records it on file. - PIO decides within the 40-day total window. The PIO weighs the third party's objection against the public interest and issues a reasoned order, with appeal rights spelt out. The 40-day clock runs from the date the application was received, not from the date the notice was issued. A PIO who consumes the full 40 days without a written decision commits a deemed refusal under Section 7(2). ===== Statutory text — Section 11 ===== >Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information: Provided that 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. ===== Practical illustrations ===== Example 1 — Tender bid documents. Citizen asks for all bids submitted in a public tender. The bidders are third parties. PIO serves §11 notice to each bidder. Losing bidders usually object citing commercial confidence under §8(1)(d). PIO still discloses the price bids after contract award because the public interest in transparent procurement outweighs the competitive harm, which has ended with the award. Example 2 — Disciplinary inquiry against a public servant. Citizen asks for the inquiry report. The charged officer is a third party. §11 notice is served. Even if the officer objects, the findings about discharge of official duty are disclosable — this is not “personal” under Section 8(1)(j). Example 3 — Bank loan file. RTI filed on a borrower's loan file at a Public Sector Bank. The borrower is a third party. §11 notice must go to the borrower. In the absence of overriding public interest, personal financial details stay protected. This is the ratio of the Supreme Court in Jayantilal Mistry (2015) as qualified by HDFC v. CIC (2020). ===== Case law — leading decisions ===== * C. Muniyappan v. State of Tamil Nadu (Madras HC, 2013) — §11 notice is mandatory; its omission is procedural illegality. PIO order set aside at First Appeal. * Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO (Delhi HC, 2010) — the “larger public interest” proviso is a real standard, not a formality. PIO must record specific reasoning. * Reserve Bank of India v. Jayantilal Mistry (Supreme Court, 2015) — fiduciary capacity does not defeat RTI where a statutory regulator holds information for public benefit. * HDFC Bank v. CIC (Supreme Court, 2020) — Jayantilal Mistry does not make every borrower-bank record public; §11 notice and balancing remain essential. * Kolkata Municipal Corporation v. WBIC (Calcutta HC, 2016) — municipal files involving private third parties require strict §11 compliance. Browse the full case-law database for 240+ rulings. ===== Why Section 11 matters — PIO takeaway ===== Skipping §11 notice is the single most common procedural defect at the First-Appeal stage. A reasoned §11 process survives writ review; a shortcut invites remand. Three things to do every time: - Issue the §11 notice in writing within 5 days. Email with delivery confirmation is sufficient. - Track the 10-day objection window; do not decide before it expires unless the third party waives time. - In the final order, summarise the third party's representation and the PIO's balancing of public interest versus harm. A bare citation of §11 is not a reasoned order — see the FAA Speaking-Order Guide for the standard. ===== Common mistakes ===== * Confusing §11 with a refusal ground. §11 is a procedure, not an exemption. The exemption itself usually comes from Section 8 or Section 9. * Using a pro-forma notice. Third party must know which information will be disclosed and why; a vague notice is as bad as no notice. * Deciding before 10 days. The objection window is a statutory right; curtailing it is set aside on appeal. * No reasoning on public interest. “Public interest outweighs harm” without reasons fails the Arvind Kejriwal standard. * Treating a public servant's conduct as “third-party personal information”. Official acts in official capacity are not personal. See Section 8(1)(j) framework. ===== FAQs — People Also Ask ===== Q1. Can third-party information be denied? Yes, if the third party objects and the PIO finds no larger public interest in disclosure. The denial must be a reasoned order citing §11 read with the applicable §8 ground. Q2. What is Section 11 in RTI? Section 11 is the procedure a PIO must follow before disclosing confidential information about a third party. The core requirements are a 5-day written notice and a 40-day total decision window. Q3. Is third-party consent mandatory? No. Consent is helpful but not mandatory. The PIO can still disclose without consent if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the possible harm to the third party. Q4. What is “larger public interest” under Section 11? It is the proviso test the PIO must apply. Factors include accountability of public authorities, prevention of corruption, and the subject matter's bearing on public money. The test must be applied case-by-case, recorded in writing. Q5. Can the PIO override a third-party objection? Yes, on reasoned public interest grounds. An override that is not reasoned will be set aside on First Appeal. Trade or commercial secrets protected by law cannot be overridden even on public interest grounds. ===== What Should You Do Next? ===== * Citizen: File an RTI online in India — 12-step guide. * If denied: File a First Appeal under Section 19(1) within 30 days. * Understanding exemptions: All 10 grounds of RTI rejection, explained. * PIO / FAA reference: How PIOs should evaluate and reply — case law grid and reply templates. * Case law: Landmark RTI rulings database — 240+ judgments. ===== Important Legal References ===== * Section 11, RTI Act, 2005 — third-party procedure (notice, objection, decision). * Section 8(1)(d) — commercial confidence and trade secrets. * Section 8(1)(j), as amended by DPDP Act, 2023 (w.e.f. 14 November 2025) — personal information. * Section 19(4) — third party's right to file First Appeal if disclosure is ordered. * CIC decisions** — consistent line that §11 is mandatory and omission is set aside on appeal.

• §11 of the Act — statutory text
• §8(1)(j) framework, post-DPDP 2025
• §8(1)(e) — fiduciary relationship
• PIO RTI Reply Guide
• FAA appellate-review checklist
• FAA speaking-order guide
• Why RTI gets rejected and 6 fixes
• RTI Glossary — 40 essential terms

• Right to Information Act, 2005 — §11, §8, §19(4).
• Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — §44(3), notified effective 14 November 2025.
• Supreme Court and High Court judgments cited above.
• CIC and State Information Commission decisions — as indexed in our case-law database.

Last reviewed: 24 April 2026.