RTI for Bridge Construction Delay

Ramesh lives in a village on one side of a river. The nearest town, school and hospital are on the other side. For three years he has watched a half-built bridge sit idle. The contractor shows up, works for a week, and disappears again. Nobody in the village knows who is building it, how much it costs, or when it will finish. Every time Ramesh asks the local PWD junior engineer, he is told “work is in progress.”

Ramesh's problem is not unique. Across India, bridges stay half-finished for years. The money is spent, the pillars are up, and then silence. The citizen pays the price in extra travel, lost wages and delayed medical care. The good news is that a bridge is a public work built with public money, and every record about it is reachable through one tool: the Right to Information Act.

Every bridge has an executing agency — the government body that owns the project and hires the contractor. For a bridge on a national highway that agency is usually the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), a central government body set up under the NHAI Act 1988; national highways themselves are governed by the National Highways Act 1956. For a state road or village link bridge the agency is the State Public Works Department (PWD) or the State Bridge Corporation. The same project may also touch the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) at the central level.

This matters because your RTI must reach the public information officer (PIO) of the correct authority. A bridge built by the State PWD will not show up in an RTI filed to NHAI, and the reverse is equally true. When in doubt, file to both, but always include the headquarters PIO, not only the site office — the site engineer often has no PIO designation.

The Right to Information Act 2005 gives every citizen the right to ask any public authority for information. Your application is filed under Section 6(1). The authority must reply within 30 days under Section 7(1) — and where life or liberty is at stake, within 48 hours. A delayed or unsafe bridge is a strong candidate for the life-and-liberty clause, because a collapse can kill.

The fee for a central public authority (NHAI, MoRTH) is Rs. 10, payable by Indian Postal Order, demand draft, banker's cheque, cash or online payment, under Rule 3 of the Central RTI Rules 2012. The DoPT FAQ (2012) confirms the same Rs. 10 figure. State fees vary — some states charge Rs. 20, some have different payment modes, and several exempt certain categories. BPL applicants pay nothing on producing a valid Below Poverty Line certificate, under Section 7(5) of the Act read with Rule 5 of the Central RTI Rules. Always check your state's RTI rules for the exact fee before you file. See why the RTI fee is officially ten rupees and how BPL applicants pay zero fee.

Bridges in India are inspected against standards published by the Indian Roads Congress (IRC). These are not optional, and quoting them in your RTI forces the agency to either produce the record or admit it does not exist:

1. IRC SP:18 — Manual for Highway Bridge Maintenance Inspection. It requires every bridge to be inspected once a year by a competent qualified engineer. Bridges in hilly terrain must be inspected twice a year — before and after the monsoon. Major and special bridges (prestressed-concrete continuous spans, suspension bridges, cable-stayed bridges) must additionally be inspected by a senior engineer. Special inspections are required after an earthquake, an abnormal overload, or an unprecedented flood.
2. IRC SP:35 — Guidelines for Inspection and Maintenance of Bridges (1990).
3. IRC SP:52 — Bridge Inspector's Reference Manual (1999).
4. IRC SP:37 — Guidelines for Evaluation of Load Carrying Capacity of Bridges (2010 revision).

When a bridge has stood half-built through a monsoon or a flood, you can ask whether the post-event special inspection required by SP:18 was carried out, and demand its report. This is the question agencies hate, because a missing report is proof of negligence.

A strong RTI is specific. Ask for one item per question so the PIO cannot dodge with a vague reply:

1. DPR and approvals: A copy of the Detailed Project Report, the approved drawings, and the date of administrative and technical sanction.
2. Contractor and contract value: The name of the contractor, the contract agreement number, the awarded value, and the scheduled completion date as per the contract.
3. Current physical and financial status: The latest physical progress percentage and the cumulative expenditure till the date of reply.
4. Time extension and reasons: Each extension of time granted, the reason recorded, and the authority that approved it.
5. Safety audit: The latest inspection report under IRC SP:18, the name and rank of the inspecting engineer, and any special inspection after the last monsoon or flood.
6. Penalties on the contractor: Liquidated damages levied or withheld, and any show-cause or termination notice issued for delay.
7. Projected completion: The current revised completion date and the reason it differs from the original date.

To: The Public Information Officer,
[Name of executing agency — State PWD / NHAI / State Bridge Corporation],
[Headquarters address]

Subject: Application under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act 2005
regarding the bridge at [location / village / km post].

Sir/Madam,

I, [your name], citizen of India, seek the following information
about the bridge at [location]:

1. A copy of the Detailed Project Report, approved drawings, and
   the date of administrative and technical sanction.
2. The name of the contractor, contract agreement number, awarded
   value, and scheduled completion date as per the contract.
3. The latest physical progress percentage and cumulative
   expenditure till the date of reply.
4. Each extension of time granted, with the recorded reason and
   the approving authority.
5. The latest inspection report under IRC SP:18, the name and rank
   of the inspecting engineer, and any special inspection carried
   out after the last monsoon or flood.
6. Liquidated damages levied or withheld, and any show-cause or
   termination notice issued for delay.
7. The current revised completion date and the reason it differs
   from the original date.

I am a BPL applicant and enclose a valid BPL certificate, and
therefore claim exemption from the application fee. [Delete this
line if not BPL.]

The information relates to the life and liberty of the residents
of [area], who cross the site daily. I therefore request a reply
within 48 hours under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, failing which
within 30 days.

Fee of Rs. 10 is paid by [IPO / DD / banker's cheque / cash /
online], receipt no. [____]. [Adjust fee and mode as per your
state's RTI rules if the authority is a state public authority.]

Date: [____]   Signature: [____]
Name: [____]   Address: [____]

If the authority is a central one (NHAI, MoRTH), Rs. 10 is correct. If it is a state PWD or State Bridge Corporation, check the state RTI rules for the exact fee and accepted payment mode before you file.

The law gives you a clear ladder. Climb it one rung at a time:

1. Step 1 — First appeal: If the PIO does not reply within 30 days, or gives an evasive or incomplete answer, file a first appeal under Section 19(1) with the officer senior to the PIO in the same authority. This is free in most states and must be filed within 30 days of the expiry of the reply period. The first appellate authority must decide within 30 days (extendable to 45).
2. Step 2 — Second appeal to the CIC or State IC: If the first appeal also fails, file a second appeal under Section 19(3) to the Central Information Commission (for NHAI/MoRTH) or the State Information Commission (for State PWD/Bridge Corporation), within 90 days. The Commission can order disclosure and penalise the PIO under Section 20.
3. Step 3 — High Court: If the Commission delays or the order is ignored, you can approach the High Court in a writ petition. The bridge-collapse PILs below show courts take bridge safety seriously.
4. Use RTI to gather proof first: Before any court step, use the RTI replies (or the silence) as your evidence. A documented missing safety audit is stronger than an angry complaint.

For the wider method of tracking any delayed public project through RTI, see how to use RTI to track any public project and how to get tender and contract records by RTI. Related guides: RTI for highway construction status, RTI for flyover status and RTI for toll collection by NHAI.

Two lines of authority back your application:

1. Bridge contract records are disclosable under RTI. In Ajay A Jangid v. National Highways Authority of India (CIC order CIC/YA/A/2016/001946/MP, signed 15 March 2017), the appellant asked NHAI for the terms and royalty records of the EPC contract for the L&T-constructed Narmada bridge at Bharuch. The CPIO furnished the relevant pages of the EPC contract agreement, and the Commission upheld that response — confirming that a bridge contract is a public record, not a trade secret, and that a citizen is entitled to see its pages.
2. Courts treat bridge safety as a public-duty matter. After the Mahad/Savitri river bridge collapse on the Mumbai-Goa highway on 2 August 2016, the Bombay High Court admitted a PIL by Pranay Sawant seeking action against the NHAI and state officials who had audited the bridge, and court-directed submission of structural audit reports of old bridges. After the CSMT Himalaya foot overbridge collapse in Mumbai on 14 March 2019 (six dead), a Bombay High Court bench of Chief Justice Naresh Patil and Justice N M Jamdar called it an “eye opener” and directed the BMC to frame a new audit, repair and upkeep policy for rail and foot overbridges, in a PIL by Shakeel Ahmed. The pattern is consistent: when audits are missing or ignored, courts step in — and your RTI asking for those same audit reports is doing the same work at the citizen level.

1. Filing only at the site office. The site engineer is rarely the designated PIO. File to the headquarters of the executing agency, and keep a copy.
2. Asking one bundled question. A single “tell me everything about the bridge” lets the PIO pick the easy items. Ask numbered, specific questions.
3. Forgetting the safety audit. The audit report under IRC SP:18 is the most revealing record — and the one an agency is most reluctant to share. Always ask for it, and especially after any collapse, flood or earthquake near the site.
4. Using the wrong fee. Rs. 10 is correct only for central authorities. State PWD fees differ. Check first, or your application can be rejected as defective.
5. Ignoring the life-and-liberty clause. If people already use a partially built bridge or the river below is in flood, say so and ask for a 48-hour reply under Section 7(1).
6. Stopping at the first silence. No reply is not a refusal — it is the trigger for your first appeal. Most citizens give up here; the law does not.

1. Q: The bridge is cable-stayed — can I ask for a special audit? Yes. IRC SP:18 treats cable-stayed, suspension and major prestressed-concrete continuous bridges as special bridges that must be inspected by a senior engineer in addition to the annual inspection. Ask for the senior-engineer inspection report and any third-party structural audit.
2. Q: How often must a bridge be inspected? At least once a year for every bridge; twice a year in hilly terrain (pre-monsoon and post-monsoon); and a special inspection after any earthquake, abnormal load, or unprecedented flood.
3. Q: The contractor says the delay is “unavoidable.” Can RTI check that? Yes. Ask for each extension of time granted, the recorded reason, and the approving authority. A chain of vague extensions without recorded reasons is itself a finding.
4. Q: Can I get the contract value and the contractor's name? Yes. The Jangid order confirmed that EPC contract pages for a bridge are disclosable. See getting tender and contract records by RTI.
5. Q: I have a BPL card. Do I pay the fee? No. On producing a valid BPL certificate you are exempt from both the application fee and the information fee, under Section 7(5) and Rule 5.

A half-built bridge is not just an eyesore — it is your money sitting idle and, when it stands through a flood, a risk to life. The records exist. Use the template above, file to the right executing agency, and climb the appeal ladder if the answer does not come.

1. Central RTI Rules 2012, Rule 3 (Rs. 10 fee) and Rule 5 (BPL exemption) — cic.gov.in official PDF.
2. DoPT FAQ on RTI (2012) — confirmation of Rs. 10 fee — dopt.gov.in.
3. Right to Information Act 2005, Sections 6(1), 7(1), 7(5), 19(1), 19(3), 20.
4. NHAI Act 1988; National Highways Act 1956 — nhai.gov.in.
5. IRC SP:18 — Manual for Highway Bridge Maintenance Inspection (inspection frequency).
6. IRC SP:35 (1990), SP:52 (1999), SP:37 (2010 revision) — Indian Roads Congress standards.
7. Ajay A Jangid v. NHAI, CIC/YA/A/2016/001946/MP, decided 15 March 2017 — indiankanoon.org/doc/185281023/.
8. Mahad bridge collapse PIL, Bombay High Court — Indian Express (2016).
9. CSMT foot overbridge collapse, Bombay High Court observations — New Indian Express (2019).

Last reviewed: 3 July 2026.