UP Public Records Act 2025: When Files Can Be Destroyed

You filed an RTI with a Uttar Pradesh department, waited the full thirty days, and the reply came back in one line: the record is not traceable. That answer is not always a lie and it is not always the end. Uttar Pradesh now has a statute that says exactly who may destroy a government file, after how long, and what happens to the officer who destroys one they should not have.

Section 1(2) says the Act shall come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. The Governor assented on 21 August 2025 and the English text was published the same day under Article 348(3) of the Constitution, as U.P. Act no. 11 of 2025, the Uttar Pradesh Lok Abhilekh Adhiniyam, 2025. That is assent and publication. It is not commencement.

So the honest position today is this. The Act exists and its text is fixed. Whether its duties bind a particular department right now depends on a commencement notification, and most of its machinery also depends on rules the State Government still has to make under section 17. Anyone who tells you a UP officer is already criminally liable under section 9 should be able to show you the gazette notification that brought the section into force. Ask for it.

That distinction is worth keeping because it is the single most common error in coverage of new State Acts, and quoting a section that is not yet in force weakens an otherwise good RTI application.

Section 2(d) is deliberately broad, and the last limb is the one that matters in a digital office.

Limb iv means a spreadsheet, a scanned PDF, a database export or a departmental email attachment sitting on a State server is a public record for this Act, not merely the paper file.

Section 2(e) then fixes who is holding it. A Records Creating Agency is any department or office of the State Government, and also the offices of any statutory body or corporation wholly or substantially controlled or financed by the State Government, and any commission or committee constituted by the State Government. That reach beyond core departments into State-financed corporations is the part most readers underestimate.

This is the sequence a UP department is supposed to follow. Each step is a separate statutory duty, and each one is a separate thing you can ask about.

1. Nominate a Records Officer. Section 5(1) requires every Records Creating Agency to nominate one of its officers as Records Officer. Section 5(2) lets it set up record rooms, each under the charge of a Records Officer. There is a named human being answerable for the file.
2. Review and weed only what is ephemeral. Section 6(1)(b) makes the Records Officer responsible for periodical review of all public records and weeding out records of ephemeral value. Ephemeral is the operative word. Routine correspondence, yes. A sanction order, no.
3. Appraise anything over twenty-five years old. Section 6(1)© requires appraisal of public records more than twenty-five years old in consultation with the Uttar Pradesh State Archives, with a view to retaining records of permanent value. A department cannot decide alone that a 1990s file is worthless.
4. Work to a written retention schedule. Section 6(1)(e) requires the Records Officer to compile a schedule of retention for public records, again in consultation with the State Archives. This schedule is itself a public record.
5. Destroy only in the prescribed manner. Section 8(1) says no public record shall be destroyed or otherwise disposed of except in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, saving anything another law requires.
6. Never touch the century-old material. Section 8(2) is an absolute bar with one narrow exit: no record more than one hundred years old on the date of commencement shall be destroyed except where in the opinion of the Director it is so defaced or is in such condition that it cannot be put to any archival use.

Section 6(2) closes the loop by making the Records Officer act under the direction of the Uttar Pradesh State Archives while discharging all of these duties. The Archives is not a museum in this scheme. It is the supervising authority.

People assume RTI is the only door. Under this Act there is a second one, and it has different rules.

Two practical readings follow. First, section 12(2) is wider than most people notice: any Records Creating Agency may grant to any person access to any public record in its custody, in the prescribed manner. That is a discretionary access route that does not require you to be a scholar. Second, section 11 lets the State Archives accept records of historical or national importance from private sources by gift or purchase, and make them available to a bona fide research scholar under section 11(2).

If your interest is genuinely historical rather than a live grievance, the Archives route may get you material an RTI would be refused, because the exemption architecture is different.

Section 7 is the provision to cite when a department admits a file is gone.

1. Section 7(1): on any unauthorised removal, destruction, defacement or alteration of a record in his charge, the Records Officer shall forthwith take appropriate action for the recovery or restoration of that record.
2. Section 7(2): the Records Officer shall submit a report in writing to the Director without any delay, covering both the incident and the action he has initiated, and shall act subject to the Director's directions.
3. Section 7(3): he may seek assistance from any Government officer or any other person, and such officer or person shall render all assistance.

That section 7(2) report is the lever. It is a document, created by a named officer, about the loss of your file. It is itself a public record. A reply saying a record is untraceable and a reply saying no section 7(2) report exists cannot both be true if the loss was unauthorised.

Section 9 reads: whoever contravenes any of the provisions of Section 4 or Section 8 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or with fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees or with both.

Note what is inside the penalty and what is not. Section 4 is the bar on taking public records out of Uttar Pradesh without prior State Government approval, with a proviso that no approval is needed if records are sent out for an official purpose. Section 8 is the destruction provision. The section 6 housekeeping duties, the failure to appraise, the missing retention schedule, are not offences under section 9. Being precise about this is the difference between a submission an officer must answer and one they can dismiss.

Section 16 also protects anything done in good faith in pursuance of the Act or its rules from suit or prosecution.

You can ask about the record management system itself, and those questions are hard to refuse because they seek documents rather than opinions.

1. The name and designation of the Records Officer nominated by your
   office under section 5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Public Records Act, 2025.
2. A copy of the schedule of retention compiled under section 6(1)(e)
   of that Act for the class of records to which file no. ......... belongs.
3. In respect of file no. ......... , whether any record has been weeded,
   destroyed or disposed of; and if so, a copy of the order or register
   entry authorising it and the date of that action.
4. If the said file is reported untraceable, a copy of the report
   submitted to the Director under section 7(2) of that Act, and a copy
   of the action taken for recovery or restoration under section 7(1).
5. A copy of the appraisal record prepared under section 6(1)(c) in
   consultation with the Uttar Pradesh State Archives for records of
   this office more than twenty-five years old.

Frame it under section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, address it to the Public Information Officer of that office, and keep the thirty day clock under section 7 of the RTI Act running. If the reply is silence, that is a deemed refusal and your first appeal is ready. The AI RTI Drafter will format the application, the RTI Timeline Calculator tracks the deadline, and the First Appeal Builder drafts the escalation. If a reply does arrive and you cannot tell whether it is a real answer, run it through the PIO Reply Checker.

For the wider strategy of escalating a stonewalled application, The RTI Playbook sets out the appeal sequence end to end.

The Governor assented on 21 August 2025 and the English translation was published the same day as U.P. Act no. 11 of 2025. But section 1(2) makes commencement depend on a separate notification in the Official Gazette. Check for that notification before treating any duty under the Act as currently binding, and note that most operative detail also waits on rules under section 17.

Not a general one. Section 12(1) covers unclassified records over thirty years old that have reached the UP State Archives, and it names bona fide research scholars. Section 12(2) is broader but discretionary: a Records Creating Agency may grant any person access to a record in its custody, in the prescribed manner. For an enforceable right to information from a live file, the RTI Act, 2005 remains your instrument.

Ask for the documents that a lawful weeding must generate: the retention schedule under section 6(1)(e), the appraisal done with the State Archives under section 6(1)© if the file was over twenty-five years old, and the order or register entry recording the destruction. If instead the file was lost rather than weeded, ask for the section 7(2) report to the Director.

Yes. Section 2(d)(iv) includes any other material produced by a computer or by any other device of any record creating agency, alongside documents, manuscripts, files, microfilm, microfiche and facsimile copies.

Yes, if it is caught by section 2(e). That covers offices of any statutory body or corporation wholly or substantially controlled or financed by the State Government, and any commission or committee constituted by the State Government, in addition to State departments.

Only within the limits of section 9, which is confined to contraventions of section 4, taking records out of the State without approval, and section 8, unlawful destruction or disposal. Poor record keeping under section 6 is a statutory failure but not an offence under section 9, and section 16 shields acts done in good faith.

Section 10 bars their transfer to the Uttar Pradesh State Archives entirely. Section 6(1)(f) separately requires periodical review for downgrading classified records in the prescribed manner, so classification is meant to be revisited rather than permanent.

• The Uttar Pradesh Public Records Act, 2025, U.P. Act no. 11 of 2025, Uttar Pradesh Lok Abhilekh Adhiniyam, 2025, assented 21 August 2025, English translation published under Article 348(3) vide No. 156(2)/LXXIX-V-1-2025-1-ka-11/2025 dated Lucknow, 21 August 2025. Full text on India Code at indiacode.gov.in
• Act No. 11 of 2025, Uttar Pradesh, State Acts collection, PRS Legislative Research, at prsindia.org
• The Right to Information Act, 2005, sections 6, 7 and 19, full text at RTI Act 2005 on RTI Wiki

• RTI application for a missing file or record
• How to file an RTI in Uttar Pradesh
• RTI fee in Uttar Pradesh: the verified schedule
• File notings under RTI: what is disclosable
• Deemed refusal under section 7(2)
• File notings are public records: CIC Full Bench
• Uttar Pradesh RTI guide

Reviewed by Dr. Shrawan Kumar Pathak. This page is general legal information, not legal advice. Statutory text quoted from the English translation of U.P. Act no. 11 of 2025 published on India Code. Commencement and rules under section 17 were still pending verification at the time of writing, so confirm the current gazette position before relying on any duty under this Act.