CONTENTS

S. No. Topic P. No.

1 Introduction 2

2 Objectives of the Act 3

3 Important Provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 4

4 Salient Features of the Right to Information Act, 2005 8

5 Major Decisions Giving Rise to Right to Information 9

6 Conclusion 12

7 Bibliography 13

1
 INTRODUCTION

Rights are the interests which are recognized and protected by law. The sanctity of
right enhances if it is adopted by the Constitution of a country. In Indian context, where the
common people were subject of negligence for centuries, constitutional principles are the
only messiahs that can ensure freedom of all sorts. Information has a pivotal role in
strengthening public by making them knowledgeable.

Accessing information, however in a developing country like India is a cumbersome

task to be accomplished by majority of less educated and illiterate citizenry oblivious of its
rights. Red-tapism and bureaucratic supremacy is highly hesitant in empowering people.
Moreover the colonial legacy which was copious with policy of secrecy still haunts the
system. Here the Constitution of India comes to the rescue of the ‘little man’ by bestowing
upon him certain fundamental rights within Part III. These rights cannot be violated except
the procedures laid down by the law, which are in consonance with spirit of Constitution.
Similarly, RTI is a right imbibed within Art. 19(1)(a)1 of the Constitution.

The right to information has not been expressly provided in the constitution. It is
derived from the Art. 19(1)(a). That is to say, it is implicitly imbibed within the constitutional
framework. However, judiciary in several landmark cases has expressly held RTI as natural
concomitant of Art. 19(1)(a).

1
Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.- (1) All citizens shall have the right-
(a) to freedom of speech and expression….

2
 OBJECTIVES OF THE ACT

Objective of the Act is to establish “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, the
constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commission and for
matters connected therewith and incidental thereto.”2

Transparency and accountability of the public authority therefore are two main
objectives which the Act seeks to achieve. Provisions are therefore society centric aiming
towards the empowerment of people making them participate in the country’s democratic
process. Survival of a democratic government is highly dependable on the accountability of
the public functionaries. Absence of it breeds unrest and generated apathy in masses against
the system. Accountability can be achieved by providing information to the people about the
functioning of government. It is a prerequisite towards a real participatory democracy. People
can play important role in a democracy only if it is an open government where there is full
access to information in regard to functioning of government.3

The major objectives of the act can be summed up as following:-

i. Greater Transparency in functioning of public authorities.

ii. Improvement in accountability and performance of the Government.

iii. Promotion of partnership between citizens and the Government in decision making
process; and

iv. Reduction in corruption in the Government departments.

Passing of this Act has been result of strivings of the public spirited citizens like H.D.
Shourie, Aruna Roy, Arvind Kejriwal and many NGOs working for the betterment of people.
The objectives stated above need to be fulfilled in order to justify the sovereignty granted to
the “People of India” by the Constitution, in real sense.

2
The preamble to the RTI Act, 2005.
3
People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, AIR 2003 SC 2363.

3
 IMPORTANT PROVISIONS OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION
ACT, 2005

RTI Act, 2005 contains provisions which impart it the nature same to that of a code. It
elaborately deals with the necessary definitions, constitution of the Information Commissions
both at the state and central level, imposition of penalty, rule making power conferred upon
appropriate governments etc. It is not possible to deal with all the provisions in detail.
Therefore, some of the important provisions are discussed as following:

Scope of Application

Perusal of the Act clearly signifies that it is applicable both to Central and State
governments and all public authorities. A “public authority”4 which is bound to furnish
information means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or
constituted (a) by or under the Constitution, (b) by any other law made by Parliament, (c) by
any other law made by State Legislature, (d) by a notification issued or order made by the
appropriate Government and includes any (i) body owned, controlled or substantially
financed, (ii) non-government organizations substantially financed, - which, in clauses (a) to
(d) are all, directly or indirectly funded by the appropriate Government.

Meaning of ‘Information’

Sec. 2(f) of the Act defines information as any material in any form, including the
records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, log
books, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form
and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority
under any law for the time being in force.

This makes it very clear that the Act regards only that as information which is in
written form. An opinion is not information until it is written. Therefore, the definition of
information as postulated by the Act does not include oral expressions.
4
Sec. 2(h) of RTI Act, 2005.

4
Definition of ‘Right to Information’

The “Right to Information” statutorily refers to as a right to information accessible

under the Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes a
right to (i) inspection of work, documents, records, (ii) taking notes, extracts, certified copies
of documents and records, (ii) taking separate samples of material, (iv) obtaining information
in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or
through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device.5

Maintenance and Publication of Records

Proactive disclosure of information by the public authorities has been provided under
Sec. 4(1) of the Act. The provision castes a duty on public authorities to maintain records for
easy access and to publish within 120 days of enactment of the statute the name of the
particular officers who should give the information and in regard to the framing of the rules,
regulations etc. For this purpose, Sec. 4(3) states that for the performance of sub-section (1),
all information shall be disseminated widely and in such form and manner which is easily
accessible to the public.

Request for Information

Sec. 6 permits persons to obtain information in English or Hindi or in the official

language of the area from the designated officers. The person requesting for information is
not required to give any reason for the request and personal details.

Disposal of Request

Sec. 7 of the Act requires the request to be disposed of within 30 days provided that
where information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall be
provided within 48 hours.

5
Sec. 2(j) of RTI Act, 2005.

5
 Before any decision is taken for furnishing the information, the designated officer
shall take into consideration the representation, if any, made by a third party under Sec. 11. 6
A request rejected shall be communicated under Sec. 7(8) giving reasons and specifying the
procedure for appeal and the designation of the appellate authority. Information is exempted
from disclosure where it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority
or would be detrimental to the safety and preservation of record in question.7

Exemptions from the disclosure of Information

There are certain sorts of information which are exempted from disclosure. Such an
exception has been incorporated within the mechanism of the Act, in order of not
compromising with national security and integrity. Their disclosure might hamper the very
existence of the state as well as detriment the national interests. Sec. 8 exempts from
disclosure certain information and contents as stated in sub clauses (a) to (j) thereof.

Information expressly forbidden by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of

which may constitute contempt of court8; information which could impede the process of
investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders 9 are some of those which are
exempted from disclosure.

Sec. 8(2) provides that a public authority may allow access to information if public
interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests. Moreover Sec. 8(3)
exempts information regarding matters or events which happened 20 years before the date of
application seeking information.

It is significant to note that the Act is not applicable to certain intelligence and
security organizations contained in the Second schedule of the Act 10 (such organizations may
be omitted from the schedule or new organizations may be added by the central government).
However proviso to Sec. 24(1) provides that in case the demand for information pertains to
allegations of corruption and human rights violations, the Act shall apply to such institutions.

6
Sec. 7(7) of RTI Act, 2005.
7
Sec. 7(9) of RTI Act, 2005.
8
Sec. 8(1)(b) of RTI Act, 2005.
9
Sec. 8(1)(h) of RTI Act, 2005.
10
Sec. 24(1) of RTI Act, 2005.

6
Other important Provisions

 Secs. 12 and 15 provide for the constitution of Central Information Commission and State
Information Commission respectively.
 Sec. 18 deals with powers and functions of the Information Commissions.
 Sec. 20 provides penalties for non - furnishing information as required by the Act in a
sum of Rs. 250/- per day but not exceeding Rs. 25000.
 Sec. 21 states that no suit or prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any
person for anything which is done in good faith or intended to be done under the Act or
rules.
 Sec. 22 overrides the Official Secrets Act, 1923 or any other law for the time being in
force insofar as they are inconsistent with the Act.
 Sec. 23 bars all courts from entertaining any suit, application, or other proceeding in
respect of any order made under the Act and every order under the Act should be first
appealed against.
 Sec. 25 imposes an obligation on the Central Information Commission11 and the State
Information Commission12 to prepare an annual report on the implementation of the
provisions of the Act in that year and forward it to the appropriate government.

11
Hereinafter referred to as CIC.
12
Hereinafter referred to as SIC.

7
SALIENT FEATURES OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005

Specifically, the main objectives of the law on RTI are: to operationalise the
fundamental right to information; to set up systems and mechanisms that facilitate people’s
easy access to information; to promote transparency and accountability in governance; to
minimize corruption and inefficiency in public offices and to ensure people’s participation in
governance and decision making.13

RTI can be said to be based on two main concepts:

(a) The right of the public to access the information and the corresponding duty of the
Government to meet the request, unless specifically defined exemptions apply;
(b) The duty of the Government to proactively provide certain key information even in
absence of a request.

The RTI Act, 2005 basically has two parts- (a) substantive law, and (b) procedural
law. Sec. 3 coupled with some other provisions like Secs. 8, 9, 18, 19 and 20 of the Act deal
with substantive law while Sec. 6 along with some other provisions like Sec. 7 of the Act deal
with procedural law. Thus the Act is a code in itself.14

These are some of the main features which make this legislation a positive step
towards the realization of tenets that have been conceived by the founding fathers of the
Constitution.

13
M.M. Ansari (Information Commissioner), Impact of Right to Information on Development: A Perspective
on India’s Recent Experiences, An invited lecture delivered at UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, France, on
May 15, 2008.
14
Dr. Niraj Kumar, Treatise on Right to Information Act, 2005, 530 (First edition, 2007).

8
 MAJOR DECISIONS GIVING RISE TO RIGHT TO INFORMATION

Upon a thorough analysis it can be safely stated that direction towards the realization
of RTI within the constitutional ambit incepted right from the verdict in Hamdard
Dawakhana v. Union of India15. Supreme Court for the first time declared RTI to be part of
Art. 19(1)(a) in Bennett Coleman v. Union of India16, where it held Newsprint Control Order
of 1972-1973 issued under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 to be ultra vires Art. 19(1)
(a) of the Constitution. Ray, CJ in the majority judgment opined that, “It is indisputable that
by freedom of the press is meant the right of all citizens to speak, publish and express their
views. The freedom of press embodies the right of the people to read.” Here what is refereed
as ‘right of the people to read’ refers to the right of the readers to get the information.

The strongest exposition in this regard came from Justice K. K. Mathew in State of U.
P. v. Raj Narain17 who emphasized that in ‘government of responsibility like ours where all
the agents of the public must be responsible for their conduct, there can be but a few secrets.
The people of this country have a right to know every public act, everything that is done in a
public way by the public functionaries.” The facts of this case were that Raj Narain who
challenged the validity of Mrs. Gandhi’s election required disclosure Blue Books which
contained the tour program and security measures taken for the Prime Minister. Though the
disclosure was not allowed, Mathew, J. held that the people of country were entitled to know
the particulars of every public transaction in all its hearing.

The major breakthrough was attained in S. P. Gupta v. Union of India18 when the apex
court imparted constitutional status to RTI. The point of contention in this case was again
with regards to the claim for privilege laid by the government of India in respect disclosure of
certain documents including correspondence between Chief justice of India and the Chief
Justice of Delhi High Court in connection with the confirmation of Justice Kumar who was
an additional Judge of the Delhi High Court. Justice Bhagwati, in his ever humanistic tone
advocated the concept of open government stating it to be the direct emanation from the right
to know which seems to be implicit in the right of free speech and expression guaranteed

15
AIR 1960 SC 554.
16
AIR 1973 SC 106.
17
AIR 1975 SC 885.
18
AIR 1982 SC 149.

9
under Art. 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. It was held by the learned Judge that, RTI or access to
information is essential for an ideally successful democratic way of life. Hence, it is
imperative that disclosure of information regarding the functioning of Government must be
the rule and secrecy is justified only where the strictest requirement of public interest
demands.

Liberal approach of apex court towards the disclosure of information is discernible in

Sheela Barse v. Union of India19 where court issued directions for release of information to
her relating to under trials kept in different parts of country. Point to be noted here is that
such direction was not issued by invoking Art. 19(1)(a). Therefore, it can be inferred that a
person having proper stand can seek information from the government. Similarly, the court
was unequivocal of the importance of people’s participation and upheld their right to know in
Pune Environmental case20.

Supreme Court further in a historic decision provided the voter’s right to know the
antecedents of the candidates.21 Scope of Art. 19(1)(a) was widened and it was affirmed that
the right to know of the candidate contesting election to a House of Parliament or a state
legislature or a Panchayat or a Municipal Corporation is a pre- condition to the exercise of a
citizen’s right to vote. Thus people have a constitutional right to know the antecedents of the
candidates contesting election for a post which is utmost importance in democracy. Later
Government brought an ordinance followed by an Act to nullify effects of the judgment. The
Act was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in People’s Union of Civil Liberties
v. Union of India.22 An important observation was made by the court that “the fundamental
rights enshrined in the Constitution...have no fixed contents.” “From time to time, this court
has filled in the skeleton with soul and blood and made it vibrant.”

Freedom of speech and expression and its relation with RTI has been vividly
described by the apex court in Secretary, Ministry of I & B, Government of India v. Cricket
Association of Bengal23 in the following words:

19
AIR 1986 SC 1773.
20
Bombay Environmental Action Group v. Pune Cantonment Board, SLP (Civil) 11291/1986 (13th October,
1986), unreported, but reproduced in A. Rosencranz (et al ed.), Environmental Law and Policy in India,
Cases, Materials and Statutes, p. 149 (Tripathi Publication, Bombay, 1991) cited in Avinash Sharma, “Right
to Information: A Constitutional Perspective”, Nyayadeep, Vol VIII, Issue 3.
21
Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms, AIR 2002 SC 2112.
22
(2002) 5 SCC 399.
23
(1995) 2 SCC 161.

10
“The freedom of speech and expression includes right to acquire information and to
disseminate it. Freedom of speech and expression is necessary, for self-expression which is
an important means of free conscience and self-fulfillment. It enables people to contribute to
debates on moral and social issues. It is the best way to find a truest model of anything, since
it is only through it that the widest possible range of ideas can circulate. It is the only vehicle
of political discourse so essential to democracy.”

11
 CONCLUSION

Success of a democratic framework depends on good governance. It can be achieved

by efficient and effective administration. As per a paper prepared by the Human Rights
Initiative, good governance has eight major facets. It is participatory, consensus oriented,
accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and
follows the rule of law. RTI is one of the most important methods of attainment of good
governance, which is necessary for ensuring sustainable human development.

Corruption is major hindrance in the growth of any system. Dangers are more in a
democratic system, where development of people who have reposed their faith by electing the
government to power does not takes place. Conditions become more aggravated when basic
information related to the people is not disclosed in the garb of maintenance of secrecy. In
fact this culture of secrecy breeds nepotism and increases corruption to an obnoxious level.
Information therefore is an antidote to corruption24. It limits the abuse of discretion and
protects civil liberties.

24
Justice Y. K. Sabharwal, “Right to Information and Good Governance”, Vol. VII, Issue 4, Nyayadeep, p.
29.

12
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. “RTI a formidable tool to fight Corruption: Supreme Court”, The Hindu, Hubli [ed.],
14th August 2011.
2. “The Constitution of India, 1950” Bare Act with Short Notes, Universal Law
Publishing, 2016.
3. Dr. Niraj Kumar, “Treatise on Right to Information Act, 2005”, Bharat Law House,
New Delhi (2007).
4. Justice Y. K. Sabharwal, “Right to Information and Good Governance”, Vol. VII,
Issue 4, Nyayadeep Publication.
5. Prof.(Dr.) S.V. Joga Rao, “Law Relating to Right to Information”, First edition
(2009).

13