An overview on

Right to Information Act, 2005

B.A.LL.B 3RD YEAR (SIXTH SEMESTER) PROJECT WORK 2024

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES (UILS),

PUNJAB UNIVERSITY,

CHANDIGARH

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

DR. SHALLU PAKHI

UILS B.A.LL.B (6TH SEMESTER)

PUNJAB UNIVERSITY SECTION B

ROLL NO. 103/21

1|P ag e
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project on the

Right to Information Act, 2005

has been successfully completed by
PAKHI student of B.A.LL.B 6th SEMESTER
Section B Roll no. 103 under the guidance of
DR. SHALLU
during the 3rd year of B.A.LL.B five year integrated course at
University Institute of Legal Studies (UILS),
PUNJAB UNIVERSITY

2|P ag e
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I PAKHI a student of B.A.LL.B 3RD YEAR

(6TH SEMESTER) SECTION B would

like to express my sincere gratitude to my

Dr. SHALLU

for her vital support, guidance and

encouragement –without which this project would not have

come forth.

I would also like to express my gratitude to UILS for giving me

this opportunity.

3|P ag e
 INDEX

S.No. TITILE Page No.

Introduction
What does the term “Information” mean?
1 5
What does Right to Information mean?
What is public Authority?
Historical aspect
2 International Context 7
Indian Context
Why is the Right to Information needed?
3 8

Importance of Right to Information

4 9

Important provision under Right to Information Act,2005

5 9

Right to Information and right to privacy

6 10

Information Commission
7 11

The shadow of Covid-19 on the RTI regime in India

8 16

Conclusion
9 18

References
10 19
This project report includes total number of 20 pages.

4|P ag e
INTRODUCTION
This project discusses the Right to Information Act 1 in India and analysis of its
various aspects.
What does the term “information” mean?
As per section 2(f)2 of the right to information act, 2005 "Information" is related to
records, documents, e-mails, memoranda, opinions, advice, press releases,
circulars, orders, logbooks, tender samples, samples, papers, models, data held in
any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be
accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force.
Information records will also include a file, a microfilm, Xerox copy.

What does right to information mean?

Information by right to information, which is under the control of a public authority, is
to be made available to the person sought. Providing information includes work,
documents, documents, inspection of records, records and comments related to
records, certified copy. If the information is stored in the computer, then the
information through which electronic means are involved comes in the right of the
person. (the "right to information" is defined under section 2(j) of the Right to
Information Act,2005)

What is Public Authority?

"Public authority" means any authority or body or institution of self government
established or constituted—
 by or under the Constitution;
 by any other law made by Parliament/State Legislature.
 by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government,
and includes any—
o body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
o non-Government organisation substantially financed,
directly or indirectly by funds provided by the
appropriate Government.

The Right to Information Act, 2005, is a historic Act in the annals of democracy in
India. The law was passed by the Parliament on 15th June, 2005 and it came into
force on 12 October, 2005. "The Act aims at promoting transparency and
accountability. As per the law, it is obligatory on the part of the public authorities to
provide information sought by citizens." Hither to the disclosure of information was
restricted by the Official Secrets Act3, enacted in 1889 and amended in 1923, which
has now been replaced by the RTI Act, 2005.

1 The Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005)

2 Ibid.
3 The Official Secrets Act,1923
5|P ag e
This project report tries to focus on the connotation and implementation of this Act,
ie. the procedural or theoretical aspect; and other the practical or real one. Since the
objective of the Act is to promote transparency, accountability and openness, hence
it becomes obligatory on the part of the public authorities to provide required
information to those who ask for it. The effectiveness of the law hinges on its use by
citizens as well as enforcement by public authorities and both rely, to some extent on
the awareness and knowledge of law. And here lies the real challenge. This paper
also seeks to highlight the difficulties in its implementation. Finally, it mentions the
remarkable innovative steps initiated by some state governments and suggests
some measures towards its effective use and execution.
"The culture of official secrecy has been in one of the strongest living aspects of our
colonial legacy. Representing that culture the Official Secrets Act restricted the
dissemination of most information held by public bodies." The Right to Information
Act ushers in a change, since with the passage of this Act 'to provide information'
tends to be a rule and 'to maintain secrecy is an exception But let us not forget that
laws can, at best, facilitate change. The real change requires building a culture of
transparency in government. The Right to Information Act, apart from being a law, is
a tool, a process and a concept that postulates a different approach to governance;
and that approach will need to be adopted to meet the challenges, to remove
obvious hindrances, to enable people to participate in governance and by doing that
ultimately to evolve an inclusive democracy. Our democratic future rests upon this
transformation. In modern democracies, citizens have the right to know about the
affairs of the Government, which has been elected by them and about the policies
aimed at their welfare formulated by the government. The key stone of a healthy
democratic arch is the existence of enlightened and well-informed citizens.
Information is power.

6|P ag e
HISTORICAL ASPECT
International Context
The first right to information law in the world came into force in 1766 (Freedom of
Press Act of 1766) in Sweden. Sweden passed the first FOI (Freedom of
Information) law in 1766.This statute, entitled Freedom-of-Press and the Right-of-
Access to Public Records Act enacted 23 years before the U.S. Revolution and 13
years before the French Revolution.
The principal sponsor of this law, clergyman and Congressman Anders Chydenius,
had been inspired by Chinese practice. According to Chydenius, China was “the
model country of the freedom the press” and set the example for other nations to
follow. This scholar- politician also admired the Chinese institution of the Imperial
Censorate, which was “an institution founded in humanist Confucian philosophy
[whose] main roles were to scrutinize the government and its officials to expose
misgovernance, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and official corruption. “He was
particularly impressed by the fact that Chinese emperors were expected to “admit
their own imperfection as a proof their love of the truth and in fear of ignorance and
darkness.” The origins of government accountability are not in the West, but in the
East at the point of the Ch’ing Dynasty.
In 1946, the United Nations General Assembly recognized that “Freedom of
Information is a fundamental human right and the yardstick for all freedoms to which
the United Nations is consecrated”. Soon after, the right to information was given
international legal status when it was enshrined in Article 19 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states: “Everyone has the right to
freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions
without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through
any media and regardless of frontiers”.

Indian Context

Prior to when our motherland got free from the clutches of the colonization of the
British the Section 76, Evidence Act, 1872 4 is the first statutory provision for access
to public records but unfortunately it remained unimplemented and unknown
provision of law for more than 150 years. Apart from this there existed The Official
Secrets Act, 1923. Under this law, the government can keep all state information
confidential. After independence, no new law was made, no amendment was made
in it. Taking advantage of sections 5 and 6 of this act, the government kept hiding all
the necessary information from the public.

Courts play a more significant role in India, the poster child of RTI activism. The
Indian Supreme Court ruled as early as 1982 that a positive right to information was

4 The Indian Evidence Act, 1872

7|P ag e
implicit in the right to free speech in Art.19(1)(a) 5 of the Constitution. Hence,
disclosure of information about the functioning of Government had to be the rule and
secrecy the exception “justified only where the strictest requirement of public interest
so demands”. In practice, however, the fundamental right to information, judicially
decreed from above, lay largely dormant until it met with a wave of activism from
below.
Consciousness about the right to information in India was first awakened in the 1975
in the State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain6, 1975 case. Right to information
remained in the headlines even further. In the Indian Express Newspaper v. Union of
India 1985 case, the Supreme Court remarked that citizens have the right to know
about the information related to the operation of the government. (Indian Express
Newspapers v. Union of India & others, 1984)7. Apart from this Supreme Court of
India made multiple passing references & comments regarding the right to
information. But a strong movement for the right to information was needed in India
and this leadership was achieved in Rajasthan through Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey.
The movement ’Hamara Paisa Hamari Hisab’ by them further strengthened the
right to information. He formed the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan. The Rajasthan
government finally passed the Right to Information on 26 January 2001.
The first Right to Information Act was enacted by the State of Tamil Nadu in India in
May-1997. Universal access to information is celebrated on 28 September
worldwide. Right to Information Day is observed every year in India on 12 October.

Why is the right to information needed?

It must first be recognized that almost any enumeration of desirable rights usually
lists the importance of the right to information, the right to know, or some such
related formulation. There is a perceptible lack of excitement about the value of this
entitlement, however. It is invoked dutifully rather than passionately. The right to
information has an undeniably old-fashioned ring to it. It is, to use the jargon, a ’first-
generation’ civil-political right, one which elaborates, but does not appear to redefine,
the individual citizen’s relationship to the state.
An educated citizen of the Republic of India expects transparency of information
which essentially obliges the government to prevent corruption and make the
government accountable for their actions. The disclosure of the necessary
information will provide other public interest in which it will be possible for
governments to operate efficiently, maximum utilization of limited state resources will
be possible. Therefore, for the receipt of all these provisions, arrangements were
made to provide information to the individuals so that the interested person could get
the necessary information. A provision has been made to constitute a Central

5 The Constitution of India

6 The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975) AIR 865, 1975 SCR (3)333.
7 Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India & others (1985) SCR (2)287.

8|P ag e
Information Commission under Section 12 of this Act 8 , which is a controlling
organization. Overall, the right to information reinforces the concept of good
governance.

Importance of Right to Information

 It can help prevent corruption through RTI. Any government official will
consider once before doing any corrupt work for fear of going out of
information.
 The RTI makes government institutions and government accountable to the
common man.
 One can ensure the constitutional right of a person through RTI.
 Transparency of information increases through information on the functioning
of government, policies, schemes, etc.
 The RTI works to bridge the gap between the government and the common
man.

Important provisions under the Right to Information Act, 2005

 Section 2(h): Public authorities mean all authorities and bodies under the union
government, state government or local bodies. The civil societies that are
substantially funded, directly or indirectly, by the public funds also fall within the
ambit of RTI.
 Section 4 1(b): Government has to maintain and proactively disclose
information.
 Section 6: Prescribes a simple procedure for securing information.
 Section 7: Prescribes a time frame for providing information(s) by PIOs.
 Section 8: Only minimum information exempted from disclosure.
 Section 8 (1) mentions exemptions against furnishing information under the RTI
Act.
 Section 8 (2) provides for disclosure of information exempted under the Official
Secrets Act, 1923 if the larger public interest is served.
 Section 19: Two-tier mechanism for appeal.
 Section 20: Provides penalties in case of failure to provide information on time,
incorrect, incomplete or misleading or distorted information.
 Section 23: Lower courts are barred from entertaining suits or applications.
However, the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India and high courts under
Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution remains unaffected.

8 The Right to Information Act,2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005), s.12.

9|P ag e
Section 4 of the RTI Act requires suo motu disclosure of information by each public
authority. However, such disclosures have remained less than satisfactory.
Section 8 (1) mentions exemptions against furnishing information under RTI Act.
Section 8 (2) provides for disclosure of information exempted under Official
Secrets Act, 1923 if larger public interest is served.
Time period9: In normal course, information to an applicant is to be supplied within
30 days from the receipt of application by the public authority.
 If information sought concerns the life or liberty of a person, it shall be
supplied within 48 hours.
 In case the application is sent through the Assistant Public
Information Officer or it is sent to a wrong public authority, five days
shall be added to the period of thirty days or 48 hours, as the case
may be.

RTI and Right to Privacy

Conceptually, RTI and the right to privacy are both complementary as well as in
conflict to each other. While RTI increases access to information, the right to
privacy protects it instead. At the same time they both function, as citizen rights
safeguarding liberty, against state’s overreach.
When the question of harmonizing the contradicting rights arises, it should
 give justice to the larger public interest
 advance the public morality

Access to official information held by public authorities is the touchstone of a strong

and efficient representative democracy. By making maximum disclosure of
information in the public domain a rule and secrecy an exception, any country can
progress as a strong society of informed citizenry, which, as Thomas Jefferson
famously said, is the bulwark of a democracy. The importance of ’right to information
- as a basic human right’ cannot be negated as a potent tool to supplement the
’concept of checks and balances’, to promote transparency and openness in the
governance process by infusing a sense of greater accountability. Globally,
governance based on freedom of information is evolving from a moral indictment of
secrecy to a tool for market regulation, efficient governing structure facilitating
economic and technological growth.

Despite the implementation of RTI Act, there have been some major challenges with
the right to information as the RTI officers and activists are facing some challenges
which include harassment and victimization. The staff strength is insufficient for the
adequate functioning of the RTI and those who are appointed as The Government

9 The Right to Information Act, 2005, s.7.

10 | P a g e
Secrets Act - 1923 also becomes the main impediment to the transparency of
information at times. Social change has always aroused fear in the hearts of the well-
to-do. Today, the right to information is slowly but steadily moving towards success.
The section which has enjoyed facilities from the old system has also been trying to
end the sharpening of this act from the very beginning. With the attitude of some
information commissioners, the possibility of this law being divided has also been
strengthened.
The increasing incidents of attack on RTI activists should not deter the public spirited
persons who have taken upon themselves the task of being ’scavengers’ to cleanse
the dirt of corruption and malpractices in public administration system. The manner
in which the Amit Jethgwa was shot dead by unidentified men near the Gujarat High
Court in Ahmedabad, is shocking. He fought against the illegal mining lobby in Gir
forests. His murder by the ’mining mafia’ is a big loss to the RTI movement. The
question of protection of whistle blowers caught the nations’ attention when the
murder of Manjunath Shammugham, an Indian Oil Corporation sales manager, for
having exposed the mafia role in petrol adulteration, shook the nations’ conscience
and brought renewed focus on the need for a law to protect the whistle blowers 10.
There is a lot of uneasiness about this act among the people working in the old work
culture, old thinking, administrative apathy and babushahi style (Bureaucratic Way),
and such people (RTI) are kept inside. Due to this, 40 percent of the applicants did
not get any information in 30 days. Even if found, only 30 percent got the information
and that too was wrong, incomplete or misleading.

“In a Government of responsibility like ours where 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 their public functionaries. They
are entitled to know the particulars of every public transaction in all its
bearings.”11

Information Commissions

Information Commissions constituted under the RTI Act are the supreme authority
and the highest decision-making body under the Act. Information Commissions have
been constituted at both the central and state level, known as Central Information
Commission(CIC) and State Information Commission(SIC) respectively.

Sections 12-14 of the Act contain the provisions regarding the constitution,
membership, etc. of the Central Information Commission, whereas, Sections 15-17
deal with the provisions relating to the State Information Commission.

10 Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014.

11 Supra note. 6 at 7.
11 | P a g e
 CENTRAL INFORMATION STATE INFORMATION
COMMISSION (CIC) COMMISSION (SIC)

SECTION 12 SECTION 15

Constituted by: CentralGovernment. Constituted by: State Government.

Membership: CIC consists of the Membership: SIC consists of the

following members:-Chief Information following members:-State Chief
Commissioner Central Information Information Commissioner State
Commissioners(Maximum no. of Information Commissioners
Central Information Commissioners (Maximum no. of State Information
is 10.) Commissioners is 10.)
Who shall appoint the members of Who appoints the members of the
Commission: President on the Commission: Governor on the
recommendation of a Committee recommendation of a Committee
consisting of: Prime consisting of the following members:
Minister(Chairperson of the Chief Minister(Chairperson of the
Committee)Leader of Opposition in Committee)Leader of Opposition in
Lok Sabha; and A Union Cabinet Legislative Assembly; andA Cabinet
Minister nominated by the Prime Minister nominated by the Chief
Constitution Minister. Minister.

Role and responsibilities of the Role and responsibilities of the

Chief Information Commissioner: State Chief Information
Power of general superintendence Commissioner:
and direction and management of the Power of general superintendence
affairs of CIC. The Chief Information and direction and management of the
Commissioner shall be assisted by affairs of SIC. The State Chief
the Information Commissioners. He Information Commissioner shall be
has the authority to exercise all the assisted by the Information
powers and do all acts which may be Commissioners. He has the authority
exercised or done by the CIC. to exercise all the powers and do all
acts which may be exercised or done
by the SIC.
Qualification of members: The Qualification of members: The
Chief Information Commissioner and State Chief Information
Information Commissioner shall be Commissioner and Information
persons of eminence in public life Commissioner shall be persons of
with wide knowledge and experience eminence in public life with wide
in law, science, technology, social knowledge and experience in law,

12 | P a g e
 service, management, journalism, science, technology, social service,
mass media, or administration and management, journalism, mass
governance. media, or administration and
governance.
Prohibition on membership: The Prohibition on membership: The
Chief Information Commissioner and State Chief Information
the Information Commissioners shall Commissioner and the Information
not: be an MP or MLA, orhold any Commissioners shall not: be an MP
other office of profit or connected or MLA, orhold any other office of
with any political party or engage in profit or connected with any political
any business or profession. party or engage in any business or
profession.
Headquarters: The headquarters of
Headquarters: The headquarters of SIC shall be at such place in the
CIC shall be in Delhi. However, the State as specified by the State
CIC may establish offices at other Government by way of notification in
places in India after taking approval the Official Gazette. However, the
from the Central Government. SIC may establish its office at
another place in the State with the
previous approval of the State
Government.
SECTION 13
SECTION 16
Term of office of Chief Information
Term of office of State Chief
Commissioner: As prescribed by
Information Commissioner: As
the Central Government. Whether
prescribed by the Central
the Chief Information Commissioner
Government.
is eligible for reappointment:
No Chief Information Commissioner
shall not hold office after attaining the
Term of Whether the State Chief
age of 65 years. Term of office of
Office and Information Commissioner is
Information Commissioners: As
conditions of eligible for reappointment: No. No
prescribed by the Central
service State Chief Information
Government or till he attains the age
Commissioner shall hold office after
of 65 years, whichever is earlier.
he has attained the age of 65 years.

Whether the Information

Term of office of State Information
Commissioner can be reappointed
Commissioners: As prescribed by
as an Information
Central Government or till he attains
Commissioner: No. However, an
the age of 65 years, whichever is
Information Commissioner may be
earlier.
appointed as the Chief Information

13 | P a g e
 Commissioner, after vacation from
his office.
Tenure of the Information
Commissioner appointed as the
Chief Information Whether a State Information
Commissioner: Maximum 5 years in Commissioner can be reappointed
aggregate as the Information as a State Information
Commissioner and the Chief Commissioner: No. However, he is
Information Commissioner. eligible for being appointed as the
State Chief Information
Commissioner, after vacation from
Resignation of members of his office.
Commission: The Chief Information
Commissioner and the Information
Commissioner(s) may resign from Tenure of the Information
the office by writing under his hand Commissioner appointed as the
addressed to the President. Section State Chief Information
13(6) provides for assistance to the Commissioner: Maximum 5 years in
Chief Information Officer and the aggregate as the State Information
Information Officers by way of Commissioner and the State Chief
officials required by them for the Information Commissioner.
efficient performance of functions
entrusted to them under the Act.
Resignation of members of
Commission: The State Chief
Information Commissioner and the
State Information Commissioner(s)
may resign from the office by writing
under his hand addressed to the
Governor. Section 16(6) provides for
assistance to the State Chief
Information Officer and the State
Information Officers by way of
officials required by them for the
efficient performance of functions
entrusted to them under the Act.

SECTION 14 SECTION 17
Removal of
members of The power to order the removal from The power to order the removal from
Commission office of the Chief Information office of the State Chief Information
Commissioner or any Information Commissioner or any State
Commissioner vests with the Information Commissioner vests with

14 | P a g e
President under Section 14(1). the Governor under Section 17(1).
Grounds for removal under Grounds for removal under
Section 14(1): Proved misbehaviour Section 17(1): Proved misbehaviour
or incapacity. or incapacity.

Manner/process of removal: The Manner/process of removal: The

President sends a reference to the Governor sends a reference to the
Supreme Court for inquiry into the Supreme Court for inquiry into the
alleged misconduct. If after such alleged misconduct. If after such
inquiry, the Supreme Court comes to inquiry, the Supreme Court comes to
the conclusion that the charges of the conclusion that the charges of
misbehaviour are proved and misbehaviour are proved and
recommends the removal of such a recommends the removal of such a
member in its report, the President member in its report, the Governor
shall remove such member. Interim shall remove such member. Interim
suspension: The President has the suspension: The Governor has the
power to: suspend such member in power: to suspend such member in
respect of whom reference is made respect of whom reference is made
to Supreme Courtprohibit such to Supreme Court to prohibit such
aforesaid member from attending the aforesaid member from attending the
office during enquiry, until the office during enquiry, until the
President has passed orders on Governor has passed orders on
receipt of the report of the Supreme receipt of the report of the Supreme
Court on such reference. Court on such reference.

Disqualifications: Notwithstanding Disqualifications: Notwithstanding

anything contained in sub-section (1), anything contained in sub-section (1),
the President of India has the power the Governor has the power to
to remove the Chief Information remove the State Chief Information
Commissioner or the Information Commissioner or the Information
Commissioner if he is guilty of any of Commissioner if he is guilty of any of
the following acts: Declaration of the following acts: Declaration of
insolvency Conviction for an offence insolvency Conviction for an offence
involving moral turpitudeEngagement involving moral turpitudeEngagement
in paid employment outside official in paid employment outside official
dutiesInfirmity of mind or dutiesInfirmity of mind or
bodyAcquisition of such financial or bodyAcquisition of such financial or
other interest which might affect other interest which might affect
prejudicely his functions as such prejudicely his functions as such
member member

15 | P a g e
THE SHADOW OF COVID-19 ON THE RTI REGIME IN INDIA
Covid-19 pandemic in the year 2020 has brought to the forefront several
discrepancies and deficiencies within the information regime in India which has
shook the strong foundation built by the RTI Act ever since 2005.

Data regarding the well-being measures for the migrant workers, total number of
migrant workers, the number of workers affected by the pandemic etc.; Data
regarding ration and food grain distribution across districts; Information about Covid-
19 treatment centers and regarding decision making process as to the acquirement
of PPE kits and information regarding the actions taken against police personnel for
their impunity against innocent citizens of the country during the pandemic- All of this
is missing in the public domain and efforts made to gain such information are also
curbed.

The pandemic is the scapegoat for the failure of the information regime to function
properly. During a pandemic that has created havoc not only in India but all around
the world and that has put not only lives but livelihoods of people at stake- it
becomes very important that information flow does not get hampered. The Right to
Information Act 2005 must continue to ensure accountability and empower citizens to
seek information during these difficult times especially information regarding the
crisis management.

Instead of turning the citizens into passive consumers of information provided by

press releases of respective government departments; advertisements; TV and
newspaper reports etc. the RTI Act should have become a formidable weapon in the
hands of the citizens to make sure that the transparency regime does not suffer a
setback due to the Covid-19 crisis. Essential issues of public importance on which
information must be readily made available to the public specifically if a RTI has
been filed, have been kept under the wraps by the government. Instance of such
escapist attitude can be seen in the refusal by the PMO to provide information
regarding PM Cares Fund stating that it is not a public authority and the refusal of
State Bank of India on the premise that it is a third party in the matter. Details
regarding the public fund which is being used to manage the crisis are not being
revealed to the public.

Another phenomenon is that there has been a relative lackadaisical attitude of the
authorities towards the information seekers as RTIs are transferred from one public
authority to another as was the case in the RTI filed to get details of the list of Covid-
19 treatment facilities in the different districts. Suo Motu disclosures under the RTI
Act have also been apathetically ignored by the authorities especially those related
to health, migrant labourers, finances etc. Instead of voluntarily publishing data on
the website portals and providing as much as information as possible to the public
regarding the true pictures of the Covid-19 pandemic in India- the authorities are

16 | P a g e
utilizing all kinds of tactics to undermine the sovereignty and right to freedom of
information of the citizens.

The institutional establishments put in place to uphold the sanctity of the RTI Act in
the form of Central Information Commissions (CIC) and State Information
Commissions (SICs) have proven to be a failure during the pandemic. Though the
CIC has been operating; hearing cases through audio/video conferencing;
conducting trainings/webinars/conferences with various stakeholders regarding how
to deal with the Covid-19 situation; accepting appeals and complaints online and so
on; but it has been rendered headless as the Chief Information Commissioner retired
in August 2020.

The state information commissions of Assam, Bihar, Goa, Rajasthan and Uttar
Pradesh were also headless. Several SICs did not work during the lockdown phase
and had minimal staff members that were present at the office but no hearings were
held like in Haryana, Rajasthan and Uttarakhand SICs; landline numbers of the SICs
and mobile numbers of many information commissioners and secretaries of SICs
were unavailable and websites of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Nagaland SICs
remained inactive during the pandemic.

During pandemic video conferencing was being used a tool for hearings by CIC and
six SICs; whereas the rest 22 SICs had failed to resume their work and staffs of the
SICs are enjoying the paid leave despite many free platforms coupled with low cost
data plans are available for digital connectivity. Already backlog of cases has been
an issue plaguing several of the SICs and their being not functional during the times
of crisis is just adding to the backlog. It is pertinent to mention that CIC alone cannot
take the burden of upholding the transparency regime in the country.

The state information commissions which have a wider reach and capacity should
have come to the rescue and heard matters of public importance on priority basis.
These should have provided online facility to the public to put forth their grievances
and get information which is a significant foundation of a democratic country like
India. Such low performance on the part of the information commissions and the
dismal image of the information regime in India has not battered down the spirit of
the citizens of the country especially the RTI activists and RTI users spread across
the country. Technology has been leveraged to bring together RTI enthusiast across
the country on online platforms to discuss and debate around the RTI Act; its
implementation and future in the context of Covid-19. It is hoped that the officials
take inspiration from the undying fortitude of the citizens of the country and start
taking their responsibilities

17 | P a g e
CONCLUSION
The Right to Information Act, 2005 is a significant statutory measure for
realization of the citizen’s right to access of information. The Act mandates
timely response to the citizen’s requests for government information. Citizens
can file RTI applications for the public authorities under the Central
Government by visiting https://rtionline.gov.in./ which is an initiative of the
Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public
Grievances and Pension. With regard to public authorities under the State
Governments, an RTI application can be filed by visiting the RTI
portal/website of the particular state.

Although Right to Information is not included as a Fundamental Right in

the Constitution of India, it protects the fundamental rights to Freedom of
Expression and Speech under Article 19(1)(a) and Right to Life and
Personal Liberty under Article 21 guaranteed by the Constitution. The
authorities under RTI Act 2005 are called public authorities. The Public
Information Officer (PIO) or the First Appellate Authority in the public
authorities perform quasi judicial function of deciding on the application
and appeal respectively. This act was enacted in order to consolidate the
fundamental right in the Indian constitution 'freedom of speech'. Since
RTI is implicit in the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under
Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, it is an implied fundamental right.

The Right to Information Act was made to achieve social justice,

transparency and to make accountable government but this act has not
achieved its full objectives due to some impediments created due to
systematic failures. This law provides us with a priceless opportunity to
redesign the processes of governance, particularly at the grassroots level
where the citizens’ interface is maximum. It is well recognized that the
right to information is necessary, but not sufficient, to improve
governance. A lot more needs to be done to usher in accountability in
governance, including protection of whistleblowers, decentralization of
power and fusion of authority with accountability at all levels. As observed
by Delhi High Court that misuse of the RTI Act has to be appropriately
dealt with; otherwise the public would lose faith and confidence in this
“sunshine Act”.

18 | P a g e
 REFRENCES

PRIMARY SOURCES

 The Right to Information Act, 2005

 DOPT, Govt of India, 2015. Implementation of RTI & impact on

Administration. [Online] Available
at: https://documents.doptcirculars.nic.in/D2/D02rti/RTI-A.pdf [Accessed 13 06
2021].
 Padalia, K. T. K. &. M., 2013. Right to Information : The new age social
software. Indian Journal of Political Science, Published by Indian Political
Science Association, 74(1), pp. 61-74.
 Goetz, R. J. &. A. M., 1999. Accounts & Accountability: Theoritical
Implications of the Right to Information Movements in India. Third World
Quarterly, Published by Taylor & Francis, 20(3), pp. 603-
622. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436599913712

SECONDARY SOURCES

 Legislative Department, Government of India., 1923. The Official Secrets Act,

1923. [Online] Available
at: https://legislative.gov.in/actsofparliamentfromtheyear/official-secrets-act-
1923 [Accessed 12 March 2024].
 Legislative Department, Government of India., 2021. Indian Evidence Act
1872. [Online] Available at: https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1872-
01.pdf [Accessed 18 March 2024].
 Freedom of Information Act 2002, Government of India., 2002. Indian
Kanoon-Freedom of Information act 2002. [Online] Available
at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/411331/ [Accessed 22 March 2024].
 Sweden, G. o., 2016. The Swedish Press Act. [Online] Available
at: https://www.government.se/articles/2016/06/the-swedish-press-act-250-
years-of-freedom-of-the-press/ [Accessed 18 March 2024].
 Barowalia, J. N., 2012. Commentary on the Right to Information Act. 3 ed.
India: Universal Law Publishing.
 Bureau, Press Information., 2019. The Right to Information Amendment Bill.
[Online] Available at:
https://pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=1579510 [Accessed 17
March 2024].
 Roberts, A., 2001. Structural Pluralism & the Right to Information. The
University of Toronto Law Journal, University of Toronto, 51(3), pp. 243-
271. https://doi.org/10.2307/825940

19 | P a g e
 Jain, A., 2012. Good Governance and Right to Information. Journal of the
Indian Law Institute, Published by Indian Law Institute, 54(4), pp. 506-519.
 Jebaraj, P., March 21, 2019. Political Parties yet to comply with RTI Act, India:
The Hindu.
 Kamla, 2012. Role of RTI Act in making Governance accountable &
Transparent. The Indian Journal of Political Science, Published by Indian
Political Science Association, 73(2), pp. 321-330.
 SINGH, P.,(2021) Fifteen Years Of Right To Information Act In India: A Long
Way To Go , available at:
https://revistaselectronicas.ujaen.es/index.php/TAHRJ/article/view/6537/6205
(Accessed on 25 March 2024)

 BBC News, 2015. Hamara Paisa Hamara Hisaab. [Online] Available at:
https://www.bbc.com/hindi/india/2015/05/150430_rti_25_year_of_mkss_rajast
han_india_rns [Accessed 14 March 2024].
 Editorial, Economic & Political Weekly., 2015a. Death by Neglect: The RTI is
virtually being strangled to death by deliberate delays in
appointments. Economic & Political Weekly EPW, 50(20), pp. 7-8.
 Editorial, Economic & Political Weekly., 2015b. Sending Whistle blowers to
their deaths: Whistle blowers continue to be murdered even as Law for their
protection awaits notification. Economic & Political Weekly, 50(12), p. 9.

20 | P a g e