10 - Chapter-6 PDF

Chapter Six
Misuse and shortcomings in

Implementation of the Act
Information is the seed for an idea and only grows when it is watered.
209
Misuse of the RTI Act
Right to information Act was enacted to provide for legal right to information for
citizens to secure access to information under the control of the public authorities, in order
to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. In
order to ensure smoother, greater and more effective access to information and provide an
effective framework for the effectuating the right to information recognized under Article
19 of the Constitution, the RTI Act passed by the Parliament in 2005.
Undoubtedly, the RTI raises the awareness of the public about government
functioning and promotes human rights. In a fast developing country like India, availability
of information regarding functioning of public organisations needs to be promoted further.
Now that India has a law for RTI, it can be made more beneficial by its effective
implementation leading to improved public administration for the betterment of the people.
This is possible only through the government's bringing down of its iron curtains as well as
people's active involvement in this process. It has rightly been observed by Henry Clay that
the government is a trust and the officers of the government are trustees and both the trust
and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people.1
As every coin has two sides, one is useful and other is flipside which is not useful
but misused by the people. Same is the case with the RTI Act too. As the law doesn’t
enquire about the purpose of the information which is shared with people, which way it is
used and what are the purpose of using this information? These are the basic question
which one always thinks but beyond this there is something which nobody knows. The
purpose behind acquiring the information is not always to dispense the things inform of the
administrative machinery to give it speed but sometime it is malaise the department, person
of very high stature in the government organization. As earlier PM Dr. ManMohan Singh
was talking about the misuse of RTI act in 2011. As he spoke about the misuse of RTI act
which discourages honest people, well meaning public servants from giving full
1
Lovekesh Jain, The Information Gleaner, p. 03( New Century publication ,2010).
210
expressions to their views. Even the earlier MEA minister Salman Khurshid said misuse of
RTI act has hit the institutional efficacy and efficiency.2
Undoubtly, revolution of information law has added new dimension to human

capabilities and benefited development of the society. Today, we are living in an age of
super-computers which has fantastically helped in increasing knowledge and enhanced the
communication skills. Though proliferation and dissemination of information has proved a
boon for mankind, it has some shortcoming as well. The right to access to information
under RTI Act is often being misused by some persons for setting personal scores with
their opponents’ arising out of the family or matrimonial disputes, maintenance claims,
rivalry, enmity or vengeance or for causing harassment to public officials.
The Act has been criticized on several grounds. It provides for information on
demand, so to speak, but does not sufficiently stress information on matters related to food,
water, environment and other survival needs that must be given pro-actively, or suo moto,
by public authorities. The Act does not emphasize active intervention in educating people
about their right to access information vital in a country with high levels of illiteracy and
poverty or the promotion of a culture of openness within official structures. Without
widespread education and awareness about the possibilities under the new Act, it could just
remain on paper. The Act also reinforces the controlling role of the government official,
who retains wide discretionary powers to withhold information.
The policy of the Right to Information Act is to save the persons concerned from
protracted, expensive and sometimes ruinous litigation of the civil courts. At the same time,
this special enactment should be strictly construed and the common law rights of the
subjects to have recourse to the courts of justice should not unnecessarily be surrounded
with restrictions. Further, the intention of the Parliament has to be gathered from what is
contained in the clear words of the statute and it is not permissible to construe the statute
with reference to the underlying intention while the language of the statute gives rise to a
different construction. One of the ordinary presumptions always is that the legislation does
not intend to make any substantial alteration in the ordinary rules of law beyond what it
explicitly declares either in express terms or by implication. In all general matters outside
2
Elited Kumar, Use and Misuse of right to Information Act,2005 available at https://
elitedkumar.worldpress.com
211
those limits, the law remains undisturbed. The present Act has deprived the subject of his
common law right of action and provides a special and prompt procedure for cases and
special courts in which a speedy decision may be given. Such a statute imposing
restrictions upon the subject's rights should be strictly construed and such restrictions
should not be extended beyond what the words used actually cover.3
Knowledge of misuse by Court and Commission
There are numerous instances of Right to Information Act, 2005, being misused.
Even the State Information Commission was aware of the fact, but currently, there is no
provision to keep a tab on it. According to State Information commissioner in Nagpur
Bhaskar Patil, who has vast experience in dealing with the cases under RTI Act, the
information sought was sometimes misused for alleged blackmailing. "However, providing
information can't be stopped as there is no provision of asking for a motive or reason to be
asked to the RTI applicants,”4
He added that many a time the information sought infringed the right of privacy of
individuals; still there are many loopholes in the procedure which need to be plugged so
that there shouldn't be any misuse or abuse of the Act by vested interests.
There are instances where RTI information was sought on the same subject
pertaining to particular ration card shop as many as 10 times. It clearly indicates that
something is fishy. Even information of hotel owners was demanded. There is definitely
third party interest involved in such applications. But providing information can't be denied
as activists are smart enough to turn it into a public cause. In hotel owners' case, they may
say that they want to check any violations in obtaining hotel licenses.5
Sounding a note of caution to all the public information authorities of the Central
and State , the Department of Personal & Training Government of India issued a circular ,
warning them to desist from supplying such information to the applicant which is
nonexistent and non available, but is based on drawing assumption. The circular says that,
3
Prof. S.R. Bhansali, The Right to Information Act 2005, p.19 ( Indian Publishing House, 2009)
4
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Misuse-of-RTI-Act-riles-PM/articleshow/16789428.cms
5
Ibid.
212
“public information officer is not supposed to create information or interpret information or
solve the problem raised by the applicant or furnish replies to their hypothetical questions.”
In Chandrakant Vrajlal Fichadiya v. State Of Gujarat & ors.6on 13 January, 2017,

the petitioner filed an application for obtaining a copy of the map under RTI Act which was
a third party information that can only reveal after giving the notice to third party with his
consent or 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.
The provisions of RTI Act, as is indicative from the Statement of Objects and
Reasons of the said Act is for securing access to information under the control of public
authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every
public authority. This Court finds that such pious object of the Act is on the contrary
misused by the petitioner that there is no public interest in disclosure.
In studying cases of RTI law it has brought before that it is being misused by casual
or habitual information-seekers for two obvious reasons. Firstly non-applicability of locus-
standi rule to RTI case and secondly, non-requirement of giving reasons for seeking
information leave ample scope for non-serious information seekers to misuse it for their
personal interest.7
Supreme Court has rightly held in Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr. v.
Aditya Bandopadhyay & Anr.8 that the right to information is a cherished right, Information
and right to information are intended to be formidable tools in the hands of responsible
citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability. The provisions
of RTI Act should be enforced strictly and all efforts should be made to bring to light the
necessary information under clause (b) of section 4(1) of the Act which relates to securing
transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities and in discouraging
corruption. But in regard to other information (that is information other than those
enumerated in section 4(1)(b) and (c) of the Act), equal importance and emphasis are given
to other public interests (like confidentiality of sensitive information, fidelity and fiduciary
relationships, efficient operation of governments, etc.). Indiscriminate and impractical
6
C/SCA/20547/2016
7
N V Paranjape, Right to information law in India, p.170 ( Lexis Nexis, 2014)
8
2011 STPL (Web) 685.
213
demands or directions under RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information
(unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and
eradication of corruption) would be counter-productive as it will adversely affect the
efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the
non-productive work of collecting and furnishing information.
The Court further said that the exemptions specified in Section 8 of the RTI Act,
2005 should not be considered as "a fetter on the right to information but they should be
taken as equally important provisions protecting other public interests essential for the
fulfillment as preservation of democratic ideals". The Act should not become a "tool of
oppression" and obstruct the national development and integration or to destroy peace,
tranquility and harmony among citizens. The Court further observed that, "the nation
cannot afford to have the honest public officials bogged down with all and sundry request
unrelated to corruption as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the government
agencies."
The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to

obstruct the national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquility and
harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or
intimidation of honest officials striving to do their duty. The nation does not want a
scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting
and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The
threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act
should not lead to employees of a public authorities prioritising 'information furnishing', at
the cost of their normal and regular duties.
The Commission has stated in some of its decisions that the right to seek
information cannot be and should not be stretched to point that it affects the very process of
governance and compromises the norms on which governance is based. Instead of seeking
legal remedy in matter filing stereotyped petitions and putting undue pressure on the public
authority by filing numerous and detailed RTI applications is in fact misuse of the RTI Act.
Right to information implicit in Article 19(1)(a) which guarantees freedom of

speech and expression is sacrosanct but it is not fair that everyone should approach the
214
court after obtaining information under RTI Act without giving notice to the concerned
authorities. The petitioners should first approach the government before moving the Court
for redresses of their grievance.9
Some Example of the misuse of the Act
Parallel process cannot be run
It is stated in R.K. Gupta v. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal10 the provisions of the
RTI Act cannot and should not be used for starting a parallel process about information
disclosure.
In Neha Srivastava v. Trade Marks Registry11 submitted that there are no provisions
in the Act for redressal of grievances in the garb of seeking information. The Rules are to
be read with the Act and in no case can actually override the Act.
Tool for vendetta
The case of Uma Kanti & Ramesh Chandra v. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti12 is
perhaps the worst case to have come to this bench showing the worst misuse of the RTI Act
The Commission feels that this case together with some others like Shri Faqir Chand v
North Western Railway, Bikaner13 show the necessity of some provision in the RTI Act for
taking punitive action against the Appellants who seek to misuse the RTI Act in such a
blatant fashion.
The CIC in Satish Tiwari v. I.O.C.L14 observed that it is indeed very unfortunate
that a large number of persons who themselves are not so clean in so far as their conduct
and behavior, including economic integrity is concerned and it is they who have been
misusing the provisions of the RTI Act for promotion of personal interest at the heavy cost
of public expenditure which are incurred in processing the RTI applications.
The Scope of the RTI Act is to ensure only that information sought is provided
within the framework of the RTI Act and rules and there under. The ambit of RTI is very
9
10
CIC Digest (Vol.IV) 3658 (2824).
11
CIC Digest (Vol IV) 3666 (2833).
12
dt. 5.1.2008, CIC Digest (Vol. II) 1977(943).
13
No.CIC/OK/A/2007/00951.
14
CIC Digest (Vol IV) 3685 (2849).
215
clear that is the information available can only be provided. The RTI Act cannot be used as
an alternative means of accessing the law, but is only an instrument for obtaining
information as defined in the Act.PIO cannot be expected to give his own opinion on
various matters and can only supply the information based on records.
Information commissioner Sharat Sabharwal found that an applicant had filed 28

RTIs over a period of nine months with Sarva UP Gramin Bank in Muzaffarnagar in his
name and his relatives after he was denied a loan. 15
Similarly, Thrissur based PD Raphael had filed 30 RTI applications against the
CBSE after he was removed from a school for his misbehavior, dereliction of duty and
unauthorised leave.
Imposing penalty in frivolous cases
The spirit of the RTI Act is to bring transparency and curb corruption and not a tool
for vendetta or promoting ulterior motives in the garb of seeking information. Therefore the
provisions of RTI cannot be used to settle the grievances or to arbitrate on disputes.
In Ramakrishna v. Ministry of Steel 16 CIC advised the appellant to refrain from

misusing the provisions of RTI Act, failing which appropriate action would be taken
against him? The Scope of RTI Act is very clear that is to provide the information that exist
and in accordance with the RTI Act and rules the information can be provided. Any
application which is made against the spirit of RTI Act should be discouraged by imposing
penalty.
The information commissioner, Tamilnadu Sridhar Acharyulu directed that

disciplinary action should be taken against applicant Saifi who has filed 36 application
against Principal and colleagues teachers about medical expenses, vacation details of the
integrity report of the committee members hearing complaints against him etc., which are
their private matter. The RTI Act is silent on action against misuse of the law though it has
provision for a penalty of Rs 25,000 on the public authority if information is not given.17
15
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/guard-against-misuse-of-rti-act/article8409561.ece the
Hindu march 29,2016
16
CIC digest (Vol. II) 2186. (1207)
17
TNN,April21,2015.
216
No public interest
Where the information is not related to any public interest nor the intention of
information seeker showed any public interest, the same may be refused as it would be
deemed to be a misuse of the RTI law. For instance, in Hardev Arya v Chief Manager
(Public Information Officers) & others, 18 the petitioner sought information regarding
details with regard to opening of bank account of an institution named arya Kanya Gurukul
Chhawani, Sheoganj (District Sirohi) which was a registered society running educational
schools etc. The petitioner having doubt about the legality of the said institution sought
information allegedly for safeguarding public merest at large. The Bank refused to disclose
information claiming exemption under section 8(j) of the RTI Act and Section 13 of the
Banking Companies Act, 1970, and informed the petitioner that it being a third party
information, cannot be imparted to him because it was not in public interest.
Disposing of the writ petition, the High Court of Rajasthan held that the petitioner
was neither the member of Arya Kanya Gurukul, Chhawani nor he had disclosed in his
petition how he is interested with the functioning of the said institution and there appeared
no relationship of the information sought with any public activity or interest. Therefore, it
was evident that the purpose of obtaining information was to misuse or threaten the
institution and it is for this reason that the petition deserves to be dismissed. The Court
warned that RTI has been enacted to bring transparency in administration and strengthen
the faith and trust of the people in the governance of the country. Therefore, the RTI law is
a vital weapon in the hands of the citizens but at the same time, it cannot be allowed to be
wielded unlawfully so as to be abused or misused by unscrupulous information-seekers.
The conduct of the petitioner in this case was far from fair and therefore, the writ was
dismissed with a cost of Rs 10,000/- which the petitioner was directed to deposit with the
Free Legal Aid Board of the High Court, Jodhpur within one month.19
Information available as open source
If the required information is available in market as published material or available

at internet or can be openly available at the concerned office as public document, then
18
AIR 2013 Raj 97.
19
Ibid para 12.
217
filing application for such information is only a misuse of the Act and a burden on the
system. In the case of State Public Information Officer & Deputy Registrar, Karnataka, v
Karnataka Information Commission & Prabhakar Rao 20 the appellant requested for
certified copies of the order sheet and documents relating to guidelines and rules are
pertaining to scrutiny of writ petition and its procedure etc. The same was refused by the
SPIO on the ground that printed copies of the Rules & Procedure for writ petitions filed in
the High Court were openly available in the market and the appellant could easily have
access to them. The High Court upheld the refusal of the SPIO and observed that supply of
such copies free of cost would lead to illegal demand which could not be permitted by law.
Ask for certified copies of documents submitted by himself

21
In the case of V.R. Krishnakumar v. Ministry of Commerce & Industry the
information asked for has no relationship to any public activity. An applicant is not
expected to ask the respondent to certify the documents submitted by him. The appellant
has unfortunately misused the provisions of the Act to ask for certified copies of documents
submitted by him.
Pressurize or harass the public authority
In the case of Deshmukh Suresh Bhagwanrao v. C.B.E.C., Department of Revenue,

New Delhi 22 Commission has received petitions from employees of public authorities on
such matters as implementation of Court and Tribunal orders, by the public authority;
action taken on the petitions in service matters filed by the employee demand for
explanation about why an employee was transferred from one post to another; reasons why
a public authority started any disciplinary proceeding against the employee; why was an
employee not empanelled for promotion; and so on. Irrespective of the merit of such RTI
applications and irrespective of whether these are admissible under the RTI Act, the
important point that emerges is that employees of the public authority are using the RTI
Act to pressurize, brow-beat or harass the public authority in order to force them to take
decisions or rescind a decision in respect of a certain employee. Such employees may or
may not succeed in their endeavours, but the fact that they use the RTI Act in a given way
20
KIC/6117/PTN/2010.
21
dt. 31.12.2008, CIC Digest (Vol. 110 2743 (2117).
22
dt. 31.05.2007, CIC Digest (Vol. 11)1516(280).
218
shows that they are treating the Act as a means to the disciplinary control of their superiors
in the public authority. The Right to Information Act was not meant to sub-serve such ends.
It shall be a sad day if the provisions of this Act become a plaything in the hands of
employees of public authorities,
Harass the department
In the case of Shripal Jain v. North Western Railway23 The Appellant is taking
recourse to the RTI merely to harass the Department and put it under undue pressure.
Commission directs the Appellant to first clear all the dues for the information already
compiled and receive them before filing another RTI application and authorizes the
Respondents not to respond to any of his applications till such time that the Appellant has
paid for the information which has already been compiled.
Harass the officials because of some adverse action
In the case of A.B. Avadhanulu v. South Central Railway, Vijayawada &

Secunderabad 24 The Appellant obviously is seeking to put the Public Authority under
undue pressure and harass the officials because of some adverse action which the
Department had taken against him. During the hearing, the Commission made it clear to the
Appellant that the RTI Act cannot be made a tool of vendetta against the Department in
which a Person has served and has invited some adverse action during the course of
service. It is in such cases that the Commission feels the need of some provision for
punitive action against such Appellants.
Putting pressure on the respondent
In the case of Manohar Singh Pangtev v. North Eastern handloom & handicrafts
Dev. Corporation25 The complainant has grievance relating to payment of arrear of pay,
which is withheld by the respondent. The complainant is aware that there has been irregular
payments to him on account of official housing facilities availed of by him and his family.
The CAG has already asked for recovery of excess amount incurred in this regard. In such
a circumstance, the arrear pay, if any, is to be adjusted with the outstanding dues and the
23
dt. 09.05.2008, CIC Digest (Vol. II) 2206 (1235).
24
25
219
remaining amount is to be recovered with interest, for which necessary steps have been
initiated by the respondent. The complainant is aware of this position, yet he has attempted
to put pressure on the respondent under RTI Act and, unfortunately, he has misled the
Commission also, for promoting his personal interest by way of hiding facts.
Asking for desperate and voluminous information
In the case of Dinesh K. Gohil v. All India Radio26 the Commission would like to
record that there should be some provision for punitive action against the Appellant for
misusing the RTI Act asking for desperate and voluminous information thereby making the
application itself meaningless.
While leaving in a huff, the Appellant left behind all the 1800 odd pages of
information that had been supplied to him telling the Commission that he was throwing all
the pages here. Nothing could be a more solid proof of the fact that he actually did not
require the information but had put in an application only for harassing the public authority
and trying to put it under undue pressure.
The conduct of the Appellant is, therefore, an intentional insult caused to the
Presiding Officer of the Commission sitting in a judicial proceeding and the same,
therefore, is an offence punishable under Section 228 of the IPC. This further reveals that
the appellant never needed any information and that the application under RTI Act was
moved by him only with a view to causing harassment and wrongful loss to the Public
Authority. In fact, the information has been extracted from the PIO of the Public Authority
holding out a threat of eventual imposition of penalty on him. This conduct of the
Appellant is tantamount to an offence punishable under Section 189 of the IPC. Under the
circumstances, the Commission, directs the Respondents (Station Director of All India
Radio, Ahmedabad), to take steps for filing a complaint case under the appropriate
provisions of penal law against the Appellant in the Court of the CMM/CJM.
In J.I. Buck v. State Bank of Saurashtra,27 the appellant had sought a large number
of information which covered not only all branches and offices of the bank but also
pertained to several years in time. The CIC upheld the view of the CPIO that collection and
26
27
2010 (1) ID 291 (CIC, New Delhi).
220
collation of such voluminous information would indeed divert resources of the Public
Authority disproportionately from its normal public duty. In the instant case, the appellant
agreed to revise his request for information and file a revised request before the CPIO
concerned to enable the CPIO to provide him the information. The same was held in S.
Thangavel v. BSNL, Chennai, 28 where the appellant had asked for photocopies of
voluminous BSNL records. Also in the case, thousands of third parties were involved and
getting their submissions would disproportionately divert the resources of BSNL.
For cheap publicity
The Supreme Court in Manoj Mishra v Union of India29 warned against misuse of
RTI law by persons who assume the role of vigilante merely for the sake of cheap publicity
or for achieving some ulterior or selfish motive. In the instant case, appellant had indulged
in making scandalous remarks by alleging that there was widespread corruption within the
sensitive atomic organisation. The Court found that conduct of the appellant in this case did
not fall within the high moral and ethical standard that would be required of a bona fide
whistle blower. In the guise of exposing illegal activities of the public organisation, he was
trying to create a great deal of panic among the local population as well as throughout the
State of Gujarat. Court pointed out that every informer cannot automatically be said to be a
bona whistle-blower because he is from the same organisation and has access to some
information, which is not available to the general public. The primary motive of a whistle-
blower should be to cleanse the organisation in which he is working, it should not be
incidental or by-product for an action taken for personal vengeance. The Court missing the
appeal held that no injustice has been caused to the appellant by punishment imposed on
him and therefore, it warrants no interference by the Court.
There are many case related to this incidences like Faqir chand v. Railways (33
questions asked by the applicant on the diverse matters) Manohar singh v. NTPC (the
employee filed as many as 74 or even more applications for seeking information)). Even in
28
AIR 2010 SC 615: 2010 AIR SCW 363: 2010 (1) ID 319 (CIC, New Delhi).
29
(2013) 6 SCC 313
221
this case the government employees are asking many questions which are not significant
but a kind of fancies which may waste the useful time and money of public at large.30
Self serving cause - frivolous case
In the case of Ashish Kumar Khare v. Fishery Survey of India,31 It is held that the
information supplied to the appellant by the CPIO corresponds to the request for
information made by the appellant, and there is no obligation on the part of the CPIO to
provide any more information to the appellant as the rules, notifications, circulars, etc. are
already in the public domain and hence accessible to the appellant.
In All India Road Network Users Association v Union of India, the petitioners
sought information from the Transport Commissioner regarding enforcement of provisions
relating to proper seating in cars, buses, trucks and other heavy vehicles to minimise
accidents arising due to poor visibility during the monsoon season. The petitioners
contended that although the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, lays down seating-norms but
accidents due to poor visibility on accounts of heavy clouds, rains, dense fog etc were still
recording an increase. Reacting to the issues raised is the petition, the Apex Court observed
that, "it was not undermining the importance of public interest involved in the writ petition
but it would have been more appropriate if the petitioners had first approached the
appropriate government authorities before approaching this Court". The petition was,
therefore withdrawn on the advice of the Court.
Interested in the affairs of other colleagues without any justifiable reasons
In the case of R.C. Jena v. Department of Posts32 CIC held that, many a time, a
requester is more interested in the affairs of other colleagues without any justifiable
reasons, rather than himself, as in the instant case. In doing so, they misuse office
infrastructure for seeking information rather than devoting adequate time and energy for
providing mandatory public services of high quality. Such employees, at the cost of public
resources merely promote personal interest which tantamount to a serious nature of misuse
of the Act. The present appeal falls in such a category of misuse of the Act by a public
30
The flip side of RTI ACT, The Administrator, Vol. L, June 2007, PP 21-38.
31
dt. 25.10.2006 CIC Digest (Vol. I) 1153.
32
222
servant, who has sought to know the details of service related information about another
colleague, mainly for promotion of his personal interest.
Means of making money
In the case of Yogesh Rajarao Reddy v. South East Central Railway, Nagpur33 The
Commission would like this Order to be a general caution to the Appellants not to be taken
in by unscrupulous elements who see the whole RTI movement as a means of making
money.
In the guise of whistle -blower
The Supreme Court in Nimmagadda v CBI34 express that with the advent of RTI
Act, it has been possible to expose the corrupt public officials and whistle blowers play a
crucial role in cleansing an organization so as to bring in transparency and openness in the
system of governance. They act as a vigil mechanism to detect and deter fraud. But there
are cases not wanting when RTI Act has been misused by certain disgruntled employees
within the department or organisation who assume the role of so called whistle blower to
accomplish their ulterior motives or take revenge against their rival competitor by
tarnishing his image as a corrupt person.
Expressing concern for misuse of RTI law, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in
Diwakar S. Natarajan v State Information Commissioner,35 observed that "indiscriminate
efforts to secure information just for the sake of it, without there being any genuine and
useful purpose to serve, would only put enormous pressure on the limited human resources
that are available. Diversion of such resource for this task would obviously be at the cost of
the ordinary functioning. Beyond a point it may become harassment for the concerned
public agencies. Therefore, much needs to be done in this direction to impart a sense of
reasonability on those who want to derive benefit under RTI Act, to be more realistic and
practical in approach."
Shankar Patil, State Information Commissioner, Karnatka told officials at the zilla
panchayat to use their discretion in deciding on RTI applications that were not bona fide.
33
34
AIR 2013 SC 2821.
35
AIR 2009 AP 1362
223
“If you know that an application has been filed only to harass officers or seek details of an
officer or beneficiary’s private life, there is no need to give information. You can always
reject the application right away, citing specific reasons,” he said. He was responding to an
officer who complained that he had received a RTI application that sought the names and
phone numbers of inmates of a girls’ hostel. Recalling one of his judgments, he said that a
teacher had filed numerous RTI applications only to harass a headmaster who had
suspended him. “I warned him that he would be arrested if he continued to do that.36
Lack of knowledge at all levels is also evident when none dealing with RTI petition
(including even the then Chief Information Commissioner having given the verdict) cited a
gazette-notification dated 31.07.2012 which restricted a word-limit of 500 words in an RTI
petition. The then Chief Information Commissioner was also known for giving non-
speaking decision-part, sometimes months after the hearing surprisingly with no file-
notings on record. Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) should arrange massive
training-programmes by experts for handling RTI petitions to avoid wastage of man-hours
of public-authorities in handling RTI petitions of frivolous vexatious and nuisance nature,
and providing proper replies to genuine RTI petitions where some public-authorities are
known for abuse of RTI Act by misuse of section 6(3) of RTI Act in transferring an RTI
petition uselessly to hundreds/thousands of departments. Compilation of DoPT circulars on
RTI should be an annual feature like was once done in the year 2013. Considering high cost
of rupees 37.45 in handling postal-orders usually used for mode of payment of RTI fees,
DoPT should ask Department of Posts to issue attractive RTI stamps in denominations of
rupees 2, 10 and 50 like earlier Radio & TV license fees stamps as a publicity tool for RTI
Act.37
If the governance systems generate huge number of complaints out of ‘service’, but
not an effective system of their redressal, it is a problem with potency to transform into a
crisis. When the RTI emerged as a mechanism from the crisis in governance, why not it
helps the redressal too? The RTI is the result of revolutions and evolutions passing through
political turbulences leading to establishment of democratic rule. It cannot be sacrificed by
36
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/guard-against-misuse-of-rti-act/article8409561.ece the
hindu march 29,2016
37
http://www.livelaw.in/welcome-hc-order-on-abuse-of-rti-act-lack-of-rti-knowledge-at-all-levels/
224
the misuse by authorities of power of discretion provided by law. Its people’s precision
right that need to be protected by themselves. It should not be allowed to die with strategic
but illegal defences like ‘missing file’ or ‘records not traceable’, or misuse of discretion to
decide disclosure. The provisions of RTI law need to be liberally interpreted and the scope
of exceptions should be realistic.
There has also been the apprehension that it may be misused to blackmail officials
or organisations. In this context it should be remembered that this law can be used to access
the truth, therefore, it may be said that how one can misuse the truth. The situation of
blackmailing the officials or organisations will only emerge when the official is placed in a
privileged position to maintain secrecy of sensitive information. It is the situation of
secrecy coupled with unguided discretion of authority, which creates a situation of
blackmailing in favour of official position and not the other way round. It may further be
said that the scope of misuse or blackmail will be reduced or minimised to a great extent in
a situation of transparency and free access to information.38
The misuse of RTI is done by the people, politicians and even bureaucrats for their
own benefits. As in the recent days the debate over political parties not coming under the
ambit of RTI law is showing the misuse of RTI in itself. Because the money by which the
political parties fight election is not known, particularly the source. Even those way
political parties are a public authority, which should be come under the ambit of RTI Act.
Over here the nexus between the politicians-officials –contractors don’t want to get
exposed in that way. They try to use many alternatives by adopting various methods of to
stop RTI exposures like murdering the RTI activists, threatening them and even in many
cases they have to succumb to further exposure. Thus it is also a kind of misuse of RTI act
because of RTI act these people who expose the scams in many cases of different places
are getting killed. If they wouldn’t have exposed these powerful corrupt people, their life
could have saved.
38
Manish Kumar Khunger, “Right to Information Act 2005: Operational Issues and Major Concerns”, Int. J.
of Multidisciplinary and Current research, Vol.3 (March/April 2015)
225
Challenges in the Effective Implementation of the Act
The Act is over-ambitious and the practical difficulties in the implementation of

various clauses have not been considered. There seems to be a great negative bias against
the government functionaries and public authorities in the formulation of the Act,
generating a feeling that they are the real culprits in the scheme of democratic governance.
Also the information seekers have some genuine concerns and queries regarding the Act.
Further, considering the socio-political and economic reality of India, the RTI Act appears
somewhat Utopian in nature so far as the socio-economically defenceless, poor and
illiterate masses are concerned.13The Act may, the maximum, serve the needs of the elite
section and that too in a limited way because of lack of infrastructure, indifference of the
power-holders and absence of transparency in administration. So there are many issues for
proper implementation of the Act.
Commenting on the problems which are raised before the judiciary and the
enforcement agencies in dealing with information related offences, the Supreme Court in
State of Punjab v M/s Amritsar Beverages Ltd & Ors,39 observed that Right to Information
law has brought with it the issues which were not foreseen by law. It also did not foresee
the difficulties which may be faced by the public information officers who may not have
any scientific expertise or sufficient insight to tackle with the new situation. Various new
developments leading to various kinds of illegal activities unforeseen by Legislature have
come to immediate focus. The problems faced by the officers enforcing the RTI Act are
multifarious to which the attention of the higher Courts is drawn through writ petitions.
In its decade long existence, the Act has managed to bring transparency by
exposing slew of corruption cases running into thousands of crores such as CWG, 2G and
Adarsh society scam. But, accountability in the routine working of the public authorities is
yet to take roots as majority of common citizens still find access to information difficult
due to delays, supply of insufficient information and limited reach of the Act.
The defects of Right to Information Act in mainly seen in the implementation of the
Act. There are several drawbacks in the Act itself also. The public authorities generally do
not displayed information about RTI on their departmental or on the notice boards of
39
AIR 2006 SC 2820.
226
concerned departments such as name plates of Public Information Officers (PIO) and
Assistant PIOs in their offices. The Act has mentioned to disseminate the information
prescribed under section 4(1) through various means of communication. However this
information is not seen even on the notice boards of public authorities in practical at many
places. PIOS do not have any training to deal with RTI applications. This creates delay in
the process of the delivery of the answer of the application. It is mandatory for the
commission to pay levy penalty under the section 20 if the information is not provided
within 30 days. In this context commission absolutely no discretion in this regard. Because
of such lack of stringent enforcement in the Act government officials do not have much
fear. The commission is supposed to prepare a report on the implementation of RTI Act at
the end of every year u/s 25(1). No proper report comes through Commission.
The effective implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005 depends on

three fundamental shifts, namely, from the prevailing culture of secrecy to a new culture of
openness; from personalised despotism to authority coupled with accountability; and
finally from unilateral decision-making to participative governance.40 However, it has been
observed that the free flow of information has often been hampered by various institutional
and organisational factors, inefficient processes and mechanisms, awareness and usage
issues, inadequate use of information technology etc. We always bear in mind that we are
all stakeholders in the Act and must guard against allowing it to become a tool for
promotion of an adversial relationship between the various stakeholders, as this will only
weaken the Act.
Impediments in seeking information
Mere acceptance of right is not sufficient; there is a need to do away with various
impediments that come up in the way of accessing information. Many information seekers
are either ill informed of their rights or are often disheartened to the callous, unfriendly and
often condescending attitude of the public authorities concerned. So there are many
challenges before the stakeholders of right to information to resolve. Poor record-keeping
practices within the bureaucracy, lack of infrastructure and staff for running Information
40
Abhishek Jain, "RTI Implementation at the District level: Issues and Challenges." The Indian Journal of
Public Administration, Vol. 55, No. 3, July-September 2009, pp. 346-363 at p. 347.
227
Commissions, and dilution of supplementary laws such as the one for whistleblower
protection as reasons for this
Low Public Awareness
Despite lots of publicity through various modes, the public awareness about
significance of this Act, the modus operandi of getting the information, and the knowledge
of names of PIO's/APIO's etc. is quite low. The efforts made by the public authorities and
governments have not been adequate in generating mass awareness of the RTI Act.
Educating the masses is absolutely essential in this regard.
Majority of the applicants who seek information lack awareness of the provisions of
the RTI Act. For instance, many applicants approach the Information Commission directly
for the seeking information without making any reference to the concerned PIO. In cases of
refusal by the concerned PIO, the applicants approach the Information Commission without
first exhausting the appeal before the First Appellate Authority in the department or public
authority concerned. Similarly, a number of applicants are not aware of the proper
procedure for obtaining information under the Act. They submit applications without
depositing the prescribed application fee. A good public relation exercise would provide
the information in a way as to generate community’s conviction about the efficacy and
usefulness of the service.
Though some steps have been taken by the government as well as the Information
Commissions yet these seem to be insufficient. Administrative Training Institutes in the
states are imparting training to the RTI functionaries but these institutes do not have
adequate funds at their disposal. There has been no popular campaign undertaken by the
government, either in the electronic or print media, to make RTI popular among the
citizens. Although the non-governmental organisations and the media are doing their bit in
their own small way but their efforts have proved to be inadequate.41
Discretionary rule making power
The section 27 and 28 of the act empowers 'State Government" and "Competent
Authorities" to make their own rules, this in many context counters the RTI Act. This
41
Dr. Anshu Jain, A treatise on the right To Information Act, p178(Universal law Publishing, 2014).
228
provision is grossly misused by many competent authorities, State governments and the
corrupt bureaucracies or officers. For example, Many State and Competent Authorities
have prescribed fee as high as Rs. 500 instead of Rs. 10 which prescribed in the Act. This is
a form of denial of the poor. And moreover they make the application form and payment
mode complicated which is another form of discrimination of illiterates. For example, in
some application form is not available in local language, rather issued in English only.
Therefore, the power granted to the States Governments and Competent Authorities under
section 27 and 28 to frame their own rules should be recalled and must be under one
uniform rule by the Central government. And people from any part of the country should
be enabling to seek information from any other part of the country.
Lack of Uniformity in Various PIO/APIO of Similar Departments in Different States
It has been observed that there is no uniformity in the designation of various

PIO/APIOs of similar departments in different states. The PIO/APIO's are left to be
designated by the various public authorities on their own in different states, leaving
confusion among the applicants needing information from various states. For instance, the
PIO/APIO of Panchayati Raj Institutions might be different states. Uniformity in
designation of officers is essential to remove unnecessary confusion.
Poor Quality of Information Provided
Quite often, the quality of information provided to the applicants is very poor. It is
either incomplete or inaccurate. More than 75 per cent of the citizens are dissatisfied with
the quality of information being provided. Over 90 per cent people in the states of Andhra
Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh said that incomplete information was provided to them.42 It is
also a common criticism that to meet the thirty day deadline, sometimes incomplete
information is handed down to the applicant.
The studies undertaken by Research, Assessment & Analysis Group (RaaG) pointed
out that while the Supreme Court had in numerous orders cautioned against the tendency of
adjudicators to give cryptic and unreasoned orders, “more than 60% of the orders of the
information commissions contained deficiencies in terms of not recording critical facts”.
42
Final Report, Understanding the Key Issues and Constraints in implementing the RTI Act, Pricewaterhouse
Coopers, June 2009, p. 44.
229
The study revealed that while in the case of the CIC 63% of the orders did not
describe the information sought; things were slightly better at 35 % in Assam, but worse
off at 73 % in Rajasthan and 74% in Bihar.43
This is “problematic” because, for the concerned public authorities and people,
there was no way to find out the rationale for these decisions. Therefore, passing a non-
speaking order, which only records the decision of the Information Commission without
providing the reasons for its decisions or other relevant details, is a violation of people’s
right to information and goes against the fundamental principles of transparency.
Impending administrative reforms
The obstructions faced by ICs and PAs in maintaining flow of information arise
from weakening of SICs’ role as implementing agencies. Under section 18 of the RTI Act,
SICs, along with disposing off 2nd appeals and complaints, are also responsible for
supervising compliance of the Act by Public Authority. Recognizing the importance of
modernization of record management by introducing information technology and capacity
building of PIOs for proper implementation of the Act, SICs have regularly recommended
to their respective state governments to carry out these reforms. Yet, it eludes
implementation because SICs do not have the authority to enforce its recommendations.
The authority rests with the state governments which have so far shown negligible progress
in implementing these recommendations.44
Attitude of PIOs
Information seekers often complain of the unfriendly and hostile attitude of the
officers. About fifty-nine per cent of applicants find the PIOs lacking in basic courtesy.45A
number of applicants feel humiliated at the hands of the officers. They say that one has to
be quite stubborn and indifferent to this condescending attitude of the officers to get
information out of them. It is felt that such a behavior dissuades the citizens from
approaching the authorities.
43
Gaurav Vivek Bhatnagar, Poor Implementation and Delays Are Making the RTI Act Redundant available
at https://thewire.in/78983/rti-study-poor-implementation/
44
(http://nebula.wsimg.com/93c4b1e26eb3fbd41782c6526475ed79?AccessKeyId=52EBDBA4FE710433B3D
8&disposition=0&alloworigin=1
45
Id at 10.
230
There have been several reports that most PIOs, especially at the district level are not co-
operative and they sometimes force the applicants to withdraw their applications.46PIOs
also tend to give inadequate information and hide crucial facts at the instance of their
superiors. They use ambiguous and ambivalent language in their responses. Consequently,
in most cases, they follow the letter of the Act but violate its spirit in a brazen manner.47
Appointment of Information Commissioners
The appointment of former bureaucrats as Chief Information Officers has raised

that the RTI regime may become just another means for the bureaucracy to tighten its
reigns over government information. As a matter of fact, the second Administrative Reform
Commissions has recommended that the government should ensure that half the number of
Information Commissioners should be drawn from non-civil services backgrounds.
Since the inception of the Act a lot of criticism has been received regarding the
appointment of retired bureaucrats as Information Commissioners. It is quite surprising that
the responsibility of this Act has placed upon those who have lived in a culture of secrecy
themselves. This creates doubts on the success of the Act itself. All information
commissioners are selected without any process and most have no predilection for
transparency. When their decisions go against the applicant very few have the resources to
challenge them in courts. On the other hand, when an important decision goes against the
public authority the department goes to court. In most of these cases, the ability of
applicants to pursue these cases is not high and hence most incorrect denials get confirmed
by courts.48
Inconvenient Fee Payment
The fee charged for furnishing information and the manner of payment is not
uniform, There is also confusion about the head of accounts to which the application and
other fees are to be credited.
While it is desirable for the State Government to have various channels for fee
collection; however, in the absence of clear guidelines and instructions, PAs have chosen a
46
Rajvir S. Dhaka, "Empowering Citizens: How Best to Make RTI a Success", The Tribune, 29 November
2009, p. 13.
47
Ranbir Singh, "RTI Ineffective in Haryana", The Tribune, Chandigarh, 1 July, 2009, p. 09.
48
http://thewire.in/12560/the-supreme-court-is-also-guilty-of-diluting-the-right-to-information/
231
subset of the allowed payment channels. It was noted in the information provider survey,
that majority of PIOs used cash and demand drafts, which causes inconvenience to citizens.
Further, collection of fee through cash necessitates the presence of the applicant in the
State, whereas the Act does not provide for any such restriction.49
Another issue is the payment mechanisms prescribed in some of the State rules are
inconvenient to the citizens applying from locations outside the concerned State. For
example, the application fee in Orissa can only be paid through treasury challans and
bankers cheques. Also postal order, which is considered to be the easiest payment channel,
is not an available option in Maharashtra, Orissa and Andhra Pradesh.
Backlog of Pending cases
There is a huge backlog of cases in the information commissions. In some states

like Assam, on average it would now take about 30 years for a new appeal to be heard.
Similarly, in West Bengal, a new matter would come up for hearing after 11 years and in
Kerala after 7 years. This is unthinkable as most of the appeals pertain to immediate issues
related to basic entitlements like subsidised rations, old age pensions, medical facilities and
minimum wages. With such huge delays, it would become meaningless for the applicants
to take recourse to the RTI Act for getting any information or to get their grievances
redressed.
The Delhi High Court in Premchand Sharma v CIC , New Delhi 50takes judicial
notice of the fact that there is a huge pendency of matters before the Information
Commissioners. So it is not appropriate to give direction to expedite the hearing especially
when the matter is clubbed with a number of other matters, where common questions of
law are involved.
Citizen’s participation in everyday governance entails supply of information in due

time. According to a study, pendency of cases in 23 Information Commissions (ICs) across
India is 1,98,739. And, it takes at least a year for an appeal to come up for hearing before
an IC. The resultant delay in accessing information undermines citizens’ right to know and
49
Report of Pricewaterhouse Coopers, Final Understanding the “Key Issues and Constraints” in
implementing the RTI Act.
50
Writ Petition No. : 308/2016, Delhi High Court.
232
redress individual grievances, access entitlements such as ration cards and pensions,
investigate government policies and decisions, and expose corruption. One of the main
reasons for high pendency of appeals with ICs is ineffective process of information supply
at the level of Public authorities (PAs) during first application and subsequent first
appeal.51
Misuse of RTI
The RTI requests, at times, are not simply to satisfy one's doubt but also to derive
vicarious pleasures. Public interest which the Act intends to secure is missing in many RTI
applications. There have been instances where applicants seek policy related information
and many a times the applicants have vested interests. At times the Act is used by people to
harass their colleagues or blackmail the authorities. Moreover, there are numerous
instances of applicants demanding irrelevant or frivolous information. Such a selfish and
unintelligent use of the Act will defeat the high objectives of the Act. It has also been
observed that the Act is frequently being used by government servants, mostly disgruntled,
under disciplinary proceedings to settle their service matters. It is also being misused by
people interested in gathering evidence in their litigation cases.52
There is likelihood that the requestor may not turn up to pay the additional fees
once the information is ready. It is also unfortunate that the language being used by
requestors is at times, intemperate and impolite, to say the least.53 The RTI Act is being
used by business competitors of public authorities. In certain cases, some NGOs are
indulging in getting projects sanctioned from international agencies which they complete
by simply filing a RTI application in the Central Ministry concerned, which in turn has to
procure the data from various states and districts. The Commission has now started looking
at some alternative remedies while dealing with information requests. It now insists that if a
normal internal mechanism for assessing information is good enough, recourse to RTI Act
51
http://cic.gov.in/Sub-Com-1-Report/1_Title.pdf
52
Abhishek Jain and Aarushi Jain, "Promoting Right to Information Through E-Governance-A Case of E-
Soochna and other Initiatives in H.P." The Indian journal of Public Administration, Vol.55, No.1, January-
March 2009,at p. 38
53
Prabodh Saxena "The Flip Side of RTI Act", The Administrator, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy
Journal of Administration, June 2997, Vol. 50, No. 1, pp. 23-25, at p. 23.
233
may not be permissible.54 There is also a need to guard against the growth of professional
middlemen who use this Act for personal gain, as witnessed in some other countries.
Constraints faced in inspection of records
Under Section 7(9) of the Act, information is to be provided in the form it is

requested in, unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the Public
Authority. It was highlighted that some information requests require the PIOs to do a
collation and analysis of data for past 10 years or more. These cases are fit to use the
provision in Section 7(9) and information in these cases can be provided through inspection
of records. But in practice they did not use the provision for inspection of records.55 Some
departments are using this provision to provide information to the applicants. This is an
appreciable effort in generating transparency in the working of a Public Authority. If
trained properly, the PIOs can provide an option to the citizens to inspect the records. This
may help in providing timely and accurate information to the applicant.
Primitive and ineffective Record Management
Good record management ensures a smooth and prompt flow of information. What
is lacking in our system is the scientific management of records. Apart from some sporadic
initiatives, the maintenance and retrieval systems for official records are primitive in our
country. In some offices indexing of records is conspicuous by its absence. Annual
statements and records are not maintained. Online maintenance of records and its updating
is an exception rather than the rule.
As a matter of fact, in thirty eight per cent cases, the major reason for delay in
processing RTI applications is due to ineffective record management.56 As a consequence,
whenever any demand for information is received, the offices concerned expend their
energies in freshly locating and retrieving record for every individual request. The current
record management guidelines at Centre and in most states are not geared to meet the
54
Ibid.
55
89% PIO accepted they do not use this according Report of Pricewaterhouse Coopers, Final Understanding
the “Key Issues and Constraints” in implementing the RTI Act
56
Final Report, Implementation of Right to Information Act ,Pricewaterhouse Coopers, 2009.
234
requirements specified under the RTI Act.57 For improving this scenario, we need nothing
less than total administrative reform, especially the utilisation of information technology.
Digital India must be in practical sense.
As per Section 4(1)(a) of the Act, a Public Authority needs “to maintain all its
records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and form which facilitates the Right to
Information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be
computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources,
computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so
that access to such records is facilitated”. Record management system plays a vital role in
timely disposal of a RTI application. The PIOs cited in a survey record management system
as a reason for delay in processing RTI requests. Further it is also cited collection of
information from field offices as a cause of delay. These findings point towards a weak
record management system being followed where critical field level information is not
available at the higher levels of hierarchy. Most significantly the practice of cataloguing,
indexing and orderly storage is absent, which is critical for quick-turnaround in case of
information request under RTI Act. It becomes difficult to provide information completely
and timely on the part of PA’s. If the RTI has to succeed, then the Public Records Act must
be implemented.
Expenditure in seeking information
The RTI Act prescribes no qualification and reason for asking information. So
anyone without locus standi ask for an information. There is excessive government
expenditure on the disposal of RTI applications. According to one estimate the government
spends about Rs.10000 in disposal of one case. The person seeking information should
have some standing or locus to seek information.58
Similarly, the clause of free information to BPL category applicant is being misused
because a non BPL person may route his application in the name of a BPL and find
information free of cost which may cost hundreds of rupees to the PIO. This trend has
57
Implementation of Right to Information Act, 2005, Report of the National Sub-Committee of Central
Information Commission, New Delhi, July 2008, p. 18
58
Shalish Gandhi, Current Assessment of RTI, Report of the third annual convention, Central Information
Commission, New Delhi
235
witnessed in many states. The RTI Act only confers right but does not prescribe any duties.
Certain duties and responsibilities should be incorporated in the Act as in Article 19(3) of
the International covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Clause of Any PIO
This is an overambitious clause which allows the application to be filled to any PIO
even though not the possession of information, which has to be forwarded to the concerned
PIO. This clause requires the PIO receiving the original application to trace and re send it
to the concerned PIO, which takes lot of time and energy. Though it is benefitting the
applicant but on the part of the information officer it is harsh.
Failure to provide information within 30 days
Currently there exist inadequate measures and processes for an Information

Commission to view the adherence levels of this important provision of the Act. The
Information Commission gets to know the failure of the Public Authority in providing the
information within 30 days (or 48 hours or 35 days or 40 days as may be the case) once the
appeal or complaint is filed. During a study, more than 50% of the information seekers
mentioned that it took more than 30 days to receive the information from the PIO. The
experience of citizens from disadvantaged communities was similar to the overall
experience levels.
The time limit of 30 days to furnish information is sometime impractical because of

certain genuine administrative reason like the PIO or the dealing staff on the leave, public
holidays, and emergent administrative assignments. Despite bona fide intention the 30 days
clause become extremely difficult in such cases.
Ineffective Implementation of Voluntary Disclosure Obligations
The major obligations that the Governments and public authorities have failed to
fulfill, despite the legislative mandate, are enumerated in sections 4 (1) (a), (b), (c), (d) and
4(2), (3) and (4) of the RTI Act. The public authorities are under an obligation to publish
sixteen theme manuals and its information. However, the public authorities have not
followed it seriously. Even the mandatory information is either not published or not given
adequate publicity. Websites of various authorities are either non-existent or are rarely
236
updated. At times there is a lot of difficulty in accessing these websites as they do not open.
Some public authorities do not care to even display the names, phone numbers and
addresses of their PIOs, APIOs and the appellate authorities at proper places. This is
mainly due to the fact that incomplete or insufficient disclosure has no penal consequences
for these public authorities.
Many of the sites not providing the annual reports or not being updated regularly.
Each information commission must ensure that all relevant information must be displayed
on its website and that, as legally required, they submit their annual report to the
parliament/state assemblies in time.
Inadequate Training of Officers
Lack of refresher training and low level of awareness is prevalent among the PIOs
as well as the appellate authorities. An in-depth understanding of the RTI Act is a basic
requirement for discharging duties effectively. As a matter of fact, everybody in State
Government including the clerical staff needs to be oriented and trained about RTI because
there is a need a develop a culture throughout government that is oriented towards
transparency in governance and the proper implementation of the RTI Act. Also the system
of transfers in government departments means that persons who are not PIOs or APIOs at a
particular point of time may find themselves subsequently having to perform duties of PIO
or APIO under the RTI Act upon undergoing a transfer, or even otherwise, as the public
authorities may find if expedient to increase the number of designated PIOs or APIOs.59
Discussions in training course and workshops as well as meetings on RTI have

revealed that often it is inadequate record management in the office that makes it difficult
to provide information as is required under the RTI Act. Accordingly, training courses on
effective and improved record management as a means to better implementation of the RTI
Act need to be planned for and conducted.
While offering RTI related training, preference could be given to officers and staff
of departments which receive the maximum number of RTI applications, which have
59
Rakesh Hooja, "The RTI Act and Training - Brief Comments on Capacity Building at the State Level", The
Indian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 55, No. 3, July-September 2009, pp. 413-421, at p. 414.
237
maximum interface with individual citizens, and which are involved in
implementation/delivery of government schemes at the field level.
Hence RTI refresher training or central knowledge repository needs to be available

to the PIOs. However, given the current levels of basic training of PIOs, the refresher
training (covering the Key landmark orders passed by SIC) still seems a distant reality. A
few initiatives have been taken by CIC (http://cic.gov.in) and Centre for Good Governance
and a website for RTI (http://www.rti.org.in) have been created under However the
awareness of these initiatives/websites amongst the PIOs is significantly low.60
The State Administrative Training Institute (ATI) should also prepare training
material, explanatory booklets and notes, information guides, case studies, success stories,
work books, lecture slides, short training films, Compact Discs, Cassettes, leaflets, comic
books etc., for each type of RTI related training course as well as for the corresponding
training of trainers.61
Lack of Motivation
The Act provides for imposing penalties on PIOs for failure to deliver information
in time. But there is no incentive for good performance. Many times, the 'coloured' and
one-sided media coverage to various RTI cases de-motivates the PIOs further. It is thus,
desirable that the PIO be provided an extra incentive commensurate with the penalty.62
Often, the PIOs feel overburdened due to the increase in the volume of their work
without additional payment. They are not paid any honorarium for their additional duties.
Hence, most of them do not discharge this 'unwanted' duty in a sincere manner and are
often insensitive towards the applicants.
Lack of infrastructure at Public Authorities
The Implementation of RTI requires the PIOs to provide information to the

applicant through photocopies, soft copies etc. While these facilities are considered to be
60
http// www.rti.org.in
61
Rakesh Hooja, "The RTI Act and Training - Brief Comments on Capacity Building at the State Level", The
Indian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 55, No. 3, July-September 2009, pp. 413-421
62
Abhishek Jain, “ RTI Implementation at the district level:Issue and challenges” The Indian Journal Of
Public Administration, Vol.55, No.3 July-Sept,2009, p. 356.
238
easily available at a district level, it is a challenge to get information from Block/
Panchayat level. PIOs highlight that the lack of infrastructure hampers the RTI
implementation at the PA level. In order to service RTI requests, basic infrastructure such
as photocopier machines at each Public Authority and basic level of automation such as
necessary applications and connectivity.
Majority of the Information Commissions are situated in the State capitals, which
results in appellants undergoing an additional cost in order to attend the hearings. The RTI
Act had envisaged such an issue and had mentioned the procedure to overcome it under
section 12(7) for the Central Government and 15(7) for the State Governments. These
provisions allow Information Commissions to set up regional offices with prior approval of
State Governments.
Imposing penalty is exception
ICs imposed a penalty only for an extremely small fraction of the cases in which the
penalty was imposable. Across the sample ICs, the study found that the penalty was finally
imposed on only 1.3 % of the cases in which it was imposable. As a huge proportion of the
IC orders were non-speaking or unreasoned or otherwise deficient, the appeals and
complaints that have been judged to be such that a penalty was imposable are limited to
those where there was a clear case of delay, or where the IC held that the PIO had wrongly
denied information.63
It also noted that the non-imposition of the penalty has many serious implications as
it sends a message that violations of the law will not invite any adverse consequences. This
destroys the basic framework of incentives and disincentives built into the RTI law and
promote a culture of impunity.
Through discussions with the Civil Society Organization and as also determined by the
different survey that the penalty is imposed is in a very few cases. Given that more than
half of the RTI applications get processed after 30 days, there is a very strong perception in
the citizens and the Civil Society Organizations that the Information Commission is lenient
towards the erring PIO.
63
Gaurav Vivek Bhatnagar ,Poor Implementation and Delays Are Making the RTI Act Redundant available
at https://thewire.in/78983
239
Political Interference
Considering the various lacunae highlighted by various administrative reforms

committees in the present day public administration and ensuring better working
relationship between political bosses (i.e. Ministers) and civil servants, particularly in the
matter of transfer, posting and disciplinary action against civil servant,64 the Supreme Court
in its decision in T.S.R. Subramanian v Union of India has suggested constitution of an
independent Civil Service Board (CSB) at the Central and State level65. The decision of the
CSB could be overruled by the political executive i.e. the Minister but only by recording
reasons, which would ensure good governance, transparency and accountability in the
government's functioning. The Parliament can also enact Civil Service Act under Article
309 of the Constitution which can guide and advice the political Minister on the aforesaid
matters.
The Supreme Court in this case observed that civil servants cannot function on the
basis of verbal or oral instructions; suggestions etc. of their political executive (Minister)
and they need to be protected against arbitrary and wrongful pressure extended by
executive superiors, politicians, business tycoons and other vested interests. Further, Civil
Servant shall also not have any vested interests. Resultantly, there must be some record to
show how Civil Servant has acted and this is why he should record such directions on file.
Recording of orders/instructions is therefore, necessary for fixing responsibility and ensure
accountability in the functioning of the administration. The Court warned that civil servants
acting on oral or verbal directions/instructions of the executive superiors, politicians etc.
would defeat the object and purpose of the RTI Act and aid give room for favouritism and
corruption.66
Uncertain working tenure and transfer of officers
Another gray area which hinders the right to information granted to citizen under
Section 3 of the RTI Act and comes in the way of rendering efficient service delivery is
64
Ashok Khemka ,Haryana; Sanjiv Bhatnagar, AIIMS Delhi etc are example of the victimization of such
nexus.
65
The CSB shall consist of high ranking in service officers, who are experts in various fields with cabinet
secretary at the Centre and Chief Secretary at the State level, to guide and advise the Government on all
service matters, especially on transfers, postings, disciplinary actions etc
66
240
uncertainty of tenure of administrative officials. Fixed tenure would not only enable the
civil servants to achieve their professional targets, but also help them to function as
effective instruments of public policy. Repeated transfers and uncertainly of their tenure is
deleterious to good governance. 67 With the minimum assured service tenure, they can
prioritise various social and economic measures and at the same time they would not be
subjected to the whims and fancies of their political boss for political or other
considerations which are not in public interest.68
Lack of Monitoring and Review mechanism
Under Section 19(8), the Central Information Commission or State Information

Commission, as the case may be, has the power to require the Public Authority to take any
such steps as may be necessary to secure compliance with the provisions of this Act by
providing access to information, if so requested, in a particular form; by publishing certain
information or categories of information; by making necessary changes to its practices in
relation to the maintenance, management and destruction of records; by enhancing the
provision of training on the right to information for its officials etc.
However, there are inadequate processes and records available with the Information
Commission to take the above-mentioned steps. A few States conduct reviews to
understand issues leading to non compliance by Public Authorities.69
Disclosure of file noting
One of the most debatable and important concerns raised in respect of RTI Act from
the very beginning is regarding disclosure of file noting. The government and bureaucracy
are concerned over the exposure of file noting to the public that "It will act adversely
against the requirement of free and frank opinion by the public officials in decision making
process” In this context it would be appropriate to mention that file noting are ad hoc
written notes added to file by officials and thus can give a critical insight into the
government decision-making process. File noting are very important when it comes to the
policy making of the government. It is these notes that hold the rationale behind actions or
67
Section 3 of All India Services Act, 1951.
68
69
Andhra Pradesh has taken concrete actions for reviewing the implementation of RTI Act at the PA level.
241
the change in certain policy, why a certain contract is given or why a sanction was withheld
to prosecute a corrupt official. The exclusion of file noting would undermine the spirit of
bureaucratic openness and accountability, which the law embodies. The purpose of the Act
is to open government's decision-making process to public scrutiny. Compulsion of
disclosure of file noting will reduce to a great extent the administrative culture of putting
something as part of record on dictation or in a mechanical manner. Disclosure of file
noting may also be considered from the point of view of the promoting the overall culture
of good administrative practice. It would be appropriate to mention the decision of the
Central Information Commission that the "file noting" were an integral part of a file.
Standard forms for RTI application
There have been numerous debates on standardizing the RTI application form.
While the Act does not necessitate having a standard application form, some States have
provided a standard form using Section 26(3)(c) of the RTI Act. There are significant
advantages of using a standard form for a RTI application. The standard form helps in
getting basic information such as address/ contact numbers, form in which information is
requested etc., which helps the PIOs in providing the requisite information and contacting
the applicant for communication required under section 7(3) etc. Further, if basic
information is available (and catalogued properly by the PIO/PA), it is helpful for the
Public Authority to identify the nature of frequent information requests so that it can be
provided as a suo-moto disclosure as per Section 4(2) of the Act.
Poor Implementation
While information commissions (ICs) are mandated to safeguard and facilitate

people’s fundamental right to information, two national studies on the implementation of
the Right to Information Act, undertaken by Research, Assessment & Analysis Group
(RaaG) and Satark Nagrik Sangathan (SNS), have revealed that the functioning of the ICs
themselves are posing a “major bottleneck” in the implementation of the Act. Moreover,
the commissions are now facing a huge backlog of cases while the petitioners are often left
with a very “poor quality of orders”.70
70
Gaurav Vivek Bhatnagar ,Poor Implementation and Delays Are Making the RTI Act Redundant available
at https://thewire.in/78983/rti-study-poor-implementation/
242
Kanso Devi, a resident of Savitri Nagar, spoke about how she filed an RTI
application asking for details as to why her old age pension of Rs 1000 per month from the
municipal corporation of Delhi was stopped suddenly. When she didn’t receive a reply, she
filed an appeal and eventually a second appeal, before the CIC in November 2015. Despite
a year having elapsed, the case has still not come up for hearing.
Another resident of Delhi, Balraj, narrated the difficulty he faced in accessing

information about the status of his daughter, Deepika’s application for the Ladli
Scheme. After five years with no word on the status of the application, his wife had filed an
RTI application in 2015. Only after the matter reached the CIC in August 2016 did the
Delhi government release Rs. 18,500 to Deepika under the scheme, as per the orders of the
commission.71
Several orders of the ICs were set aside by the courts due to lack of reasoning or
because orders were ultra vires of the Act. It also stated that deficient orders prevented
effective public scrutiny and accountability of the information commissions and
commissioners.
Scarcity of funds
Lack of ownership of the act by state governments has also resulted in scarcity of
financial resources for the functioning of the act. Union Government, on the
recommendation of the 2nd Administrative Reform Commission had advised state
governments to earmark 1 % of the funds meant to implement major welfare schemes
towards necessary reforms such as digitization of records and buying necessary
infrastructure to provide information over a period of five years. A study by Research and
Advocay Group (RAAG) highlights that state governments have merely forwarded the
circulars of Directorate of Personnel Training (DoPT) on RTI implementation guidelines to
the Public Authorities without undertaking any financial or administrative reforms
themselves.72
71
Ibid.
72
http://nebula.wsimg.com/93c4b1e26eb3fbd41782c6526475ed79?AccessKeyId=52EBDBA4FE710433B3D
8&disposition=0&alloworigin=1
243
Along with delaying reforms, scarcity of funds has thwarted initiative at the level of
ICs to deal with issue of backlog of cases. ICs require competent and professional full time
employees to help in preparing case backgrounds but there is no allocation in budget for
such posts. Thus, ICs have to make do with smaller and ad hoc staff lacking expertise
which delays work adding to mounting pendency. Further down, an inadequate budget is
available to public authorities at the district level to implement the RTI Act, be it in terms
of undertaking training programmes for its officers, creating awareness about the Act,
providing publicity material, user guides to the public and other related matters. Lack of
infrastructure with the public authorities at the district and village level makes
dissemination of information about welfare schemes related to education, health and right
to work practically impossible.
The enactment of the RTI Act is indeed a step in the right direction and shall go a
long way in ensuring transparency and accountability in administration. But mere law is
not enough political fair and just will is more important to overcome the deficiency of the
Act. It is pertinent to mention here that the Central Information Commission in a landmark
decision Shri Subhash Chandra Aggarwal & Shri Anil Bairwal v. Indian National
Congress and others73 dated 03.06.2013 has brought the political parties in the ambit of the
RTI Act. The Commission has held six political parties namely AICC/INC, BJP, CPI (M),
CPI, NCP and BSP as public authorities under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. While deciding
that the said political parties are public authorities, the CIC has relied mainly on the
grounds that there is substantial indirect financing of political parties by the Central
Government and they invariably perform public duties
Thus to nullify the effects of the decision of the Central Information Commission
Parliament inserted an explanation by amendment in section 2(h) of Right to Information
Act that The expression "authority or body or institution of self-government established or
constituted" by any law made by Parliament shall not include any association or body of
individuals registered or recognised as political party under the Representation of the
People Act, 1951. Thus, the political parties have been kept out from the ambit of Section
73
File No. CIC/SM/C/2011/001386).
244
2(h) of the RTI Act. This amendment have been proposed to be given retrospective effect
from the date of judgment of the CIC i.e. 03.06.2013 with a view to remove the adverse
effects of the said decision.
However, all said and done, the need of the hour is to ensure proper implementation
of the Act by eliminating the above mentioned bottlenecks and bring blocks. Right to
Information possesses a great potential of unleashing and transparent governance, which
shall ensure social, political as well as economic equity. Effective operationalisation of the
RTI Act requires effective capacity building both of the Information providers as well as of
the information seekers. Above all, the Act can be made effective only through the active
involvement of the citizens. Much would depend upon the seriousness of all the
stakeholders. Not only there is a need for attitudinal change in the bureaucratic mindset but
also there is a need to initiate suitable amendments in the conduct rules for the public
servants, create efficient information management system and more frequent use of this
right by the media and the citizens.
Protection of Whistleblowers
The whistleblowers are person who release information about wrongdoing of any
government or public official or disclose some corruption on the part of public office
holder to the public. He may be person who is a part of government functionary. Whistle
blowing constitutes an important element of information law. A constant demand for the
protection of whistle blower since the commencement of the Act. They play a role of
investigative journalist or an RTI activist who reveal misdoing which are being secretly
manipulated in the government departments or public bodies leading to harmful
consequences or potential danger for the people.74
The vulnerability of whistle blower to threats or attacks from the corrupt public
officials, political leaders and mafia who do not want their nefarious activities to be
disclosed. A serious problem is that there is no protection available for those trying to
counter corruption by taking on influential official and politician. The voices of those who
74
245
are brave to speak up against dishonestly are often throttled. Satyendra Dubey of National
Highways Authority of India and Manjunath Shanmugham of Indian Oil Corporation were
killed because they too had stood up against corruption.
With other corruption prevention strategies, there is a dire need for extending legal
protection to those who make effort to expose to corrupt element. Due to the Government
of India resolution on public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informer, 2008
considered to be an adequate measure which authorized the central Vigilance commission
to receive complaints for any disclosure on any allegation of corruption or misuse of office
and recommended appropriate action.
Expressing concern for the growing incidents of murders, assault torture harassment
of whistle blower and RTI activists, the Asian Centre for Human Rights in its report
emphasised the need and urgency of a protective provision in RTI Act or an independent
legislation on Whistle blower protection. For example sheela massod from Bhopal harassed
by police officer and murdered because she was exposing a private school which belong to
a powerful politician. Chandra Mohan burnt in his car because he was filing RTI
application against land mafia. RTI activist Satis Shetty who exposed many land scam in
Telangana was killed by land mafia. RTI activist Shashdhar Mishra was murdered for
exposing several welfare scam in Bihar. Amit Jethwa was shot dead for filing many
application and PIL against illegal mining in Gir forest. Niyaat Ansari,Babbu Singh,
Dattatreya Patel and many more are examples who murdered in the fight against
corruption, in several cases attempts of life of RTI activists and whistle blower have been
reported. While a large number of such attacks and treats go unnoticed or unreported.
Victimization of the activists by harassing them or implicating in false cases is also often
resorted to by the official holding power who misuse of authority or indulge in corruption
or illegal activities. Ashok Khemka from Haryana who expose the murky deal of land of
Robert Vadra, Anup Singh who start fight against land mafia in Noida, Sanjeev bhatnagar
who expose irregularity in AIIMS are examples of victimization.
What the RTI Act has managed to achieve in the last decade is to unleash a silent
citizen’s movement for government accountability across the country. The RAAG report
found that on an average, 4-5 million applications are filed under the Act every year. But
246
this has not been without its negative consequences. Forty activists who had demanded
crucial information, with the potential to expose corruption within the government, had
been killed. This has necessitated supplementary laws such as whistleblower protection
laws to ensure protection for information activists.
The demand for a comprehensive Whistle Blowers Protection Act (WBP Act)
started in 2002 when Satyendra Dubey, an engineer on the golden quadrangle project, was
murdered for exposing corruption in the project. Finally in 2014, after 12 years of the
murder of Satyendra Dubey, the WBP Act was passed when families of whistleblowers
and activists held protests for over 20 days. The WBP Act provides protection of identity
for whistleblowers and safeguards against their victimisation. Despite assurances
the government had taken no steps to prevent deaths of whistleblowers by operationalising
the WBP law. Close to 60 people have been killed in the last few years for exposing
corruption and wrongdoing in the government. Police and state Government many times
has failed to provide protection to the whistle blower.75
The Whistleblowers Protection (Amendment), Bill, 2015, passed by the Lok Sabha
renewed concerns regarding the vulnerability of information seekers making disclosures in
the public interest. “The original intention of the whistleblower protection law was to
protect citizens disclosing information regarding wrongdoing in the larger public interest.
The amendments do not provide immunity to whistleblowers, making them liable for
prosecution under the Official Secrets Act. The Bill completely dilutes the provisions of the
earlier law removing everything exempted under Section 8 (1) of the RTI Act from within
the ambit of whistle-blowing. “If the government wanted to ensure that sensitive
information regarding national security, integrity, etc., is not made public, then the law
could have been appropriately amended to ensure additional safeguards or by making
provisions for a mechanism for confidential disclosure. What is sought to be done now is a
blanket ban on disclosures containing sensitive information.76
75
Two year report card of the government on issues of transparency and accountability Available at
http://righttoinformation.info/2069/
76
10 years after RTI, transparency under cloud available at
http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi//article7213480.ece
247

10 - Chapter-6 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

10 - Chapter-6 PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Chapter Six

Misuse and shortcomings in

Undoubtly, revolution of information law has added new dimension to human

Knowledge of misuse by Court and Commission

In Chandrakant Vrajlal Fichadiya v. State Of Gujarat & ors.6on 13 January, 2017,

The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to

Right to information implicit in Article 19(1)(a) which guarantees freedom of

Some Example of the misuse of the Act

Parallel process cannot be run

Tool for vendetta

Information commissioner Sharat Sabharwal found that an applicant had filed 28

Imposing penalty in frivolous cases

In Ramakrishna v. Ministry of Steel 16 CIC advised the appellant to refrain from

The information commissioner, Tamilnadu Sridhar Acharyulu directed that

Information available as open source

If the required information is available in market as published material or available

Ask for certified copies of documents submitted by himself

Pressurize or harass the public authority

In the case of Deshmukh Suresh Bhagwanrao v. C.B.E.C., Department of Revenue,

Harass the department

Harass the officials because of some adverse action

In the case of A.B. Avadhanulu v. South Central Railway, Vijayawada &

Putting pressure on the respondent

Asking for desperate and voluminous information

For cheap publicity

Self serving cause - frivolous case

Interested in the affairs of other colleagues without any justifiable reasons

Means of making money

In the guise of whistle -blower

The Act is over-ambitious and the practical difficulties in the implementation of

The effective implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005 depends on

Impediments in seeking information

Low Public Awareness

Discretionary rule making power

Lack of Uniformity in Various PIO/APIO of Similar Departments in Different States

It has been observed that there is no uniformity in the designation of various

Poor Quality of Information Provided

Impending administrative reforms

Appointment of Information Commissioners

The appointment of former bureaucrats as Chief Information Officers has raised

Inconvenient Fee Payment

Backlog of Pending cases

There is a huge backlog of cases in the information commissions. In some states

Citizen’s participation in everyday governance entails supply of information in due

Constraints faced in inspection of records

Under Section 7(9) of the Act, information is to be provided in the form it is

Primitive and ineffective Record Management

Expenditure in seeking information

Clause of Any PIO

Failure to provide information within 30 days

Currently there exist inadequate measures and processes for an Information

The time limit of 30 days to furnish information is sometime impractical because of

Ineffective Implementation of Voluntary Disclosure Obligations

Inadequate Training of Officers

Discussions in training course and workshops as well as meetings on RTI have

Hence RTI refresher training or central knowledge repository needs to be available

Lack of infrastructure at Public Authorities

The Implementation of RTI requires the PIOs to provide information to the

Imposing penalty is exception

Considering the various lacunae highlighted by various administrative reforms

Uncertain working tenure and transfer of officers

Lack of Monitoring and Review mechanism