Frequently Asked Questions and Answers

No, she/he has to first file the application in the PA with the PIO. If the PIO fails to provide information within the time limit or provide incorrect, false information, s/he can prefer first appeal with the FAA of the Public Authority. The citizen can approach the SIC only after the first appeal is disposed by the PA.

However the citizen can file a complaint before the SIC if s/he has been unable to submit a request to PIO as no such officer has been appointed or because the PIO has refused to accept his application for information or appeal under the Act.

Though private organizations do not come within the purview of this Act, a citizen can get information from the regulatory body of the private firm. For eg., for collecting details from ration shops (which is a private dealer) the citizen can apply to the Taluk Supply Officer and get details. Similarly, co-operative societies do not come with the purview of the Act, but application can be made to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and information collected on such societies.

The Information Commission can require the PA to compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered by him/her under Sec 19 (8) (b) of RTI Act.

PIO is the provider of information and not the seeker. There is no provision in the Act to consider such appeals or complaints by the PIO against an order of the first Appellate Authority.

The PIO and AA are statutorily designated offices. They shall perform their function as per the provisions of the Act and hence cannot be instructed or forced to take decisions pertaining to RTI.

Question: Can a request be denied if it is too big? If not, how can such requests be handled best? How much information can a citizen request in one application? or If one asks 20-30 different sets of information in one application, should it be given? Or should the citizen be asked to put in fresh applications for each point of information requested and also be asked to pay application fees every time?

ANSWER: The Act does not permit the rejection of an application simply because it relates to a large number of documents.. If a large number of records are involved in relation to a request, the PIO can contact the requestor / summon him to the office to verify the records and facilitate photocopies of the required documents on payment of the prescribed fee.This recognizes the fact that in some cases at least, a broad application may be submitted simply because the requestor was not sure what was available.

The Act limits the APIO's role to receiving application for information and forwarding the same to the PIO concerned. In the normal course reply has to be given by the PIO and in his/her absence in certain cases where the last date for responding expires, there is not legal issue if the APIO replies on behalf of the PIO.

As per Section 19 (6), an appeal shall be normally disposed within 30 days of the receipt of the appeal or with an extended period not exceeding 45 days from the date of filing, and the reasons shall be recorded in writing. The FAA has the powers to summon the applicant and hear him if found necessary.

No, The PIO shall deal with the application and give reasonable assistance to rectify the defect (not signed, application fee not remitted, etc.)

Yes, all citizens have the right to information as per RTI Act Section 2(J). Whether the applicant is an insider or an outsider is not a matter of consideration.

There is no such provision for interim reply. But PIO can invoke provisions of Sec 7 (9) and request the applicant to visit his/her office (with date and time specified) and inspect the files and take photocopies by paying the fees as prescribed by Rules.

The information can be denied only if,

i.The disclosure would amount to contempt of court.

ii.The disclosure is expressly forbidden to be published by a court.

No. Section 8(1)(h) is applicable only to investigation under Cr. P C and not disciplinary proceedings. Even in the case of an investigation under the Cr. PC, the information can be denied only if the disclosure of this information would impede the process of investigation or apprehension, or prosecution of offenders.

Section 8(3) is the provision to disclose the information pertaining to exemptions other than under section 8(1)(a), 8(1) (e) and 8(1) (i) after 20 years. Hence information except section 8(1)(a), 8(1) (e) and 8(1) (i) need not be disclosed after 20 years from the period it has been computed.

IT returns filed by an assesse are confidential information which include details of commercial activities and that it relates to 3rd party information, which are submitted in fiduciary capacities. It is exempted under Sec 8(1)(j) and there is no public interest involved in the matter.

This falls under the category of 'personal information' which is exempt from disclosure under Sec 8(1) (j) unless larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information.

Yes. In this case, they will have to pay the statutory fee fixed by the respective PA and not the fee as prescribed under RTI rules.

No. The right to information is for inspection of records and to get certified copies of records/documents. If the citizen is unable to submit an application for information as above, the PIO shall give all reasonable assistance to access the information.The PA is not expected to consolidate or provide information held by them in any prescribed proforma or format.

No. The records can be inspected by the citizen and he can take copies of the documents and take necessary notes. PIO needs to give information only in the form available in the records.

No. The decision of the PIO can be challenged only by an appeal before the Apellate Authority(AA) or a complainant before the Information Commission(IC). The decision of the AA can be challenged only by an appeal before the IC.

The details regarding disciplinary procedure against an employee can be revealed only if it is can be established that the public interest outweighs individual privacy. If there is no convincing public interest in the disciplinary procedure / process of an employee, such aspects need not be revealed.

As per Supreme Court ruling in a case, the disclosure of 'name and address of the Selection Board would exfacia endanger their lives or physical safety'. Hence this need not be disclosed.

Yes, it can be denied if it would made into the privacy of the individual.

There is no provision for asking for more time.

When a request for information is made to a PA, it is a request made to the PIO who has been designated by the PA to provide information. Here the PA or its administrative unit which receives the application has to hand over the same to the PIO concerned for disposal.

Those parts of the Service Book which are of a personal nature need not be revealed, whereas those parts of the service book like employment details , salary, promotion, leave particulars, ( excluding those availed under medical ground) etc., can be revealed .

No. The information shall be disclosed if the public interest in disclosure (as claimed by the applicant) outweighs in importance the possible harm or damage to the interest of the third party.

The travel expenses are met from the state exchequer, and hence disclosure cannot be denied on the grounds of 'personal information', 'not a public activity' or 'no public interest involved'. Travel performed as part of official duty and the records related to the same are public records and therefore a citizen has the right to seek disclosure.