Gajendra Singh Godara
Sep 2, 2025
20
mins read
The Right to Information Act, 2005 is a landmark transparency law that empowers Indian citizens to obtain information from public authorities. It was enacted on 15 June 2005 and came into force on 12 October 2005, replacing the weaker Freedom of Information Act, 2002. Rooted in grassroots campaigns (e.g. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) “Jan Sunwais” for corruption probes) and Supreme Court rulings, RTI Act, 2005 is recognized as part of citizens’ fundamental freedom of speech. It obligates governments to proactively publish key information (Sec 4) and to respond to citizen queries (Secs 6-7) in a timely manner. By revealing official records (budgets, contracts, policies, etc.), RTI has exposed many scams and strengthened democracy. In this guide, we explain RTI’s provisions, processes, institutional setup and recent issues for UPSC aspirants, with an emphasis on clarity and relevance.
Enactment: The RTI Act was passed by Parliament in June 2005 (effective Oct 2005). It applies to all government bodies at Centre, State and local levels, including institutions financed substantially by government.
Purpose: To foster transparency and accountability in governance. Its preamble states the objective is to “empower citizens, promote transparency and accountability in the working of the Government, contain corruption, and make our democracy work for the people”.
Background (Key Points)
Genesis of RTI law started in 1986, through judgement of Supreme Court in Mr. Kulwal v/s Jaipur Municipal Corporation case, in which it directed that freedom of speech and expression provided under Article 19 of the Constitution clearly implies Right to Information, as without information the freedom of speech and expression cannot be fully used by the citizens.
Constitutional basis: The Act implements the right to information implicit in Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression). The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that access to information is a fundamental right under the Constitution.
Grassroots activism: Championed by activists (e.g. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan’s public hearings), RTI was included in UPA’s manifesto and enacted under intense public pressure. It overrode earlier secrecy laws (see Key Challenges).
Periodic anniversary: 2025 marks the 20th year of RTI. The Act’s provisions are subject to ongoing debate and reform, reflecting its evolving nature.
Read about Basic Structure Doctrine : Basic Structure
Table of content
Information (Sec 2(f)): “Any material in any form” held by a public authority, such as records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advice, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, data, or any electronic material. Even information from private bodies is covered if it is accessible under any law.
Record (Sec 2(i)): Includes any document, manuscript, file, microfilm, computer printout or any material produced by a computer. File notings and notes are explicitly included (and cannot be denied merely because they are “notings”).
Right to Information (Sec 2(j)): The Act defines this right broadly. A citizen can request (and obtain) information by: obtaining certified copies of documents/records; inspecting records; taking notes or extracts; and even inspecting public works or taking samples of materials from public works.
Public authority (Sec 2(h)): A wide class including any government body, statutory organization, body owned/controlled by government, and certain NGOs or societies that receive government funding or substantially work for government purposes. This makes RTI Act 2005 applicable beyond government departments, in many semi-government bodies.
Section 4 of the RTI Act 2005 requires every public authority to maintain records systematically and publish key information on its own—so that citizens can access it without filing RTI requests and routine queries are pre‑empted. In practice, authorities must place on their websites and notice boards basic particulars of the organisation, decision‑making processes and rules, key documents and manuals, budgets and spending, subsidies and licence/permit recipients, public services available, and the names and contacts of PIOs/appeals officers, and keep these updated at least annually. This “suo motu” disclosure is meant to reduce the need for applications, improve transparency, and strengthen accountability.
Typically included under Section 4
Organisation, functions, powers; decision‑making norms; rules/manuals used; lists of documents held; budgets, expenditure, and subsidy details; beneficiaries of licences/permits; services/facilities for citizens; names and contacts of PIOs/FAAs; and information in electronic form with regular updates.
Who can apply?
Any Indian citizen can file an RTI; no age/education limit and no reasons needed.
How to apply for RTI
Send a simple application in English/Hindi/local official language to the PIO of the public authority; APIOs can forward requests; central fee typically ₹10; BPL applicants are fee‑exempt. Online filing for many central bodies is available.
Timelines
Information within 30 days; within 48 hours if it concerns life or liberty; add 5 extra days if sent via APIO or transferred to the wrong authority.
Decision and disclosure
If not exempt, information is provided by copy/inspection/electronic form; denials must be reasoned with appeal advice.
Appeals
First Appeal to departmental Appellate Authority within 30 days; Second Appeal to CIC/SIC within 90 days if still aggrieved. Commissions can order disclosure and levy penalties.
Central Information Commission (CIC): Established under Sec 12, the CIC is a statutory body at the national level. It consists of one Chief Information Commissioner and up to 10 Information Commissioners. These members are appointed by the President on the recommendation of a committee (Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, and a Cabinet minister). The term of office is 3 years or until the age of 65, whichever is earlier.
State Information Commissions (SIC): Each state/union territory similarly has a State Chief Information Commissioner and up to 10 State Information Commissioners (conforming to Sec 15), appointed by the Governor on a similar committee. The State Commissions hear second appeals and complaints related to state public authorities.
Powers and functions: The CIC/SICs adjudicate second appeals (Section 19), complaints about refusal of information (Section 18), and oversee implementation of RTI. They can summon officials, demand records, require affidavits, and impose penalties for non-compliance . Under Sec 12(4), the CIC can form benches, frame rules, and regulate its proceedings. The Commission also monitors compliance (often through annual reports).
Performance issues: A recent independent study reported that out of 29 Commissions (CIC + 28 SICs), 4 are defunct and 3 have no head; in 10 commissions the wait for appeal hearings exceeds a year; and 19 commissions have not filed their mandatory annual reports.
Section 8(1) exemptions: The Act lists specific categories of information that may not be disclosed. These include matters affecting national security, sovereignty, foreign relations (8(1)(a)); breach of privilege of Parliament/State legislatures (8(1)(b)); Cabinet papers (8(1)(d)); professional or fiduciary advice (8(1)(e)); law enforcement investigation details and court records (8(1)(f),(g)); personal information (8(1)(j)); commercial confidence/trade secrets (8(1)(d) & (j)); and similar sensitive issues.
Public interest override (8(2)): Crucially, Sec 8(2) provides that an exemption cannot be claimed if the disclosure serves larger public interest. In other words, even if information falls under an exemption, it must be disclosed if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm. This override is a core principle ensuring that RTI does not become a “right to withhold”. Note: The recent DPDP Act amendment removed this override for personal data, triggering controversy.
Section 9 (consultations): If a PIO holds information in part that belongs to another public authority, they must consult that authority before deciding on the request. This ensures that consultations happen (within 5 days) before final disposal of requests involving multi-agency information.
Section 24 of the RTI Act: Certain intelligence and security organizations are exempted from the provisions of the RTI Act unless cases of corruption or human rights violations are involved. These organizations are listed in Schedule 2 of the RTI Act and include:
Central Intelligence Bureau
Research and Analysis Wing
Directorate of Enforcement
National Technical Research Organization
Central Reserve Police Force
Border Security Force
National Security Guard
Why do activists want political parties to be brought under RTI?
To contain corruption
Huge donations from corporates which lead to favouritism or crony capitalism
Illegal foreign contribution
The leader of the opposition is statutorily mandated to be part of the select committees to choose Chairperson for CIC, Lokpal, CBI Director and CVC
Various members of the opposition are also part of various parliamentary committees
They enjoy multiple benefits like concessional office spaces, free airtime on DD & AIR from govt
Stand of Political Parties
Political Parties are not public authorities, hence cannot be brought under RTI Act.
Disclosed information can be misused.
Can disclose financial information under the IT Act.
Recent Amendments
The RTI amendment Bill 2013 removes political parties from the ambit of the definition of public authorities and hence from the purview of the RTI Act.
The draft provision 2017 which provides for closure of cases in case of death of an applicant can lead to more attacks on the lives of whistleblowers.
The proposed RTI Amendment Act 2018 is aimed at giving the Centre the power to fix the tenures and salaries of state and central information commissioners, which are statutorily protected under the RTI Act. The move will dilute the autonomy and independence of CIC.
The Act proposes to replace the fixed 5 year tenure to as much prescribed by the government.
Transparency and accountability
RTI opens government files, decisions, and spending to public view, which makes officials answerable and reduces room for arbitrary action.
Regular disclosure and the fear of scrutiny improve record‑keeping and compel departments to justify choices on contracts, hiring, and service delivery.
Anti‑corruption lever
Access to documents, tenders, and beneficiary lists helps uncover leakages and conflicts of interest across schemes and procurement.
The possibility of penalties and public exposure deters rent‑seeking, improving integrity in day‑to‑day administration.
Citizen empowerment and entitlement tracking
Any citizen can demand information without giving reasons, which helps secure rations, pensions, MGNREGA wages, and other dues with documentary proof.
It strengthens social audits by providing lists, muster rolls, and bills so local communities can verify who actually received benefits.
Strengthens democracy, free speech, and media
By turning information into a right linked to Article 19(1)(a), RTI supports informed public debate and participatory governance.
Journalists and civil society use RTI replies as primary evidence for stories, campaigns, and court actions that check misuse of power.
Better service delivery and administrative efficiency
Time‑bound replies and proactive disclosures push departments to organise records, standardise processes, and respond faster to citizens.
Tracking response timelines and appeal outcomes creates feedback loops that highlight bottlenecks and drive process reforms.
Social justice and inclusion
RTI helps identify exclusion errors (missing names, fake entries), ensuring marginalised groups aren’t left out of welfare rolls.
Disaggregated information enables targeted course‑corrections—like fixing last‑mile delivery in remote or vulnerable areas.
DPDP Act (2023): As noted, Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act (effective Feb 2024) amended RTI’s Sec 8(1)(j). It struck off the public-interest exception in 8(1)(j), effectively making all personal data non-disclosable under RTI.
Digital RTI portals: In March 2023, the Supreme Court directed all State governments and High Courts to establish online RTI portals within 3 months to ease access. A 2024 petition to the SC reported that 11 states/UTs (e.g. AP, Jharkhand, West Bengal, etc.) and some courts have not complied.
Institutional reforms: Various stakeholders (2nd ARC, RTI activists) have proposed reforms. For example, the Second Administrative Reforms Commission recommended single-window RTI facilitation (especially at district/block level), uniform fee procedures, inclusion of NGOs receiving government funds, and identification of all subordinate offices as "public authorities". It also suggested rejecting malicious/vexatious requests with appellate approval.
Performance audits: Transparency audits and NGO reports (e.g. Satark Nagrik Sangathan’s 2023-24 “report card”) continues to highlight gender and vacancy issues in Information Commissions, flagging them as public debates.
Exposing corruption: RTI applications have led to revelations of numerous scams and irregularities (e.g., 2G spectrum, coal allocation, Adarsh scam). Transparency activists credit the Act for enabling citizen-led investigations.
Citizen empowerment: By letting ordinary people request official data, RTI has democratized access to information. Panchayat-level planning, NGO watchdog reports, and media investigations all frequently cite RTI responses. The Act has given citizens a tool to participate in governance and question public spending.
Strengthening democracy: RTI has made government actions more visible and accountable. Studies note that where RTI is vigorously used, there is greater pressure on officials to behave lawfully.
Institutional transparency: Public authorities routinely publish data (budgets, meeting minutes, etc.) due to RTI’s mandatory disclosures. Many government websites now host RTI sections, and data portals provide bulk information. The Central Information Commission, through its orders, has clarified many points of law (e.g., access to file notings, applicability of RTI to NGOs, etc.), thereby refining governance standards.
Numbers: Over the years, crores of RTI requests have been filed across India. (A CHRI study estimated ~4–5 million annual requests around 2014)
Implementation gaps: A significant challenge is incomplete execution. Many public bodies do not proactively maintain records or publish mandatory disclosures. PIOs often lack training, and some departments treat RTI as a formality. Consequently, citizens sometimes receive evasive or partial replies.
Awareness and accessibility: Not all citizens know their RTI rights. Awareness is particularly low in rural areas and among women. Language barriers and lack of accessible forms can inhibit use. The RTI Act mandates user guides (Sec 26), but many offices do not publish them, leaving applicants guessing how to apply for RTI.
Capacity and infrastructure: At district and village levels, the RTI mechanism is weakest. Blocks/Panchayats often lack trained PIOs/APIOs or even separate RTI cells. Infrastructural issues (limited internet access, no filing centers) hinder e-filing. Physical file management is poor in some departments, leading to delays or lost records.
Institutional vacancies: Information Commissions are frequently understaffed. As noted, several SICs/CIC posts remain vacant or unfilled. Pending cases number in lakhs, and hearings can take years. This backlog undermines the right to timely information.
Exemptions and misuse: The wide exemptions (Sec 8) are often cited to refuse requests. Over-cautious interpretations (claiming broad categories like “national interest”) can hamper legitimate queries. Additionally, there are occasional misuses of RTI (e.g. personal vendettas, frivolous requests) that clog the system; a mechanism to refuse “vexatious” requests in consultation with the appellate authority exists, but is not uniformly applied.
Safety of activists: RTI activists and whistleblowers sometimes face threats and attacks after exposing corruption. Ensuring their protection and discouraging reprisal are ongoing concerns.
Related Blog : NALSA
To make RTI more effective, experts suggest several reforms:
Legislative fixes: Roll back the DPDP amendment to restore the public-interest exception for personal data, ensuring critical disclosures (assets, qualifications of officials) are not permanently sealed. Consider amending the Act to cover private bodies performing public functions (as recommended by various committees).
Capacity building: Strengthen RTI infrastructure by mandating full-time RTI cells at all levels, improving record-keeping systems, and facilitating online filing (single-window portals at district hubs). Ensure timely appointments to fill vacancies in Information Commissions and set performance targets to clear backlogs.
Awareness and education: Conduct mass awareness campaigns (especially in rural areas) about RTI rights and procedures. Incorporate RTI training in administrative capacity-building (so that PIOs understand the Act).
Digitization and transparency: Build robust e-RTI systems (as in the courts’ portal) to allow online tracking of requests. Continue to improve public data portals and open data initiatives, reducing the need for requests.
Protecting rights: Enforce penalties for non-compliance more strictly. Safeguard RTI activists via legal and physical protection measures.
The Right to Information Act, 2005 recommends including postal orders as a valid fee mode alongside existing payment options under RTI Act Rules.
It urges harmonising state fee structures with the Right to Information Act, ensuring uniformity across India.
Proposes setting up a Single Window Agency at the district level under district administration, with an APIO (Assistant Public Information Officer) to streamline RTI requests.
Suggests identifying the lowest decision-making units as subordinate public authorities.
Recommends bringing NGOs receiving significant government support (₹1 cr+) under the RTI Act purview, extending oversight.
Grievance Redressal Authorities: Set up independent grievance redressal mechanisms to address issues of delay, corruption, and misgovernance.
Proposes amending Section 7(10) to let PIOs, with appellate authority’s approval, reject “manifestly frivolous or vexatious” applications—streamlining access and reducing misuse of the Right to Information Act 2005.
UPSC Previous Year Questions
2019 (Mains GS2): “There is a view that the Official Secrets Act is an obstacle to the implementation of the Right to Information Act. Do you agree? Discuss.”
Q.What is the Right to Information Act 2005?
A.The RTI is a law (RTI Act 2005) granting Indian citizens the right to request and receive information from government bodies, thereby promoting transparency and accountability in governance.
Q.Is RTI a Fundamental Right?
A.Yes. Courts have held that RTI flows from the freedom of speech and expression (Art.19(1)(a)). The Act itself begins by noting that “all citizens have the right to information,” in accordance with Supreme Court rulings recognizing it as a fundamental right.
Q.When was the RTI Act passed and implemented?
A.The RTI Act was enacted by Parliament on 15 June 2005 and came into force on 12 October 2005. It replaced earlier transparency laws and covered all of India.
Q.How do I file an RTI application?
A.Write an application (plain paper, any language) addressed to the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the concerned public authority. Include your name, address, details of the information requested, and pay the fee (commonly ₹10; exemptions for BPL). The PIO must reply within 30 days. No specific form is required, and you need not provide a reason for your request.
Q.What information is exempt under Section 8 of the RTI Act 2005?
A.Section 8(1) lists information that may be withheld, such as matters affecting national security, Cabinet deliberations, legal actions, trade secrets, personal privacy, etc. However, Sec 8(2) provides a public-interest override: even exempt information must be disclosed if a larger public interest justifies it.
The Right to Information Act, 2005 has fundamentally changed India’s governance by legally empowering citizens to demand government data. It enshrines transparency as a cornerstone of democracy. While the Act has led to greater accountability (uncovering many wrongdoings), its full potential depends on effective implementation and continual reform. UPSC aspirants should grasp RTI’s key features, understand ongoing debates (e.g. data protection vs RTI), and analyze its role in broader governance. Going forward, measures like robust online RTI systems, legislative tweaks, and public awareness campaigns will be crucial to strengthen this vital tool of good governance.
Suggested Blogs:
How to Begin Your UPSC Preparation : The Ultimate Guide For Beginners
UPSC Previous Year Question Papers with Answers PDF - Prelims & Mains (2014-2024)
40 Most Important Supreme Court Judgements of India : Landmark Judgements UPSC
GST Council (Goods and Services Tax Council): Constitutional Provisions, Functions, Way Forward
External Linking Suggestions
UPSC Official Website – Syllabus & Notification: https://upsc.gov.in/
Press Information Bureau – Government Announcements: https://pib.gov.in/
NCERT Official Website – Standard Books for UPSC: https://ncert.nic.in
UPSC Notification 2025 was released on 22nd January 2025.
UPSC Prelims Question Paper 2025 and Unofficial Prelims Answer Key 2025 are available now.
UPSC Calendar 2026 is released on 15th May, 2025.
The UPSC Vacancy 2025 were released 1129, out of which 979 were for UPSC CSE and remaining 150 are for UPSC IFoS.
UPSC Mains 2025 will be conducted on 22nd August 2025.
UPSC Prelims 2026 will be conducted on 24th May, 2026 & UPSC Mains 2026 will be conducted on 21st August 2026.
The UPSC Selection Process is of 3 stages-Prelims, Mains and Interview.
UPSC Result 2024 is released with latest UPSC Marksheet 2024. Check Now!
UPSC Toppers List 2024 is released now. Shakti Dubey is UPSC AIR 1 2024 Topper.
