CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BIHAR

SCHOOL OF LAW AND GOVERNANCE

TOPIC: FORMALITIES OF DISPOSAL OF REQUEST

SUBMITTED BY

NAME- AYUSH KUMAR GUPTA

ENROLLMENT No. – CUSB1813125025

PROGRAMME- B.A.LLB(H.)

SUBJECT TITLE AND CODE- RIGHT TO INFORMATION

SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. POONAM KUMARI

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

SCHOOL OF LAW AND GOVERNANCE.

1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Acknowledgement strictly speaking may not be complete expression of one's gratitude towards
the acknowledged persons. However, it is one of the medium to express the sentiments and
records, one's grateful indebtedness towards those who have guided and helped the researcher.

I acknowledge my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Mrs. Poonam Kumari, Assistant Professor,

School of Law and Governance, Central University of South Bihar, Gaya, who despite her
manifold academic as well as administrative activities spared her precious time and allowed full
freedom for my thoughts to flourish. She always helped me with her intellect as well as material
resources available to her; in case of non-availability of material with her she indicated the
sources from where I can get it. She always managed to take out time from her busy schedule to
guide me in my work. Without her guidance, it would have been very difficult to complete this
work.

At last, I express my thanks to the Library Staff of the Central University of South Bihar, Gaya
for permitting to use the library and their active cooperation and guidance in respect of this work.
I am also thankful to my friends of this University Programme for their kind support.

Last but not least, I thank the almighty for his divine grace and whose footprints I saw, every
time I look back.

AYUSH KUMAR GUPTA

2
TABLE OF CONTENT

 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………6-8

 RECEIVING APPLICATION BY “PIO”……………………………9-10

 DISPOSAL OF REQUEST……………………………………………10 -12

 FORMALITIES OF DISPOSAL OF REQUEST……………………12-13

 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………….14

 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………….15

3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Aims and Objectives:

The aim of the project is to present a detailed study of the topic “Formation of disposal of request
under RTI Act, 2005” forming a concrete informative capsule of the same with an insight into its
relevance in the Indian Society.

Research Plan

The researchers have followed Doctrinal method.

Scope and Limitations:

In this project the researcher has tried to include different aspects pertaining to the concept of
disposal of request, and basics of Procedure in Right to Information Act and many others
directional topics of that.

Sources of Data:

The following secondary sources of data have been used in the project-

• Case Study

• Websites

• Case Laws

• Books

Method of Writing and Mode of Citation:

The method of writing followed in the course of this research project is primarily analytical. The
researcher has followed Uniform method of citation throughout the course of this research
project.

4
ABSTRACT

This project aims at introducing the concept of obtaining information under RTI Act and
critically analyzing it. It deals with citizen‟s right to seek such information from a public
authority which is held by the public authority or which is held under its control. This right
includes inspection of work, documents and records; taking notes, extracts or certified copies of
documents or records; and taking certified samples of material held by the public authority or
held under the control of the public authority. It is important to note that only such information
can be supplied under the Act which already exists and is held by the public authority or held
under the control of the public authority. The Public Information Officer is not supposed to
create information; or to interpret information; or to solve the problems raised by the applicants;
or to furnish replies to hypothetical questions. The information to the applicant should ordinarily
be provided in the form in which it is sought. However, if the supply of information sought in a
particular form would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or may
cause harm to the safety or preservation of the records, supply of information in that form may
be denied. Some Information Seekers request the Public Information Officers to cull out
information from some document(s) and give such extracted information to them. A citizen has a
right to get „material‟ from a public authority which is held by or under the control of that public
authority. The Act, however, does not require the Public Information Officer to deduce some
conclusion from the „material‟ and supply the „conclusion‟ so deduced to the applicant. It
means that the Public Information Officer is required to supply the „material‟ in the form as held
by the public authority, but not to do research on behalf of the citizen to deduce anything from
the material and then supply it to him.

5
INTRODUCTION

Since the time of democratic Governments came to function it is the intention of curious citizens
to seek information as to how the administrations, carries on the work of administration entrusted
to them by law. The subjected citizens some times are eager to know, how taxes paid by them
has been utilized by men in power or whether such spending has gone on sideways (miss-
utilized). The curious citizens are also interested to know how the discretions vested with the
administrators are utilized, properly implemented for the benefit of larger interest of
society/community or whether such discretions are got en-cashed in the process o dispensing of
benevolences given by the State. From time to time mechanisms have been devised to keep
checks and balances on administrators, about the utility of funds ear marked for developmental
work. This strict scrutiny of administrative action is possible only when the opposition party in
the Legislature House is strong enough to expose the misdeeds of the Administrators/Executives.
The problem of dissecting the pit-falls of the Government policies comes only when the
opposition may also not morally strong enough to scrutinize governmental actions or obvious
reasons.

At that time the governed/voter/subject requires to know how things are taking shape in
following the policy of the State. In any part of the world and in any forms of Governments, the
persons in power, who are prone to commit misdeeds and who have committed misdeeds, wants
to hide facts from the glare of public view. To cover up such miss-deeds or misdemeanor the
rulers will try not to disclose the true facts to the public. To overcome this difficulty in securing
information from the Governmental machinery information must be sought from persons who
hold such information. In this direction the main of aim of Right to Information Act is to secure
information from authorities for exposing mis-deeds or to fortifying to criticize anti- people
policies with valid points.

To remedy this problem it is only by securing right information by means of questioning so as to

facilitate the public to secure such information on the functioning of Governmental authorities
The Right to Information Act, 2005 has been enacted on 15th June 2005 (Central Act No.22 of
2005) by the Central Government. It has taken India 82 years to transition from an opaque

6
system of governance, legitimized by the colonial Official Secrets Act, to one where citizens can
demand the right to information. The recent enactment of the Right to Information Act 2005
marks a significant shift for Indian democracy, for the greater the access of citizens to
information, the greater will be the responsiveness of government to community needs.

Right To Information is derived from our fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression
under Article 19 of the Constitution. If we do not have information on how our Government and
Public Institutions function, we cannot express any informed opinion on it. Democracy revolves
around the basic idea of Citizens being at the center of governance. And the freedom of the press
is an essential element for a democracy to function. It is thus obvious that the main reason for a
free press is to ensure that Citizens are informed. Thus it clearly flows from this, that the Citizens
Right To Know is paramount.

The Act and its rules define a format for requisitioning information, a time period within which
information must be provided, a method of giving the information, some charges for applying
and some exemptions of information which will not be given.

The need for the right to information

In recent years, there has been an almost unstoppable global trend towards recognition of the
right to information by countries, intergovernmental organizations, civil society and the people.
The right to information has been recognized as a fundamental human right, which upholds the
inherent dignity of all human beings. The right to information forms the crucial underpinning of
participatory democracy - it is essential to ensure accountability and good governance. The
greater the access of the citizen to information, the greater the responsiveness of government to
community needs. Alternatively, the more restrictions that are placed on access, the greater will
be the feelings of 'powerlessness' and 'alienation'. Without information, people cannot adequately
exercise their rights as citizens or make informed choices.

The free flow of information in India remains severely restricted by three factors:

1. The legislative framework includes several pieces of restrictive legislation, such as the Official
Secrets Act, 1923;

2. The pervasive culture of secrecy and arrogance within the bureaucracy; and

7
3. The low levels of literacy and rights awareness amongst India's people. The primary power of
RTI is the fact that it empowers individual Citizens to requisition information. Hence without
necessarily forming pressure groups or associations, it puts power directly into the hands of the
foundation of democracy- the Citizen.

Applicability of the Act:

The Act applies both to Central and State Governments and all public authorities. A public
authority (sec. 2(h)) which is bound to furnish information means any authority or body or
institution of self-government established or constituted

(a) by or under the Constitution,

(b) by any other law made by Parliament,

(c) by any other law made by State Legislature,

(d) by a notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government and includes any

(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed,

(ii) non- government organization substantially financed - which, in clauses (a) to (d) are all,
directly or indirectly funded by the appropriate Government.

What is Right to Information?

The right to information is defined in sec. 2(j) as a right to information accessible under the Act
which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes a right to (i) inspection
of work, documents, records, (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or
records, (iii) taking separate samples of material, (iv) obtaining information in the form of
diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts
where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device.

8
RECEIVING APPLICATION BY “PIO” UNDER SECTION 6(1) OF RTI Act.

The Applicants’ seeking information under Section 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005,
could make their request in writing in a language of English, Hindi or in the regional official
language of the area, and could submit their “Applications’ to the Public Information Officer
(PIO) appointed at an office, where you think or assume or believe that the information required
would be available. Even, the Applicants’ have the option of submitting their application either
online or offline. A nominal fee of Rs.10/- (Rupees Ten Only) has to be paid for every such
application as per Rule 3 of the Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005.
However, no such payment of fee shall be made if the applicants are Below Poverty Line (BPL).
The PIOs at the State Government Offices shall be addressed as State Public Information Officer
(SPIO) and the PIOs at the Central Government Offices shall be addressed as Central Public
Information Officer (CPIO)

The PIOs must receive the applications made in any mode under Section 6(1) of the Right to
Information Act, 2005, and should never prevent the receipt thereof. Further, any illiterate or
handicapped or those who could not make their request/application in writing if approaches the
PIOs, the PIOs are bound to extend the assistance to the person (intending to make a request
orally) to reduce the same in writing (vide the provisions of Section 6(1) of the Right to
Information Act, 2005. In fact, the PIOs need to note here that any “intentional refusal to receive
the application”, on their part, lead to imposition of Penalty under Section 20 of the Act.

WHETHER MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS CAN BE SUBMITTED?

There is no such bar or barrier in RTI Law. Any citizen can make any number of applications,
but the fee prescribed for the purpose has to be paid with each of such application. Getting
“Information” by a Citizen is a statutory right.

WHAT IS THE WAY OUT TO REDRESS THE GRIEVANCE IF THE “PIO” REFUSES
TO RECEIVE THE APPLICATION?

Irrespective of the mode of submission of application, the PIO ought to receive the application &
even if the “Applicant” under the Act has either intentionally or wrongly addressed his/her
application to a PIO, the PIO has to receive the same and in no case the PIO should prevent the

9
receipt or refuse to receive the same. If the PIO intentionally attempts to prevent the receipt or
refuses to take postal delivery of the Application addressed to him, it may be construed that the
PIO has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application under the Act, and shall
be liable for Penalty under Sections 19(8) and 20 of the Act. If the PIO refuses to take postal
delivery, there exists sufficient proof to tackle the issue to redress the grievance properly in two
ways – (1) Directly complaining to the State Information Commission (SIC) or the Central
Information Commission (CIC) as may be applicable, and (2) Appealing to the First Appellate
Authority (FAA).

DISPOSAL OF APPLICATION:

On receipt of application under Section 6(1) of Right to Information Act, 2005 the PIO [i.e.,
State Public Information Officer (SPIO) or the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), as the
case may be] shall, at the earliest possible go through the application thoroughly and –

(1) if found that the requested “information” is

(a) held by another PIO/Public Authority; or

(b) the subject matter is connected with or related to another PIO/Public Authority, the recipient
PIO shall transfer the application or part/portion thereof, as per Section 6(3) of the Act, to such
other PIO/Public Authority within “Five Days”, duly informing the “Applicant” about such
transfer.

(2) if found that the requested “information” is –

(a) “Exempt from Disclosure” under Section 8 of Right to Information Act, 2005, or

(b) “Involve any Infringement of Copyright” as per Section 9 of Right to Information Act,
2005,or

(c) any part of “information” (out of the “information” requested) which does not fall under the
category of “information exempt from disclosure” may be supplied to the applicant, by
intimating the fact that after severance of the record from the information exempt from
disclosure, is being provided under Section 10 of Right to Information Act, 2005.

10
(3) if found that the requested “information” is relating to a “Third Party” and the PIO intends to
supply the information or record or any part thereof, shall issue a notice to that “Third Party”
giving the opportunity to make his/her representation as per Section 11 of Right to Information
Act, 2005 and then take a decision as to whether the “information” sought by the applicant is to
be supplied or not. (the PIO) normally pass the order accordingly within “Thirty Days” of receipt
of such application as per Section 7 of Right to Information Act, 2005 duly supplying the
“information” or rejecting the application.

A. When the required “information” concerns with “Life or Liberty” of a Person, the time limit
for disposing application/supplying information is within “Forty-Eight (48) Hours” from receipt
of such request/application as per Section 7(1) of the Act.

B. When the application was submitted to APIO, which should be transferred to PIO, there shall
be an allowable period of “Five Days” for such transfer as per Section 5 of the Act, and
therefore, for disposal of such transferred application the time limit shall be “Thirty Five Days”.

C. When the application was transferred from one PIO to another PIO, there shall be an
allowable period of “Five Days” for such transfer as per Section 6(3) of the Act, and therefore,
for disposal of such transferred application the time limit shall be “Thirty Five Days”.

D. When the application requesting the “information” relates to a “Third Party” the time limit for
disposing such application, as per Section 11(3) of the Act, is within “Forty Days”.

E. When the PIO fails to comply within the time limits specified, the “information” shall be
provided “Free of Charge/Cost” to the Applicant as per Section 7(6) of the Act

ACTIONS LIABLE TO IMPOSITION OF PENALTY:

The PIOs need to note here that:

(1) for “non-furnishing information within time specified” or (2) for “malafidely denying the
request for information” or

(3) for “knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information” or

(4) for “obstructing in any manner in furnishing the information” or

11
(5) for “destroying the information which is subject of the request”, leads to imposition of
Penalty under Section 20 of the Act.

WHAT COULD BE THE PENALTY?

There shall be an imposition of penalty at the rate of Rs.250 per each day till the application is
received by the PIO or the applicant receives the information. However, such penalty is restricted
to a maximum amount totaling to Rs.25,000. In addition to it, there has the scope for
recommending for suitable disciplinary action against the PIO under the Service Rules applicable
to him/her.

WHO COULD IMPOSE PENALTY?

As per provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 only the Second Appellate Authority
(SAA), i.e., the State Information Commission (SIC) or the Central Information Commission
(CIC) as applicable, is only the Authority Empowered with the Power of Imposing Penalty on
PIOs under Sections 19(8) and 20 of the Act.

FORMALITIES OF DISPOSAL OF REQUEST :

1. The Citizen can file an application for getting information along with fee to the P.I.O.
shall ensure, that request is delivered to concerned office, as early as possible.
2. Where further fee is required say for photo copying; The P.I.O. shall intimate to the
applicant in writing giving details of amount to be deposited for providing information.
The Citizens can seek inspection of works, documents, and records, take extracts or
certified copies of documents or sample of material.
3. On receipt of request in concerned department it shall be the duty of the Official In
charge of the Section/Divisional Head of that department that the request is properly
examined by nominated official and entered in the register.
4. In case the inspection of document has been asked for, it shall be the duty of the official
/person in charge of the section that the document or record or file is sent to P.I.O. with
the information within 7 days so that P.I.O. may intimate applicant to inspect the record
or documents under single window system.

12
5. P.I.O. shall intimate the applicant to come and inspect the document available in his
office within a week.
6. The applicants shall be provided the information free of charge if the Commission fails to
provide information within 30 days. If the interest of third party is involved then the time
limit is 40 days.
7. The information is to be supplied in a time bound manner, failing which the applicant can
file an appeal before the appellate Authority. In case information is supplied after 30
days, no further fee will be collected.
8. In case of third party information, the P.I.O. shall issue notice to third party and give him
opportunity of hearing if required and 10 days time to represent (if required). The P.I.O.
shall take into consideration the representation while taking decision on the request on
merits.
9. In case, where, the request is rejected or refused by the P.I.O.; the particulars of the
Appellate Authority to whom appeal can be referred, shall be mentioned with time limit
of the appeal.

13
CONCLUSION

By enacting the Right to Information Act India has moved from an opaque and arbitrary system
of government to the beginning of an era where there will be greater transparency and to a
system when the citizen will be empowered and the true centre of power. Only by empowering
the ordinary citizen, any nation can progress towards greatness. By enacting the right to
information Act 2005, India has taken a small but significant step towards that goal. The real
swaraj will come not by the acquisition of authority by a few but by the acquisition of capacity
by all to resist authority when abused. Thus with the enactment of this Act India has taken a
small step towards achieving real swaraj.

It is evident from the study undertaken that the employees of Private sector are aware of the Act
and are utilizing the Act. It can be observed that lack of awareness among people is the hurdle
for effective implementation of RTI Act. It is found that the loopholes in the government
departments is the main reason for applying for information under the Act and respondents
believe that RTI is one of the best methods to collect information from Government departments.
Because they believe that the wrong information would be given by government departments.

Generally speaking those who have applied under the Act know about the procedures, Majority
of respondents are not ready to follow through for the bitter experience they had before. Further
Government bodies are also discouraging people for using the RTI Act. However it cannot be
denied that accountability and transparency in administration has improved because of the Act.
So improving the RTI Act and proper implementation is very helpful to the civil society and can
achieve good governance.

14
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Dharmendra Mishra, Participatory Governence Through NGO‘s, AAIEKH publishers

Jaipur, India.
 Lisa Brush D., Gender and Governence, RAWAT publications Jaipur, India.
 Muralidhar Y.G., Mahiti Hakku, Nava Karnataka Publishers, Bangalore.
 Mandakini Devasher, Your Guide to Using the Right to Information Act – 2005, New
Delhi.
 RTI: Role of Civil Society, Social Action – Oct-Dec. 06.

Web Source

 https://taxguru.in/corporate-law/receiving-disposing-applications-pios-information-act-
2005.html
 http://ncw.nic.in/rti/rti-manual-guidelines/chapter-iv-disposal-request#:~:
 https://wblc.gov.in/sites/default/files/Role%20of%20PIO.pdf

15