Have you ever felt that the government department you’ve approached with an RTI application doesn’t have the information you need, or perhaps it belongs to another department or even a state government? This is a common dilemma for many RTI applicants in India. Understanding whether a central government authority can and should transfer your RTI application to a state government is crucial for getting the information you’re entitled to. This case highlights a situation where an applicant seeking information about an action against a public figure found their RTI application bounced between central departments, leading to confusion and delays. Let’s delve into what happened and what it means for you.
Background: What Information Was Sought
The applicant, in this case, came across a news report titled ‘Congress attacks corrupt Anna’. Based on this news, they filed an RTI application with the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). The core of their query was whether the Prime Minister or the PMO was aware of this news report and, if so, what action had been taken against Anna Hazare. The intention was to uncover potential government actions or awareness regarding a matter reported in the media.
How the Public Authority Responded
The initial RTI application was sent to the PMO. Subsequently, it was transferred to the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT). The Public Information Officer (PIO) at the DoPT responded that they had no knowledge of the Prime Minister’s awareness of the specific news item. Instead, they advised the applicant to approach the State Government of Maharashtra, as it was this government that had established the Justice P.B. Sawant Commission to inquire into the charges against Anna Hazare. The applicant then filed a first appeal, arguing that if the Central Government lacked the information, it should have transferred the application to the relevant State Government. However, the First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld the DoPT’s stance, stating that department guidelines did not obligate the PIO to transfer an RTI application to a public authority under a State Government.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The matter eventually reached the Central Information Commission (CIC). During the hearing, the applicant presented a strong argument. They contended that departmental guidelines should not override the explicit provisions of the RTI Act. The applicant emphasized that Section 6(3) of the RTI Act clearly mandates a PIO to transfer an RTI application to another public authority if the subject matter is more closely connected to that authority. Furthermore, the applicant pointed out that they had received a prior response from the PMO’s PIO, indicating that a report from Sri Manish Tewari to the Prime Minister had been forwarded to the Secretary of the DoPT. This suggested that the DoPT should indeed possess some relevant information. The respondents from the DoPT maintained that they had no recorded information regarding any action taken against Anna Hazare in this specific matter. They also confirmed the absence of any files or records detailing the formation of the Commission or its recommendations, and whether any action had been taken based on those recommendations.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC, in its decision, directed the PIO of the DoPT to inform the applicant whether any action had been taken Department based on the Sri Manish Tewari report that was forwarded PMO. The Commission also made a significant observation regarding the transfer of RTI applications. It stated that there couldn’t be a rigid rule on whether a PIO is always obliged under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act to transfer an application to a State Government. The decision to transfer an RTI application to an authority outside the Central Government must be made on a case-by-case basis. The CIC clarified that if records clearly indicate that the subject matter is directly related to a state public authority, there is no prohibition under the RTI Act from transferring the application to that authority, regardless of any departmental circulars to the contrary. However, this transfer is not an absolute mandate but depends on the specifics of each case. The Commission further noted a concerning practice within the DoPT where RTI applications with multiple queries were often split and distributed among various PIOs. This led to PIOs responding mechanically with “information not available” or providing only partial information. To address this, the CIC directed the Secretary of the DoPT to revise their internal arrangements. The Commission stressed that unless an RTI application is overwhelmingly large and covers a vast range of topics across the department, efforts should be made to compile the information centrally after sourcing it from different divisions, and then provide a comprehensive response to the information seeker.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understand Section 6(3) of the RTI Act: This section is your strongest ally when your RTI application is with the wrong authority. It mandates the transfer of your application to another public authority if the subject matter is more closely related to it. Do not accept a simple “information not available” if you suspect the information might lie with another department or government.
- Lesson 2: Challenge Incorrect Responses and Guidelines: Departmental guidelines or circulars cannot supersede the provisions of the RTI Act. If you believe a PIO is wrongly refusing to transfer your application or is acting contrary to the Act, you have the right to appeal and argue your case, citing the relevant sections of the Act.
- Lesson 3: Be Specific and Persistent: While this case involved a specific news report, the principle applies broadly. Clearly articulate what information you are seeking and why you believe it should be with the authority you are addressing or another specific authority. Persistence through appeals is key. Also, be aware of how large departments might mishandle complex RTI queries and advocate for comprehensive responses.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Before filing, try to determine which government department or authority is most likely to hold the information you need.
- Draft Your RTI Application Clearly: State your request precisely. If you are transferring an application or believe it should be transferred, mention Section 6(3) of the RTI Act and explain why you believe the information is held specific authority.
- File Your Application and Pay the Fee: Submit your application to the PIO of the chosen public authority, along with the prescribed fee.
- Follow Up and Appeal if Necessary: If you receive an unsatisfactory response, a delay, or a refusal, file a first appeal with the First Appellate Authority. If the first appeal is also unsuccessful, you can then approach the Central Information Commission (CIC) or State Information Commission (SIC).
Sample RTI question you can use:
“Please provide details of any communication, report, or action taken department regarding [specific issue or event, e.g., the news item ‘Congress attacks corrupt Anna’ dated XX/XX/XXXX] and its connection to [specific public figure or matter]. If this information is held public authority, please transfer this application under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005, to the appropriate authority and inform me of the transfer.”
Conclusion
This case serves as a powerful reminder that the RTI Act is designed to empower citizens. While bureaucratic processes can sometimes create hurdles, understanding your rights and the spirit of the law can help you overcome them. Remember that central government departments can, and often should, transfer your RTI applications to state governments if the information you seek falls under their purview. Don’t be deterred rejections or misdirections. informed and persistent, you can effectively use the RTI Act to access the information you are entitled to, ensuring greater transparency and accountability from all levels of government.
