Many Indian citizens want to know how public money is spent and where government funds are directed. Understanding the flow of funds, especially those released Central Government to state governments, is crucial for transparency and accountability. This article explores a case where an RTI applicant sought specific details about fund releases, and what the Central Information Commission (CIC) ruled. It highlights the practical limitations of RTI and what kind of information is realistically obtainable.
Background: What Information Was Sought
An RTI applicant approached the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) with a specific request. They wanted to know about the funds released Government of India to the State of Bihar. The request was particularly interested in the period when Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav and Smt. Rabri Devi served as Chief Ministers of Bihar. The PMO, as the Public Authority, initially handled the application. Recognizing that the information might reside with another department, the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the PMO transferred the application to the Department of Expenditure. This department then provided some information in response to the query.
How the Public Authority Responded
The initial response from the Department of Expenditure provided partial information. However, the core of the applicant’s request, concerning the detailed breakdown of funds released to a specific state during a particular political tenure, proved difficult to address comprehensively. The response indicated that providing such granular data across numerous ministries and over several years was a significant challenge.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
When the applicant pursued the matter further, it reached the Central Information Commission (CIC). During the hearing, the CIC examined the nature of the information sought and the capabilities of the public authorities to provide it. The Commission acknowledged the applicant’s right to information but also considered the practical realities of information management within the government. The key observation was that the Government of India releases funds to states through various ministries and departments under a multitude of heads. Unless a specific office centrally maintains and compiles all this data in a readily accessible format, it becomes an enormous task for any single PIO to gather and present it accurately.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC ultimately ruled that it was not feasible for any single public authority within the Government of India to furnish the exact details requested appellant. The Commission noted that funds are disbursed to state governments under numerous categories central ministries. Without a centralized system for tracking and compiling all these releases over extended periods, it would be impossible for any PIO to collect and compile such comprehensive information. Consequently, the CIC rejected the appeal, stating that the desired information could not be provided in the form it was sought, and there was no further disclosure to be made in this specific case. This decision underscores that while RTI is a powerful tool, its effectiveness is dependent on the record-keeping practices of public authorities and the nature of the information requested. The CIC’s decision implies that information must exist in a tangible and accessible form for it to be disclosed under RTI. The Commission also implicitly highlighted the limitations under Section 7 of the RTI Act, which mandates providing information within the scope of the Act, but also acknowledges that certain information may not be held or accessible.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understand Information Availability: Not all information, especially highly detailed or aggregated data spanning long periods and multiple departments, might be readily available or easily compiled single public authority. RTI works best when seeking specific, existing records.
- Lesson 2: Be Specific but Realistic: While it’s good to be precise in your RTI application, consider if the authority you are addressing is the likely custodian of that specific, detailed information. For broad financial data, seeking consolidated reports might be more effective than asking for granular, historical breakdowns.
- Lesson 3: Consider the Scope of PIO’s Duty: A PIO is obligated to provide information that is held under the control of the public authority. They are generally not required to collect, collate, or create new information to satisfy an RTI request, especially if it involves extensive research across various departments.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Right Public Authority: Determine which ministry, department, or office is most likely to hold the information you need. For fund releases from the central government to states, this could be the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, or the PMO itself, depending on the specifics.
- Draft Your RTI Application Clearly: State your request precisely. Mention the period, the specific state, and the type of funds you are interested in. However, be mindful of the limitations discussed above.
- Specify the Format (If Possible): If you know the information is likely available in reports or published documents, you can request copies of those.
- Submit and Follow Up: File the application with the appropriate fee and address. If you don’t receive a response within the stipulated 30 days (or 35 days if transferred), file a First Appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act. If the appeal is also unsatisfactory, you can then file a Second Appeal with the CIC.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide details of funds released Government of India to [Specific State Name] during the financial years [Specify Years] under the [Specify Scheme/Head, if known]. If consolidated reports or summaries are available, please provide copies of the same.
Conclusion
This case serves as an important reminder that while the Right to Information Act, 2005, is a powerful tool for citizens to seek accountability, its practical application has certain boundaries. The CIC’s decision highlights that information must be held and accessible public authority. For complex financial data spread across multiple agencies and years, the ability to provide it is dependent on existing record-keeping systems. Applicants should approach RTI with a clear understanding of what information is likely to be available and how it is maintained. strategic and realistic in their requests, citizens can maximize their chances of obtaining valuable information through RTI and contribute to a more informed and transparent governance system.
