In India, the Right to Information (RTI) Act empowers citizens to seek information from government bodies. However, what happens when the information sought relates to a third party? Does that third party have the power to block the release of information? This crucial question was addressed Central Information Commission (CIC) in a case that clarifies the rights and limitations of third parties when information is requested under the RTI Act. Understanding this case can help you navigate similar situations and ensure your right to information is protected.
Background: What Information Was Sought
The RTI applicant in this case approached the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) with a specific request. They sought a list of all Engineering Colleges and Technical Institutions belonging to the Veltech Group of Institutions and its associated deemed universities. Crucially, the applicant also wanted to know which of these institutions had received approvals from both the AICTE and the University Grants Commission (UGC). Further details regarding each of these institutions were also requested.
How the Public Authority Responded
The Public Information Officer (PIO) at AICTE initially provided the applicant with a list of institutions belonging to the Trust. However, for the remaining information requested, the PIO took a different approach. Instead of directly deciding whether to disclose the information, the PIO issued a notice to the Veltech Group of Institutions (the third party) under Section 11(1) of the RTI Act. This section mandates that if the information requested relates to or has been supplied third party and is treated as confidential , the PIO must notify the third party and invite their submissions on whether the information should be disclosed. The Secretary of the Trust, upon receiving this notice, responded the information. Their argument was that the matter was pending before the State Government of Tamil Nadu and that details of properties held private trust were not publicly available.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The case eventually reached the Central Information Commission (CIC) because the applicant was not satisfied with the outcome. The CIC reviewed the actions of both the PIO and the third party. The Commission observed that the response from the Trust was not a proper response as required under Section 11(1) of the RTI Act. Instead of providing their submissions on whether the information should be disclosed, the Trust seemed to have taken on the role of the decision-maker, effectively usurping the authority of the PIO. The CIC noted that the Trust had virtually decided the case on behalf of the PIO. The PIO’s role, upon receiving the third party’s submissions, is to consider them and then make an independent decision based on the merits of the case and the provisions of the RTI Act.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC, in its order, clarified the role of the third party in RTI matters. The Commission directed that a fresh notice be issued to the Trust under Section 11(1) of the RTI Act. This time, the Trust was explicitly asked to provide its views on whether it agreed to the disclosure of the requested information. Crucially, the CIC emphasized that after receiving the Trust’s response, the PIO was then to make the final decision on disclosure in accordance with the law. This order is significant because it clearly establishes that while a third party’s views must be considered, they do not have an absolute veto power over the disclosure of information. The ultimate decision-making authority rests with the Public Information Officer, who must apply their judgment based on the facts and legal provisions.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understanding Third-Party Rights: When your RTI application seeks information concerning a third party, the PIO is obligated to notify them under Section 11 of the RTI Act. This gives the third party an opportunity to make their case against disclosure, typically on grounds of confidentiality or potential harm.
- Lesson 2: The PIO’s Decisive Role: Remember that the third party’s response is advisory, not binding. The PIO must consider their submissions but is not bound . The PIO’s duty is to weigh the applicant’s right to information against any legitimate concerns raised third party and make a decision based on the public interest and the provisions of the RTI Act.
- Lesson 3: Challenging Improper Responses: If a third party tries to act as the decision-maker, or if the PIO improperly relies on the third party’s refusal without independent consideration, you have the right to appeal this decision to the First Appellate Authority and subsequently to the CIC.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which government department or public authority holds the information you need.
- Draft Your RTI Application Clearly: State your request precisely. In this case, it would involve asking for specific lists and details related to educational institutions and their approvals.
- Submit the Application and Fee: Pay the required RTI application fee and submit your application to the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the relevant authority.
- Follow Up and Appeal if Necessary: If you don’t receive a satisfactory response within the stipulated time (usually 30 days), or if the information is denied, file a First Appeal. If the First Appellate Authority’s decision is also unsatisfactory, you can then escalate the matter to the CIC.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide a list of all [type of institutions] affiliated with [specific group or entity] that have received approval from [relevant regulatory bodies, e.g., AICTE, UGC, etc.], along with the details of their approval status and any other related information available in your records.
Conclusion
This case serves as a powerful reminder that the RTI Act is designed to promote transparency and accountability. While the law respects the legitimate concerns of third parties, it does not grant them the power to arbitrarily block the flow of information. The PIO, empowered RTI Act, remains the gatekeeper, tasked with balancing competing interests and upholding the citizen’s right to know. these principles, citizens can more effectively use the RTI Act to access the information they are entitled to.
