Many Indian citizens use the Right to Information (RTI) Act to get information from government departments. But what happens when you need advice on a matter, like a promotion, and the Public Information Officer (PIO) refuses to give it? This case highlights an important distinction in what you can and cannot ask for under RTI. Understanding this can save you time and help you file more effective RTI applications.
Background: What Information Was Sought
In this instance, an applicant approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and also filed an RTI application. The core of the applicant’s request was to know if the CAT could direct All India Radio (AIR) to grant him a promotion, based on a statutory amendment to a recruitment rule. Essentially, the applicant was seeking an opinion or advice on whether his situation warranted a promotion and if the CAT had the power to enforce it. The Public Information Officer (PIO) of AIR responded that if the applicant had a grievance, he should file an application with the CAT under its own rules, provided the matter fell within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) upheld this decision, emphasizing that it was not the PIO’s duty to answer hypothetical questions or provide interpretations of rules.
How the Public Authority Responded
The initial response from the PIO was to redirect the applicant to the appropriate forum, the CAT, for redressal of his grievance. This was based on the understanding that the PIO’s role under RTI is to provide existing information, not to offer legal advice or interpretations on future actions. The FAA reinforced this that hypothetical questions and interpretations were outside the scope of an RTI response. The public authority did not outright deny information but rather clarified that the applicant’s request was not for existing information but for guidance on a potential legal remedy.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The case eventually reached the Central Information Commission (CIC). The appellant argued that the definition of ‘information’ under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act is broad and includes ‘opinions’ and ‘advices’. Therefore, he contended that he was entitled to receive such advice from the PIO. The appellant believed that since the law defines information to include opinions and advice, the PIO should have provided his perspective on the promotion matter. This argument focused on a literal interpretation of the definition of ‘information’ as provided in the Act.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC, after hearing both sides, clarified the scope of ‘information’ as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The Commission held that the terms ‘opinion’ and ‘advice’ within the definition refer to any such opinion or advice that the public authority might have already obtained and which form part of its existing records. These terms do not extend to opinions or advice that do not already exist with the public authority. Therefore, a citizen cannot use the RTI Act to seek the opinion or advice of a PIO on a matter unless such opinion or advice is already documented and available with the public authority. The CIC upheld the PIO’s response, stating that the PIO had correctly advised the appellant to approach the CAT for redressal of his grievance, as this was the appropriate legal avenue for his specific concern. The appeal was rejected on these grounds.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understand the Definition of Information: While Section 2(f) of the RTI Act includes ‘opinions’ and ‘advices’ in the definition of ‘information’, this refers to existing records. You cannot ask a PIO to generate a new opinion or provide advice on a hypothetical situation or a future course of action.
- Lesson 2: Differentiate Between Information and Advice: RTI is primarily for seeking existing facts, records, and documents. If you need legal advice, an interpretation of rules, or guidance on how to pursue a grievance, the RTI Act is generally not the correct tool. You should approach the relevant authority or legal expert directly.
- Lesson 3: Focus on Existing Records: Your RTI application should clearly specify the existing documents, records, or information you are seeking. Vague requests for ‘advice’ or ‘clarification’ on how to proceed are likely to be rejected.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify Your Specific Information Need: Clearly determine what existing document, record, or piece of information you need from the public authority.
- Determine the Relevant Public Authority: Find out which government department or office holds the information you require.
- Draft Your RTI Application Carefully: Frame your questions precisely, asking for specific records or information that you know or believe exists. Avoid asking for opinions, advice, or interpretations.
- Submit and Follow Up: Submit your application with the prescribed fee and follow up if you do not receive a response within the stipulated time frame under Section 7 of the RTI Act. If denied, consider filing a First Appeal under Section 19.
Sample RTI question you can use:
“Please provide a copy of the recruitment rules pertaining to promotions in All India Radio, as amended, and any official notes or records that discuss the interpretation or application of these amendments concerning promotions.”
Conclusion
This case serves as a valuable reminder that the RTI Act is a powerful tool for transparency and accountability, but it has its limitations. While it empowers citizens to access government information, it is not a substitute for legal advice or a platform for generating new opinions. the nuances of what constitutes ‘information’ under the Act, citizens can file more targeted and successful RTI applications, ensuring they get the information they are entitled to and use the Act effectively to uphold their rights.
