Right To Information Act : A body of Government or "instrumentality of State.
Right To Information (RTI) Act 2005 mandates timely response to citizens’ requests for government related information. Since every citizen pays taxes, therefore he is entitled to know how the government is functioning. The Act empowers every citizen to seek any information from the government, obtain copies of any government documents, inspect any government documents, works and records, and take certified samples of materials of any government work.
According to Act No. 22 of 2005, The Right To Information Act is “An Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the Constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.” This law was passted by the Parliament on 15 June, 2005 and came fully into force on 13 October, 2005.
The RTI Act extends to the whole of India except the state of Jammu and Kashmir. All bodies, which are constituted under the Constitution or are under any government notification, or all bodies, including NGOs, which are owned, controlled or substantially financed by the government are covered under the Act. All authorities covered must appoint their Public Information Officer (PIO). In addition, every public authority is required to designate Assistant Public Information Officers (APIOs) to receive RTI requests and appeals for forwarding to the PIOs of their public authority. Any person may submit a request to the PIO for information in writing along with the application fees, which is ₹ 10 for Central Government Departments and different for different states.
In case of Central Government Departments, 629 post offices have been designated as APIOs. This means that one can go to any of these post offices and submit his/her fee and application at the RTI counter. A receipt will be issued as an acknowledgement and it is then the responsibility of that post office to deliver it to the right PIO. It is the PIO’s obligation to provide information to citizens of India who request information under the Act.
The PIO cannot refuse to accept application for information under any circumstances. Even if the application does not pertain to his department/ jurisdiction, he would have to transfer it to the concerned PIO within 5 days. If the concerned PIO does not accept the application, then the applicant can make a formal complaint to the respective Information Commission under Section 18. The Act also casts a direct accountability on the officer for not performing his duty and Information Commissioner can impose a penalty of ₹ 25000 or ₹ 250 per day. Also the applicant is not required to disclose any information or reason other than his name and contact particulars to seek the information.
Rampant corruption prevailing in the country forced the law-makers to realise that there is no way the country can be better without giving more power in hands of its citizens. Under such circumstances, the RTI Act checks corruption and helps in improving transparency. Since its enactment, the Act has been extensively used by ordinary Indian citizens to demand a vast range of information from their government. Unlike many countries where RTI laws have been used primarily by journalists and the media, in India the law has a broad base of users from different parts of the country. Case studies and media reports show that RTI is being used to redress individual grievances, access entitlements such as ration cards and pensions, investigate government policies and decisions and expose corruption and misuse of government resources.
For many, particularly India’s poor and disadvantaged, the Act has been empowering and has lead to tangible results. For instance in 2010, a resident of rural village of Odisha, filed a RTI application seeking information on the number of ponds constructed in his village under government’s scheme. The information he received was revealing: the ponds had never been constructed even though money was spent. Following this, the local administration was forced to take action.
