A Study on Right to Information Act

A Study on the Significance of Right To Information Act

CHAPTER - 1

INTRODUCTION

Since the time of democratic Governments came to function it is the

intention of curious citizens to seek information as to how the

administrations, carries on the work of administration entrusted to them by

law. The subjected citizens some times are eager to know, how taxes paid by

them has been utilized by men in power or whether such spending has gone

on sideways (miss- utilized). The curious citizens are also interested to know

how the discretions vested with the administrators are utilized, properly

implemented for the benefit of larger interest of society/community or

whether such discretions are got en-cashed in the process o dispensing of

benevolences given by the State. From time to time mechanisms have been

devised to keep checks and balances on administrators, about the utility of

funds ear marked for developmental work. This strict scrutiny of

administrative action is possible only when the opposition party in the

Legislature House is strong enough to expose the misdeeds of the

Administrators/Executives. The problem of dissecting the pit-falls of the

Government policies comes only when the opposition may also not morally

strong enough to scrutinize governmental actions or obvious reasons.

At that time the governed/voter/subject requires to know how things

are taking shape in following the policy of the State. In any part of the

world and in any forms of Governments, the persons in power, who are prone

to commit misdeeds and who have committed misdeeds, wants to hide facts

from the glare of public view. To cover up such miss-deeds or misdemeanor

the rulers will try not to disclose the true facts to the public. To overcome this

difficulty in securing information from the Governmental machinery

information must be sought from persons who hold such information. In this

direction the main of aim of Right to Information Act is to secure information

Page 1


from authorities for exposing mis-deeds or to fortifying to criticize anti-

people policies with valid points.

To remedy this problem it is only by securing right information by

means of questioning so as to facilitate the public to secure such information

on the functioning of Governmental authorities The Right to Information Act,

2005 has been enacted on 15th June 2005 (Central Act No.22 of 2005) by the

Central Government. It has taken India 82 years to transition from an opaque

system of governance, legitimized by the colonial Official Secrets Act, to one

where citizens can demand the right to information. The recent enactment of

the Right to Information Act 2005 marks a significant shift for Indian

democracy, for the greater the access of citizens to information, the greater

will be the responsiveness of government to community needs.

Right To Information is derived from our fundamental right of

freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution. If we

do not have information on how our Government and Public Institutions

function, we cannot express any informed opinion on it. Democracy revolves

around the basic idea of Citizens being at the center of governance. And the

freedom of the press is an essential element for a democracy to function. It is

thus obvious that the main reason for a free press is to ensure that Citizens are

informed. Thus it clearly flows from this, that the Citizens Right To Know is

paramount.

The Act and its rules define a format for requisitioning information, a

time period within which information must be provided, a method of giving

the information, some charges for applying and some exemptions of

information which will not be given.

Page 2


The need for the right to information

In recent years, there has been an almost unstoppable global trend

towards recognition of the right to information by countries,

intergovernmental organizations, civil society and the people. The right to

information has been recognized as a fundamental human right, which

upholds the inherent dignity of all human beings. The right to information

forms the crucial underpinning of participatory democracy - it is essential to

ensure accountability and good governance. The greater the access of the

citizen to information, the greater the responsiveness of government to

community needs. Alternatively, the more restrictions that are placed on

access, the greater will be the feelings of 'powerlessness' and 'alienation'.

Without information, people cannot adequately exercise their rights as

citizens or make informed choices.

The free flow of information in India remains severely restricted by

three factors:

1. The legislative framework includes several pieces of restrictive

legislation, such as the Official Secrets Act, 1923;

2. The pervasive culture of secrecy and arrogance within the bureaucracy;

and

3. The low levels of literacy and rights awareness amongst India's people.

The primary power of RTI is the fact that it empowers individual

Citizens to requisition information. Hence without necessarily forming

pressure groups or associations, it puts power directly into the hands of

the foundation of democracy- the Citizen.

Applicability of the Act:

The Act applies both to Central and State Governments and all public

authorities. A public authority (sec. 2(h)) which is bound to furnish

information means any authority or body or institution of self-government

Page 3


established or constituted (a) by or under the Constitution, (b) by any other

law made by Parliament, (c) by any other law made by State Legislature, (d)

by a notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government and

includes any (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed, (ii) non-

government organization substantially financed - which, in clauses (a) to (d)

are all, directly or indirectly funded by the appropriate Government.

What is Right to Information?

The right to information is defined in sec. 2(j) as a right to

information accessible under the Act which is held by or under the control of

any public authority and includes a right to (i) inspection of work,

documents, records, (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of

documents or records, (iii) taking separate samples of material, (iv) obtaining

information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any

other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored

in a computer or in any other device.

Information’s covered under the Act

The Act defines information in sec. 2(f) as any material in any form,

including the records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press

releases, circulars, orders, log books, contracts, reports, papers, samples,

models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to

any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any law

for the time being in force. Sec. 2(i) defines the word ‘record’ as including

(a) any document, manuscript and file, (b) any microfilm, microfiche and

facsimile copy of a document, (c) any reproduction of image or images

embodied in such microfilm and (d) any other material produced by a

computer or any other device.

Page 4


Maintenance and Publication of Records

Sec. 4 makes it a duty of public authorities to maintain records for

easy access and to publish within 120 days the name of the particular officers

who should give the information and in regard to the framing of the rules,

regulations etc. Subsection (3) of sec. 4 states that for the performance of

subsection (1), all information shall be disseminated widely and in such form

and manner, which is easily accessible to the public.

Sec. 6 permits persons to obtain information in English or Hindi or in

the official language of the area from the designated officers. The person

need not give any reason for the request or any personal details. Sec. 7

requires the request to be disposed of within 30 days provided that where

information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall

be provided within 48 hours. Under sec. 7(7) before any decision is taken for

furnishing the information, the designated officer shall take into

consideration the representation, if any, made by a third party under sec. 11.

A request rejected shall be communicated under sec. 7(8) giving

reasons and specifying the procedure for appeal and the designation of the

appellate authority. Sec. 7(9) exempts granting information where it would

disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be

detrimental to the safety and preservation of the record in question.

Exemptions

Sec. 8 exempts from disclosure certain information and contents as

stated in Sub-clauses (a) to (j) thereof. Sub-clause (b) exempts information,

which is expressly forbidden by any court of law or tribunal or the dispute of

which may constitute contempt of court. Sub-clause (g) exempts information

the disclosure of which would endanger life, or physical safety of any person

or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law

enforcement or security purpose. Sub-clause (h) exempts information, which

Page 5


could impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of

offenders. Sub-clause (i) exempts Cabinet papers.

It is important to note that the Act specifies that intelligence and

security organizations are exempted from the application of the Act.

However, it is provided that in case the demand for information pertains to

allegations of corruption and human rights violations, the Act shall apply

even to such institutions. Constitutional Avenues Remain Open Under the

Act, where a citizen has exhausted the remedy of appeal or second appeal, the

finality given to the orders of the commissioners and appellate authorities is

only for the purposes of the Act and the citizen has a right to approach the

High Court under Art. 226 or where it refers to a fundamental right, he may

even approach the Supreme Court under Art. 32.

Right to Information is a Fundamental Right

The right to information is a fundamental right flowing from Art.

19(1)(a) of the Constitution is now a well-settled proposition. Over the years,

the Supreme Court has consistently ruled in favour of the citizen’s right to

know. The nature of this right and the relevant restrictions thereto, has been

discussed by the Supreme Court in a number of cases:

In Bennett Coleman, the right to information was held to be included

within the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Art.19 (1)

(a).

In Raj Narain, the Court explicitly stated that it is not in the interest of

the public to ‘cover with a veil of secrecy the common routine business - the

responsibility of officials to explain and to justify their acts is the chief

safeguard against oppression and corruption.’

In S.P. Gupta, the right of the people to know about every public act,

and the details of every public transaction undertaken by public functionaries

was described. The preamble of RTI Act, 2005 (Central Act No.22 of 2005)

Page 6


recites that the Act has been enacted, to set-out for practical regime of Right

to Information for citizens. To secure access of information under the control

of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability, in

the working of public authority and also the constitution of Central and State

Information Commission for monitoring; supervision and administration of

Right to Information Act. Apart from this Aim of Right to Information Act is

that democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of

information, which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption

and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the

Governed.

It has also been felt by the Government to moderate revelation of

information in actual practice which is likely to conflict with other public

interests, including efficient operations of the governments; Optimum use of

limited fiscal resource available at the disposal of the Government and the

prevention of confidentiality of sensitive information; to harmonize these

conflicting interests while preserving the paramountcy of the democratic

ideal; and to provide certain information to citizens who desire to have it

revelations and stipulations have been made under RTI Act, 2005.

Even to appreciate or criticize, Governmental action the citizen must

have, correct information of the policy of Government and such information

are requires to be obtaining from the administrations. For this, the right tool

in the hands of citizens is “Right to Information”. Another important function

of right to information is to expose corruption which is taking place inside the

organization. Time and again it has been felt by authorities that in any

organization of Government, where spending money on various projects,

persons involved in managing such affairs inevitably knows, who is corrupt,

in the system of working. For obvious reason they cannot on their own

disclose, to whoever he may be, who is corrupt or who is sabotaging the

Page 7


scheme of action within the system. Which is the detrimental of public good

persons who knows such information, requires to divulge such information

by them; then there must be sufficient mechanism and protection to the

informer who is known as a whistle blower. In our of system of governance,

it can also, treated only as a wishful thinking. Whenever administrators are

wronged and not transparent in their activity, the informers or colleagues are

not prepared to divulge such information regarding wrong spending of

Government and its mis-utilisation, to extract such information, which can be

used against administrator, requires the support of the Statute which is

absolutely required.

Another important feature of Right to Information Act is that the

locus standee of gatherer of information is not insisted; it may be for the

reason to encourage the public to develop the habit of asking and

ascertaining/how policy makers/implementers are functioning in

implementation of socio-economic projects of the Government. One more

aim of Right to Information Act is also to reduce/contain corruption and

exposure of misdeeds. In this process of securing information, such seekers

of information should not be made to over dramatise the facts secured by

them under Right to Information Act.

In this context, it may be mentioned under Freedom of Information

Act, 2000 an information regarding the disclosing of assests and liabilities of

any employee can be sought by seeker of information as a matter of right. But

under Right to Information Act, 2005 the Central Information Commission

has ruled in many cases that utmost caution is needed in disclosing personal

information of employees of public authority (F.No. CIC/AT/A/2006/00311,

dated 3rd November, 2006 in Shri Janardan Dubey Vs Ministry of Defence;

and property returns filed by employees do not constitute public action and

are barred from disclosure as help in Decision No. 256/IC(A)2006,

Page 8


F.No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00509, dated 11th September, 2006 in Sri S. Saran Vs.

Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, Vishakapatnam Steel Plant. Under the State

enactment whether the information sought relating to assets and liabilities of

Government employees or employees covered by under Right to Information

Act, requires reconsideration, and such information sought may can it be

treated as a third party information, since the filling of annual statement of

assets and liabilities are covered by the conduct rules of the employees; and

the employees are also governed by other service rules, then in proven cases

only after examination of the bonafide of the applicant and his standing,

information may be considered to be given. If at all such information are

sought through Right to Information Act, then there may be and are chances

of setting personal agenda against government servants by unconcerned

vexatious persons than seeking information to streamline administration of

Government. This is one grey area where state authorities have to ponder

over it.

The main features of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is that it

contains six chapters with thirty one Sections and two Schedules and States

have also frames Rules for implementation of the Right to Information Act,

2005.

The following Sections have come into force from 15th June 2005.

Section 4(1) Obligation of Public Authorities;

Section 5(1) Designation of Public Information Officers of Chapter II; and

Section 5(2) designing of officers within one hundred and twenty days of

Chapter II;

Section 12: Constitution of Central Information Commission; and

Section 13. Terms of office and conditions of service of Chapter III;

Section 15. Constitution of State Information Commission

Page 9


Section 16 Term of Office and condition of service of State Chief

Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners of

Chapter IV;

Section 24: Act not to apply to certain Organization;

Section 27: Power to make rules by Appropriate Governments and

Section 28 Power to makes rules by competent authority of Chapter V;

and the remaining Section have come into force from 12th October 2005 that

is on its one hundredth and twentieth day after enactment of Right to

Information Act, 2005.

Fourteen terms have been defined under Definition Clause and more

specific and important are

Section 2(1): (f) “information”; means any material in any form,

including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press

releases, circulars orders, logbooks, contracts, reports papers, samples

models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to

any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any law

other law for the time being in force.

Section2 (1)

(i) “record” include –any document, manuscript and file.-

(ii) any microfilm, microfiche and facsimile copy of a document;

(iii) any reproduction of image or images embodied in such microfilm

whether enlarged or not)

(iv) any other material produced by a computer or any other device; Section

2(1)(i) “right to information” means the right to information accessible under

the Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and

includes the right to –

(i) inspection of work, documents, records;

(ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records;

Page 10


(iii) taking certified samples of materials;

(iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video

cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where

such information is stored in a computer or in any other device;

Section2(1)(n) “third party” means a person other than the citizen

making a request for As contemplated under Section 3 of the Act, all citizens

shall have the information as a matter of right subject to provisions of the

Act.

In the State of Karnataka all Departments have notified the names of

the Information Officers, in various departments, from whom the

“information” can be obtained on payment of prescribed fees. The

requirement of Section 4 is, that is obligation of public authorities has been

compiled and majority of the Government departments have notified the

particulars of their organization, functions and duties of their employees,

name and address of Information Officers, in the official gazette.

The departments have also notified the Citizens’ Charter ie., what is

expected of them by the public and such information have been notified both

in English and Kannada language. Under Section 4 of the RTI Act, 2005,

seventeen different duties and obligation are cast on public authorities for

divulging of Information as enunciated under the Act.

Section 6 of the Act prescribes the fee and the form to be submitted to

secure particular information from the authorities and if the applicant is

unable to reduce his thoughts in writing, he authorities concerned are

required to help him, not only getting the application written but also guiding

the applicant how to secure that information. Disposal of application seeking

information from the authorities under RTI Act is on time bound basis and

normally within thirty days information has to be furnished and if the

application is related to life and liberty such applications are required to be

Page 11


disposed-off within forty-eight hours of the receipt of the application and

failing which penalties are contemplated under Section 20 of the RTI Act.

Law also provides in case of not furnishing of complete information

or providing incomplete information, the Information Officer must furnish

not only reason for shortcoming of information, but also communicate to the

applicant, what remedy is available to the applicant and the particulars of

such authority from whom the applicant can seek further remedy. Any

information sought under RTI Act, from Public Information Officer should

be furnished within thirty days and information sought of through any others

another five days are added and if the information relates to third parties, the

maximum time in which information has to be furnished is within forty days.

Regarding information concerning life and liberty is involved such

information shall be furnished within forty eight hours. In relation to the

person who is under arrest, the arrested person shall be informed in a

language known to him the reason for his arrest and to the persons to whom

the intimation of arrest should be communicated as declared in Human Right

Act in Rome Convention of 1948. Liberty includes living peacefully without

encroachment on rights like violation of habitation and prevention of right to

light and water and also peaceful existence.

RTI Act also provides for exemption from furnishing information

under ten different circumstances narrated under Section 8 of the Act. If the

disclosures demands, that the necessity of disclosure information outweighs

the public interest, then such information are required to be furnished by the

Information Officer limiting it only to cases falling under Second Schedule of

the RTI Act, 2005.

While seeking information under RTI Act, where such cases of

infringement of Copy Right is involved, it also provides for denial of such

information under Section 9 pf the Act. During the course of disposal of

Page 12


application under RTI Act, the information officer may also come to an

opinion that the information sought is out of vexatious interest, then the

Information Officer can deny the information sought and after denial of such

information, if applicant seeks further remedy, then first or second appellate

authority will have opportunity to consider the request of the applicant and

then information sought, if conceded by the first and second appellate

authorities , such information has to be furnished to the applicant by the

Information Officer.

In case of any information sought relates to a third party, then the

third party may have to be notified, and by furnishing such information, if

third party is aggrieved, then such affected third can go in appeal under

Section 19 of the RTI Act.

In all the cases the seeking information sought outweighs the public

interest, then the information sought cannot be denied at the by the authority.

Section 12 & 13 of the Act, provides for appointment of Chief Information

Commissioners at Center and also not exceeding ten Central Information

Commissioners and their duties and responsibilities have been formulated.

The appointment is by recommendation of Prime Minister in consultation

with the Leader of opposition in Lok Sabha and one Cabinet Minister

nominated by the Prime Minister. The terms and conditions of the

appointment cannot be varied to the disadvantage appointed person and the

status of the Central Information Chief Commissioner is that of Chief

Election Commissioner of India and Commissioner is equivalent to Member

of Election Commission of India.

Section 15 provides for Constitution of State Information

Commission with one State Chief Information Commissioner and not

exceeding ten numbers of State Information Commissioners appointed by the

Governor and they shall be persons of eminence in public life with wide

Page 13


knowledge of experience of law, science and technology, social service,

management, mass media or administration and governance. The service

condition and tenure of office of the Chief Information Commissioner is on

par with the State Chief Election Commission and that of Information

Commissioners is that of Chief Secretary of Government. The appointment of

State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners

are made by the Governor on the recommendation of the Chief Minister as

Chairman with leader of apposition of Legislative Assembly and a cabinet

minister nominated by the Chief Minister as member of the Committee.

Powers and functions of State and Center Information Commission

are vast and are as enumerated under Section 18 of the Art. Both Central

Information Commission and State Information Commission have analogous

powers as vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the code of Civil

Procedure 1908. Aggrieved by the finding of the Information Officer, appeals

can be filed within thirty days before the public Information Officer who is

senior in rank to the Central or State public Information Officer entertainable

with power of condonation of delay.

The Second Appellate Authority may also admit the appeals with

condonation of delay of appeals preferred after ninety days. The Second

appellate authority has vast powers in administration and appellate

jurisdiction conferred under the Act.

Under Section 20 of the Act, on proven case of fault of the authority,

the Central/State Information Commission can, not only subject the defaulter

or who has committed an offence, after giving an opportunity of being heard,

award a penalty of Two hundred and fifty rupees per day but can also can

recommend to the appointing authority of the faulted officer for institution

disciplinary proceedings against the delinquent official.

Page 14


Apart from this The Commissions both Center and State has the

power of monitoring and reporting of its working and compilation such

statistics about implementation and monitoring administration of this Act is

required to be reported to Government: relating to:

The number of requests made to each public authority;

The number of decisions where applicants were not entitled to access

to the documents pursuant to the requests, the provisions under which

decisions were made and the number of times such provisions were

invoked; the number of appeals referred to Central/State Information

Commission, as the case may be for review;

the nature of the appeals and the outcome of the appeals;

the amount of charges collected by each public authority under Act;

particulars of any disciplinary action taken against any officer in

respect of the administration of the Act;

any facts which indicate an effort by the public authorities to

administer and implement the spirit and intention of this Act;

recommendations for reforms, including recommendations in respect

of the particular public authorities, for the development, improvement,

modernization, reform or amendment to this Act or other legislation or

common law or any other matter relevant to operationalising the right

to access information.

The Center or State Government shall arrange to cause a report of the

Commission to be tabled before each of the House as soon as possible.

Under Section 26 the appropriate Government may to the extent of

availability of financial and other resources.

Develop and organize educational programmers to advance the

understanding of the public, in particular of disadvantaged

Page 15


communities, as to how to, exercise the rights contemplated under the

Act;

Encourage public authorities to participate in the development and

organization of programmes and to undertake such programmes

themselver;

Promote timely and effective dissemination of accurate information by

public authorities about their activities; and

Train Central/ State Public Information Officers, and produce relevant

training materials for use by the public authorities themselves.

Apart from this, statute also stipulates, within eighteen months of the

coming into operation of this enactment, the appropriate Government shall

compile in its official language a guide containing such information, in an

easily comprehensible form and manner, as may be required by a person who

wishes to exercise any right specified in the Act. Such guidelines shall

requires to be updated at frequent intervals. and shall be published for

information of the public.

Relevant Rules for implementation of the Act, have been framed by

the Center and State Governments in implementation of this RTI Act.

The working of the Act, in the State of Karnataka is also worth

studying. State Government has published Rules to implement this Act. Apart

from this, the Karnataka Right to Information Act, 2000 has come into

existence with effect from 10th December 2000 (Karnataka Act No.28 of

2000) which was a separate enactment and in this Act the information

relating to returns of assets and liabilities filed by any Government servant

Shall be made available to the public and where such request relates to

personal information, the disclosure of which, has no relationship to any

Page 16


public activity or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of

an individual except where larger public interest is served by disclosure;

The State of Karnataka is pioneer in enacting Karnataka Transparency

in Public Procurements Act, 1999, and publishing relevant Rules way back in

the year 1999, Wherein it has been notified for tenders over five crore by

public works department and in other cases more than one crore are to be by

two cover tender systems for securing service after due publication of tenders

with certain exceptions under certain exigencies.

When statues guarantee the right to secure information there are also

mechanisms to streamline the flow of information from the Governmental

agencies to the person who have secure such information. Even though

stature stipulates that training programmes shall be arranged, material

prepared for information of general public not much publicity is given to

Right to information Act, like what has been given to scheme of legal aid,

extending of old age pensions, advertisement given to Ashraya Schemes etc.,

the matter of securing information under Right of to Information also requires

to be advertised through hoardings at every important junctions of Taluk and

District Headquarters and also before all Government and aided institutions.

This will create more awareness on the part of the citizen to secure right

information under Right to Information.

Another way of educating public on right to Information Act, is keep

copies of various reports tabled on the house of Legislatures in all Public

Libraries at State, District and taluk places. Separate enclosures m and made

available in all ZP and gram panchayath offices for the use of the members of

public. Separate counters may be established in those libraries with literature

on Right to Information available to the reading public. Apart from this social

service institutions like Rotarians, Members of Lion Clubs and Jaycees,

Page 17


women’s organization, NGOs must take active part to propagate the idea of

securing information under Right to Information Act.

Regarding functioning of Karnataka Information Commission, there

are more than seven hundred second appeals filed before the KARNATAKA

Information Commission from January 2007 to May 2007. The majority of

cases involved in second appeals is mainly on civic amenity or against

revenue authorities. Not many appeals are filed are filed denial of

information involving law enforcing authorities, taxations departments or

expenditure made by development authorities. But in case Central

Information Commission, information sought on diverse grounds fee matters,

guide lines on public authorities opinions and advises, cabinet and board

papers, finance and banking matters examination and service matters

vigilance and enquiry matters. Under State Commission, there are more

number of complaints against authorities than appeals. The main reason may

be there is no denial of information or such information might not have been

asked by public. The cause for this lacunae may be political parties which are

the breeding centers of future legislators and law makers appears to have not

taken active participation in training activities under RTI Act to educate party

cadres either by both ruling or opposition parties. Systematic training

imparted to base level party workers on Right to Information Act will change

the scenario of mis-information, no-information, wrong information, mis-

deeds, harassing public and other corrupt practices in implementing the

projects and policies of the various governmental funded agencies.

While hearing second appeals, the State Information, Commission can

enforce the attendance and production of documents on priority basis. To

represent the defendant officers before the State Information Commission,

appropriate appointment of Nodal Officers with sufficient Statues to bind the

Page 18


defendant officers, against whom the Commission has issued Notice is not

forthcoming or not yet formulated by the Government department/agencies.

The way State commission hears the case in Bangalore it is seen that

the petitioner feels that the State Commission is a grate going treats them

with utmost courtesy to the petitioners, respecting the dignity of the

defendant, rather more educative, than punitive. This courtesy of the

Commission is some what mis-read by the defendant officers in not

complying with production of record on the ground not-traced, not-available

at the appropriate time or shifting responsibility from one officer to another.

Karnataka State Information Commission is housed in third floor II

wing of multistoried building with a modern office networked with

Computers. The cause list is exhibited through net working. Court halls with

spacious sitting accommodation for the petitioners and defendants are

provided. But only designations of the officers are indicated at the entrance of

the Commission office without disclosing the scope of each authority; prime

duties and responsibilities it discharges has not been exhibited at the entrance

of the office. As could be seen from the number of second appeals pending

before the Commission and Commission must also give its thoughts to hear

the petitioners at the concerned District Headquarters by which the travel and

expenditure on petitioners are saved, since the case may not be finalized in

one sittings and Commission may also not recover the cost from the

defendant to be payable to the deserving to the deserving petitioner except

directing a penalty on the defaulting party.

The State Information Commission on cases pending before it can

summon/enforce the production of records and fix responsibility on the erring

person. The problem comes when the file is under trace or not producing at

the appropriate time or untraceable. In such circumstances the method re-

building of files and guidance given how fast the file can be re-built for

Page 19


production before the Commission, rather then mere punishment of the

erring official will not solve the problem, the solution is how fast the records

can be rebuilt securing information available at various ends the scattered

correspondence has taken place.

The issues decided by the Commission are published and accessible

to the public through the Commission domain. Even though the Right to

Information Acr2005 came into in force in June 2005 and Rules framed by

October 2005. Education of officials in Karnataka is done through District

Training Institute has come into force only after May 2007 and not many

training programmes have been drawn up for training of officers who are

implementing/executing the policy of the State. The State must organize

programmes of education under Right to Information predominately for

persons dealing public utility, revenue and police administration and zilla and

taluk panchayats who are involved in implementation major governmental

development works.

Under Karnataka Transparency Act, double cover tenders are invited

and accepted after many deliberations. At the project site the nature of work,

value for which is has been tendered, the work undertaken and the period of

completion are exhibited both in regional and English language. The

important point missing in the Act is the follow-up disclosure of the cost

involved at the end of the project, the delay in execution of the work, if any

in completion of work, the escalation in cost, the factors and persons

responsible for such delay is not made known to public, may be on the

pretext that those facts will be audited by proper authorities and such lapses

will be scrutinized by legislative committees and public account committees.

If that is so, then that procedure was there even before the coming of the

advent of Karnataka Transparency Act. With introduction of Transparency

Act, enlightened citizen/organizations can seek this information to deliberate

Page 20


and bring it to the notice and education of public the misdeeds or short

coming of the implementation and cost of projects.

Comparison with the USA Act

The United States enacted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in

1966 and introduced amendments in 1974 and 1986. This Act is applicable to

government agencies. ‘Agencies’ under the act include the whole executive

arm of the state as well as military department, government corporations and

government controlled corporations and any independent regulatory agency.

The Act begins with the obligation on the government agencies to

publish (in the Federal Register) information about the organization of the

agency; functions; procedure; the persons/officials from whom information

can be collected; the availability of forms; the scope of information available;

the substantive rules and statements of general policy or interpretations of

general applicability adopted by the agency and amendments thereof.

The agencies are obligated to provide records not included in the

above categories, upon request, which reasonably describes the record. The

right to make a request lies with ‘ any person’, i.e., any legal entity like an

individual, private corporation etc. The request has to be in accordance with

the rules in place regarding time, place, fees and procedure to be followed.

The regulations have to be made by each agency and framed pursuant to

notice and receipt of public comments thereon. It must include a schedule of

the fees and the guidelines to determine the waiver or reduction of the fees.

The Act contains minimum tests for fees. Fees have to be limited to

reasonable standard charged for search, duplication and review when

requested for commercial use. This is limited to reasonable charges for

duplication only when request is by educational or scientific institution, for

scholarly or scientific research; or by representative of the news media. For

Page 21


any other kind of request, reasonable standard charges for document search

and duplication is the norm.

Time period for compliance with a request is ten (10) days from

receipt of the request. Decision will be notified immediately to the requestor

with reasons. In case of refusal, it must mention the right to the requester to

appeal to the head of the agency and the names and titles/positions of the

person responsible for the denial. The time limit is extendable with notice and

reason but only for a maximum of 10 more days. Such extension is allowed

for search and consultation time.

The first appeal lies to the head of the agency and has to be

determined within twenty (20) days from the date of receipt of the appeal.

From this departmental appeal lies the right of judicial review by the District

Court. The court can be approached directly, in case of no response on the

request within twenty days or if the decision of the departmental appeal is not

given within twenty days. Additional time is given for review of the request

by the court after retaining jurisdiction if the government can show existence

of exceptional circumstance and due diligence of the agency in responding to

the request.

The United States like other developed countries enacted laws such as

the Freedom of Information Act 1966,which allow individuals to access

records of government agencies in order to ascertain the proper functioning

of such agencies. The Freedom of Information Act like our own Right to

Information Act provides for a specific time period within which applications

made under the act must be complied with. The Freedom of Information of

Act provides that only a reasonable fee for compiling with the request for

information shall be levied on the citizen. Similarly the Right to Information

Act also provides for a prescribed fee that will be levied on the citizen

making an application for information.

Page 22


Freedom of Information Act, which expressly provides for the District

courts in the US to exercise the power of judicial review in case of non-

response from the authorities established under the act or by way of appeal

from such authority. The power of judicial review though not expressly

provided under the Act is inherent, as this power has been given to them by

the Constitution.

Impact of the New Law

Now that the statute requires information about the pendency of the

applications, reasons as to why they are not disposed of or the reasons behind

the rejection of an application, there is bound to be improvement in the

efficiency of the departments. As of now, the only supervision of efficiency

is supervision that is made by the superior officers at the time of reviewing

the employees’ work and while recording comments in the annual

confidential reports or ACRs. This process has not proved successful and

though it may be continued, still the threat of a Designated official calling for

the relevant information at the instance of a citizen will be a salutary check

on the inefficiency of officers. It also checks lethargy or bad faith or corrupt

motives.

Another important aspect is that in India we have not given respect

and prominence to the rights of the individual Citizen. True democracy is

impossible until we recognize the majesty of the individual Citizen. If

individual Citizens are empowered to ensure greater accountability and

transparency in governance, it can bring about a major change. There has

been no vehicle available for individual citizens to impact the governance

structure. In a system reeking with corruption and becoming increasingly

insensitive to the problems of the disadvantaged Citizenry, the Right To

Information has shown promise of empowering Citizens to get accountability

and act as an enforcer of good governance.

Page 23


The overall impact of these decisions has been to establish clearly that

the right to freedom of information, or the public's right to know, is

embedded in the provisions guaranteeing fundamental rights in the

Constitution. Various Indian laws provide for the right to access information

in specific contexts. Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, contains

what has been termed a 'Freedom of Information Act in embryonic form'.

This provision requires public officials to provide copies of public documents

to anyone who has a right to inspect them.

The Factories Act, 1948, provides for compulsory disclosure of

information to factory workers "regarding dangers including health

hazards and the measures to overcome such hazards", arising from their

exposure to dangerous materials. While this is an excellent provision, in

practice it is violated with impunity. The Environment (Protection) Act 1986,

and the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations provide for public

consultation and disclosure in various circumstances.

Example of use of the Act

One of the simple and yet very powerful examples of use of the Right

To Information (RTI) I have heard is of a slum dweller that had learnt the use

of the Right To Information. When he applied for a new ration card, he was

told that he would have to give a bribe of Rs. 2000 to the officials to obtain it.

Our friend, -a RTI-empowered Citizen, - smiled, and applied for the ration

card without offering any bribes or groveling in front of the officials for pity.

Our common Citizen had decided to personally become the enforcer of good

governance. He found out that the bribe-givers got their ration cards in about

four weeks. He waited for an extra four weeks, and then applied for

information under RTI. Using the simple format with an application fee of

Rs. 10, he delivered it to the Public Information Officer of the Food and

Supply office. He had asked up to, which date applications for ration cards

Page 24


had been cleared, and the daily progress report of his application. This shook

up the corrupt officials, since the answer would reveal that they had given

ration cards to others who had applied after him, which would be conclusive

evidence that they had no justification for delaying his card. Happy ending:

The Ration card was given to him immediately. Our RTI-empowered Citizen

had been able to enforce the majesty of the Citizen by using RTI. This story

has been repeated many thousand times in getting a road repaired, getting an

electricity connection, admissions in educational institutions and so on.

Criticisms of the Act

The Act has been criticized on several grounds. It provides for

information on demand, so to speak, but does not sufficiently stress

information on matters related to food, water, environment and other survival

needs that must be given pro-actively, or suo moto, by public authorities. The

Act does not emphasize active intervention in educating people about their

right to access information -- vital in a country with high levels of illiteracy

and poverty -- or the promotion of a culture of openness within official

structures. Without widespread education and awareness about the

possibilities under the new Act, it could just remain on paper. The Act also

reinforces the controlling role of the government official, who retains wide

discretionary powers to withhold information.

The most scathing indictment of the Bill has come from critics who

focus on the sweeping exemptions it permits. Restrictions on information

relating to security, foreign policy, defence, law enforcement and public

safety are standard. But the Right to Information Act also excludes Cabinet

papers, including records of the council of ministers, secretaries and other

officials, this effectively shields the whole process of decision-making from

mandatory disclosure.

Page 25


Another stringent criticism of the Act is the recent amendment that

was to be made allowing for file notings except those related to social and

development projects to be exempted from the purview of the Act. File

notings are very important when it comes to the policy making of the

government. It is these notes that hold the rationale behind actions or the

change in certain policy, why a certain contract is given or why a sanction

was withheld to prosecute a corrupt official. Therefore the government’s

intention to exempt the file notings from the purview of the Act has come in

for stringent criticisms.

Page 26


CHAPTER - 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Review of literature is an integral component of any study or project. It

enhances the depth of knowledge and inspires clear insight in to the problem.

Literature review throws light on the studies and their findings reported about

their findings reported about the problem under study. Review of literature as

a systematic identification location and summary of written materials that

contain information on research problem.

The review of related literature provides basis for future investigation.

It justifies the need for the study throws light on the feasibility of the studies,

reveals constraints of data collection and related findings from one study to

another with the hope to establish a comprehensive study of scientific

knowledge in a particular discipline. Few studies which are very relevant to

the study is quoted here below.

Regarding the impact of RTI in India general is very important fact.

Harinesh Pandya, founder of Mahiti Adhikar Gujarat Pahel says, “From

over 55,000 calls received on our helpline, nearly 80% relate to information

that is already covered under Section 4” and thus to “reduce the burden of

numbers of applications and protect applicants against the risk of having to

ask for it personally it is imperative that all departments covered by the Act

are made to follow S. 4 and make mandatory disclosures pro-actively”

However, implementation of Section 4 has value much beyond just

parrying potential assaults. Vidya Subrahmaniam while writing about the

changing power relationship between the State [its functionaries] and the

citizen uses the phrase, “RTI Glasnost”, referring to the transparent and

consultative style of government initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev to reduce

corruption and abuse of power in the Soviet Union. The mandate of suo motu

Page 27


disclosure of information on public authorities envisions just this. In an

interview, the outgoing Chief Information Commissioner.

Kejriwal writes of the objective of the Right to Information Act, “To

make it possible for any citizen of India to get any piece of information from

any government set-up” and then goes on to say, “given this very broad

parameter, it can be easily gathered that “conceding” information is no small

task, and the heat is likely to build up as time passes”.

During National RTI Convention, Mehboob S. Jeelani describes about

the significance of RTI and notes that “the audience was repeatedly moved to

tears by the stories of poor farmers, low-wage workers and other previously

powerless individuals who had used the law to demand accountability from

local authorities” and cites the example of Mochi, a low-caste cobbler who

filed an RTI to force investigation of his “complaint against the owner of a

local farm with the police for non-payment of wages. When the landowner

was found to be in violation of labour laws, Mochi was paid his overdue

wages in a matter of a week. “He even said sorry to me,” Mochi said, fighting

back tears while standing on stage. For a moment the hall went silent—one of

many such moments, when it was clear that the RTI Act had the potential to

change the lives of millions of voiceless and powerless Indians. When Mochi,

a young man still in his 20s, walked back to his seat, the audience erupted in

applause”

It is also important to observe that the present Indian Prime Minister

Dr. Manmohan Singh’s views towards the Act as “the consummation of a

process initiated with the adoption of our Constitution. The RTI, along with

the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution and the National Rural

Employment Guarantee Act, took India closer to fulfilling Mahatma

Gandhi’s idea of “real Swaraj”

Page 28


Nikhil Chakravarty observes, “you have begun one of the most

important struggles of independent India. I was a part of many of the

struggles that Gandhiji led, and it was in small meetings such as this one,

attended by a few hundred ordinary people, that India’s freedom movement

took shape. The struggle for independence was built around exposing the

looting of the country by foreign rulers. Your struggle is in essence the same:

exposing the looting of the country by our own rulers. This was a right that

should have come with independence. It is not going to be easy to win this

entitlement, but you must not give up. This is like a second battle for

independence”.

Prashant Bhushan observes ‘by mainstreaming the need for

transparency, the RTI Act has fundamentally changed the prospects of

governance in our country. With the increasing privatization of the country’s

resources and its public functions, “there is a need to democratize

corporations. There have been calls from many quarters to make the RTI

applicable to businesses that use the money and investments of people. The

experience with the RTI Act over the last three years, has given us an idea of

how crucial it is for making power accountable and building a culture of

democracy. That much is transparently clear”

Tehelka documents also describes about the significance of RTI.

Pragya Tiwari denotes that the “heartbreaking stories of petitioners “from

tiny tribal villages to the bustling lanes of Mumbai and Delhi; from farmers

and lorry drivers to middle class professionals” who have been harassed for

having the temerity to use this Act”. She rues that “this is not the kind of

stock-taking that a democracy should be doing to mark five years of the RTI

Act”. She presents the case of Gopubandhu Chhatria, “the first person from

his district to file an application and ask the authorities about how they had

spent the money sanctioned for a check dam in his village. In February 2009

Page 29


the Assistant Block Development Officer summoned him to his office and

after refusing to answer any of his questions, offered him a sum of Rs. 10000

to not bring up the matter again. When Chhatria refused this bribe he was

beaten up in the ABDO’s office itself. As he stood outside the office wailing,

policemen from the local police station arrived and arrested him on charges

of assault and for ‘creating a ruckus’ in the ABDO’s office. For four days, he

was locked up and beaten. He was given no food nor water for the first three

days and not allowed to meet or speak to anyone either. For the whole of next

year Chhatria fought his case drawing on every bit of his meager resources.

Finally on the 24th of July 2010, he was acquitted of all charges. But his

land, which he had hoped to turn fertile, and filed an RTI for, had been

mortgaged in this process. Chhatria is now a landless labour, sustaining a

family of three young children, an aging father and wife on daily wages of Rs

70. “There are days when I have to ask my wife to work as a labourer to

make ends meet”, he says in a low voice”.

Ramakrishnan V. writes in ‘Front line’ magazine about the use of

RTI in a different context. He notes, “A close examination of the murder

cases and the allegations around them lends credence to the contention that

the RTI process is being challenged from different quarters, including

sections within the government and the power structure. A case in point is the

killing of Amit Jethwa, 33, in broad daylight near the Gujarat High Court on

July 20. Jethwa’s was a familiar name in the world of wildlife conservation,

especially on account of the activities of the Gir Nature Youth Club, of which

he was president. He campaigned to prevent mining around the Girnar

Wildlife Sanctuary and ensure the safety of Gir’s lions and other wildlife. He

used the RTI Act and other legal provisions to advance his campaign.

According to his family, Jethwa had received threats for a long time from the

Bharatiya Janata Party Member of Parliament from Junagadh. The

Page 30


provocation, apparently, was the public interest petitions Jethwa had filed

linking the MP to illegal mining in the surroundings of the Girnar Wildlife

Sanctuary. Jethwa was responsible, through his petitions, for the appointment

of two more Information Commissioners in the Gujarat Information

Commission. He was also instrumental in ensuring that a Lokayukta was

appointed for Gujarat, a post that remained vacant for almost seven years.

Clearly, his interventions exposed the nexus between politicians, bureaucrats

and mafias”.

Venkatesan, V. writes in ‘Frontline’ magazine that the “Government

Bills are often rushed through with members spending less and less time

discussing them because of time and other constraints. Bills are referred to

standing committees for detailed examination and report, but the media are

barred from reporting the proceedings of these committees, with the result

that the cloak of secrecy over these Bills is ensured right from the drafting

stage to their eventual enactment. No doubt, Bills are in the public domain

after they are introduced in Parliament or State legislatures and the public is

free to discuss them. But this phase cannot be construed as offering space for

public consultation, as public opinion cannot hope to influence the

government to make the required changes in the Bills once they are

introduced in Parliament or the State legislatures. The degree of public

consultation over the draft Bills prepared by the government, therefore, is

indicative of the government’s preparedness to democratize the law-making

exercise. On this, the attitudes of the governments at the Centre and in the

States have not been consistent. The Central government, for instance,

permits certain draft Bills to be placed in the public domain to invite

suggestions and comments. But certain departments of the government do not

believe in this transparency. They take shelter under Sections 8(1) (c) and

8(1) (i) of the RTI However the CIC has held “that exemption under Section

Page 31


8(1) (i) of the Right to Information Act (RTI) would not apply to

deliberations leading to the formulation of a policy framework until such time

as the draft was submitted to the Cabinet Secretariat, with all its necessary

attachments for submission to the Cabinet. Thus when a Cabinet note is

finally approved for submission to the Cabinet through the Cabinet

Secretariat, Section 8(1) (i) will apply. Once approved by the Cabinet, it will

also qualify for exemption under Section 8(1) (c). The CIC also

recommended that the Cabinet Secretariat consider amending its circular

issued in 2002 to allow for public consultation in an appropriate form.”

Wajahat Habibullah says, “A major tool of democracy is the right to

information. It is a means of generating public participation in governance,

which is at the heart of democracy. Elections are a means of doing it but

democracy itself means public participation in governance. Once the

elections are over and we get a government in power, then what do we do?

Sit at home? No, we have to participate. How does one do that? We have the

Right to Information Act”.

Page 32


CHAPTER -3

METHODOLOGY

The term methodology refers to the process, principles and procedures

by which aims at giving a brief introduction and description of the motivation

of the study, the objective of the study, its scope, the universe of the study,

samples, methods and tools of data collection and also the limitation of the

study, which will lend credibility and act as a catalyst in putting the concept

into practice. This section of the report is an attempt to explain as clearly as

possible the steps and procedures used in undertaking the study.

TITLE OF THE STUDY

‘A Study on The Significance of Right To Information Act

MOTIVATION

As the researcher has experience of applying for information under

RTI Act wanted to know the experience of others who have applied for the

same.

OBJECTIVES

The following are the major objectives

To know the awareness of right to information act by the respondents

To understand procedural difficulties of right to information Act

To study different issues of respondents trough right to information Act

To give measures and suggestions based on the study shall be

undertaken

To study the level of satisfaction and opinion about RTI

Page 33


SCOPE

The scope of the study is restricted only to those who have applied under

right to information Act. The study covers awareness, procedural difficulties,

different issues of respondents and level of satisfaction related to RTI act.

UNIVERSE OF STUDY

The study was carried out in Gram Panchayats. The universe for the study

is includes those who have applied for the under RTI act in the district.

SAMPLING

The researcher has considered ‘representative’ or ‘convenient’ type of

sampling. The sample includes the respondents above 18 years who have

applied under the RTI Act in district. The size of sample is small and 50

samples have been taken for this study. A structured questionnaire and

observation methods have been used for data collection.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The research design used is descriptive in nature. This study is meant

to describe the awareness, procedural difficulties, issues and level of

satisfaction about Right to Information Act.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

For the purpose of the study researcher has taken only such as

1. Who have applied for information under the Right To Information Act.

2. Respondents were above the age of 18 years.

3. All the castes and class groups have been included in the study.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Page 34


The remaining are excluded from the study. They are:

1. Only 50 respondents are taken as samples.

2. Respondents other than Grama Panchayath and NGO are excluded

from the study

METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

The research is based on both primary and secondary data. The tool

used for data collection was questionnaire. The questionnaire comprised of

45 questions. The questionnaire was prepared in accordance with the

objectives of the study.

Primary data

Primary sources include personal interview, discussions with the

operating personnel and questionnaire to the applicants of RTI.

Secondary data

Secondary sources include reference of text books, magazines, journals and

articles in newspapers, administration reports, college library and various

websites.

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Editing:

Page 35


Editing is done like field editing to check the correction of entries. This

is done on the questionnaires which are filled. This is mainly done to check

the mistakes occurred while entering in the questionnaires.

Coding:

Coding is done after editing. Coding is done in the form of tally

marks. This method helps in the analysis of the data. A tally mark is given to

each question which is collected.

Tabulation:

Arrangement of data into concise and logical order in the next step.

Percentages are worked out after grouping the data into sets and categories,

charts, tables and graphs will be prepared wherever it is necessary.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

As the study is undertaken to fulfill the academic requirements, it has

some limitations. The limitations of the study are:

1. Respondents did not reveal proper answer for some questions.

2. PDOs denied to give the information’s about applicants.

3. Questionnaires especially in the cause of students were not returned on

time.

4. Respondents were busy with their woks and researcher did not get

proper place for data collection.

Page 36


CHAPTER - 5

MAJOR FINDINGS

The investigator interviewed 50 respondents in district who applied before

through R.T.I. The main objective was to study the significance of the R.T.I.

This study is basically a descriptive one multistage purposive samples was

used to select the respondents. The main tool used in data collection is the

questionnaire

The main finding of the study as follows:-

A majority (34%) of the respondents belong to middle age groups 41-

50 years. Therefore it can be said that this age group people have

greaten participating in the utilizing process of R.T.I.

Majority (38% degree & 34 P.G qualified) of the respondents applied

for R.T.I.

A Majority (36%) of the respondents belong to private

occupation/Business. Therefore it can be said that this occupation

group we have more favourable about R.T.I.

Majority of 66% of Male participants have utilized the RTI act.

Majority (50%) of the respondent used come to know about R.T.I

through NGO’s. Hear we can find out effective role of the NGO’s.

(28%) of the respondents have applied 2-3 times under the act.

Majority (90%) of respondents have applied in their own interest.

Page 37


A majority (64%) of the respondents applied for R.T.I because of

loopholes in the departments. It narrates that people have started

analyzing the loopholes in the governance.

Majority (70%) of the respondents said information should be collected

only through R.T.I. It highlights their mistrust in authorities.

(51.43%) of the respondents are of the opinion that reason for applying

only through RTI is that wrong information may be given by

Government departments.

Majority (73.33%) of the respondents are of the opinion that

information can be taken by meeting PIO (Public Information Officer)

A majority (70%) of the respondents, out of I criteria of R.T.I they

aware about 5-7 criteria. Hear we can find out they were applied for

R.T.I they were fully aware about criteria of R.T.I.

Majority (70%) of the respondents know 5-7 criteria’s of applying

under RTI act.

Majority (88%) of the respondents have received response for their

application.

(56%) of the respondents have got response in 31to 45 days.

Majority (56%) of the respondent have received good response form

respective department or organizations.

Majority (58%) of the respondents applied for both public & private

purpose, hear we can find out criteria about public issues among

people.

Page 38


(90%) of the respondents had shows awareness and interest about

following up of the application.

Majority (66%) of the respondents have applied to higher authority

(100%) of the respondents dint followed any other alternatives like

bribe, recommendation they followed proper way to collect

information.

Majority (54%) of the respondents have taken assistance from NGO’s

(78%) of the respondents were not discouraged for applying for

R.T.T

(92%) of the respondents did not faced difficulties while applying RTI

(88%) of the respondents did not faced any challenges during RTI

procedure.

(96%) of the respondents agree that Government mechanism has

improved.

(92%) of the respondents agree that elected representatives are

answerable.

(48%) of the respondent agree greatest loophole of RTI is time

consumption.

Page 39


SUGGESSION

NGO intervention will be effective

Information about RTI act should be included in the high school

syllabus

There is need to creating awareness through medias

Reduce the time limit for giving information

There should be penalty for delay in information

Further study is needed for amendments to be more effective

utilization of the Act

Page 40


CONCLUSION

By enacting the Right to Information Act India has moved from an

opaque and arbitrary system of government to the beginning of an era where

there will be greater transparency and to a system when the citizen will be

empowered and the true centre of power. Only by empowering the ordinary

citizen, any nation can progress towards greatness. By enacting the right to

information Act 2005, India has taken a small but significant step towards

that goal. The real swaraj will come not by the acquisition of authority by a

few but by the acquisition of capacity by all to resist authority when abused.

Thus with the enactment of this Act India has taken a small step towards

achieving real swaraj.

It is evident from the study undertaken that the employees of Private

sector are aware of the Act and are utilizing the Act. It can be observed that

lack of awareness among people is the hurdle for effective implementation of

RTI Act. It is found that the loopholes in the government departments is the

main reason for applying for information under the Act and respondents

believe that RTI is one of the best methods to collect information from

Government departments. Because they believe that the wrong information

would be given by government departments.

Generally speaking those who have applied under the Act know about

the procedures, Majority of respondents are not ready to follow through for

the bitter experience they had before. Further Government bodies are also

discouraging people for using the RTI Act. However it cannot be denied

that accountability and transparency in administration has improved

because of the Act. So improving the RTI Act and proper implementation is

very helpful to the civil society and can achieve good governance.

Page 41


Bibliography

Dharmendra Mishra, Participatory Governence Through NGO’s,

AAIEKH publishers Jaipur, India.

Lisa Brush D., Gender and Governence, RAWAT publications Jaipur,

India.

Mandakini Devasher, Mahiti Hakku Kanunu 2005 – Balasuvdu Jege?

New Delhi.

Muralidhar Y.G., Mahiti Hakku, Nava Karnataka Publishers,

Bangalore.

Mandakini Devasher, Your Guide to Using the Right to Information

Act – 2005, New Delhi.

Shilaja M.C. and Villfred D’souza, Mahiti Hakku, Abdul Nazirsab

Rajya Gramina Abhivrdhi Samsthe, Mysore.

Magzins – INFOTAP (Quarterly), Consumer Rights Education and

Awareness Trust (CREAT), Bangalore.

RTI: Role of Civil Society, Social Action – Oct-Dec. 06.

Web Source

WWW. Wikipediya. Org

WWW. Google.com

WWW.righttoinformation.org

WWW.dpar.kar.nic.in

WWW.cic.gov.in

WWW.kic.gov.in

Page 42

http://WWW.kic.gov.in/

http://WWW.cic.gov.in/

http://WWW.dpar.kar.nic.in/

http://WWW.righttoinformation.org/

A Study on Right to Information Act

Documents

right information

secure information

securing information

information act chapter

significance of right

central act

fundamental right of

access of citizens