INTRODUCTION: The 

Fundamental Rights in India enshrined in the Part III of the Constitution of India

guarantee civil liberties such that all Indians can lead their lives in peace and harmony as citizens of India.
These include individual rights common to most liberal democracies, such as equality before law, freedom
of speech and expression, freedom of association and peaceful assembly, freedom to practice religion, and
the right to constitutional remedies for the protection of civil rights by means of writs such as habeas
corpusThe Fundamental Rights are defined as basic human freedoms which every Indian citizen has the
right to enjoy for a proper and harmonious development of personality. Freedom of information
refers to a citizen’s right to access information that is held by the state. In many
countries, this freedom is supported as a constitutional right.

Importance---Freedom of Information laws are important.they are important for public

accountability and the equal treatment of all people under the rule of law.  They are important asan

anti-corruption tool.  They are important to the advancement of commerce and

science.  And they are important to the legitimacy of democratically elected
governments.  For without access to government records, citizens cannot determine
whether their leaders deserve reelection or whether they should be thrown out of
office because of fraud or mismanagement.  As James Madison, a key participant
in the formation of the American republic and its constitution, and the fourth
President of the United States, stated in 1822:
“A popular Government without popular information, or the means of
acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps
both. . . .  A people who mean to be their own Governor, must arm themselves
with the power which knowledge gives.”

Legal provision ---The right to information is a fundamental right under Article 19 (1) of the
Indian Constitution. In 1976, in the Raj Narain vs the State of Uttar Pradesh case, the Supreme
Court ruled that Right to information will be treated as a fundamental right under article 19. The
Supreme Court held that in Indian democracy, people are the masters and they have the right to
know about the working of the government.

Thus the government enacted the Right to Information act in 2005 which provides machinery for
exercising this fundamental right.

The Right to Information Act of 2005

The act is one of the most important acts which empowers ordinary citizens to question the
government and its working. This has been widely used by citizens and media to uncover
corruption, progress in government work, expenses-related information, etc.
The primary goal of the Right to Information Act is to empower citizens, promote openness and
accountability in government operations, combat corruption, and make our democracy truly
function for the people. It goes without saying that an informed citizen is better equipped to keep
a required track on governance instruments and hold the government responsible to the
governed. The Act is a significant step in informing citizens about the activities of the
government.

All constitutional authorities, agencies, owned and controlled, also those organisations which are
substantially financed by the government comes under the purview of the act. The act also
mandates public authorities of union government or state government, to provide timely response
to the citizens’ request for information.

The act also imposes penalties if the authorities delay in responding to the citizen in the
stipulated time.

What type of information can be requested through RTI?

The citizens can seek any information from the government authorities that the government can
disclose to the parliament.

Some information that can affect the sovereignty and the integrity of India is exempted from the
purview of RTI.

Information relating to internal security, relations with foreign countries, intellectual property rights
(IPR), cabinet discussions are exempted from RTI.

Objectives of the RTI Act

1. Empower citizens to question the government.

2. The act promotes transparency and accountability in the working of the government.
3. The act also helps in containing corruption in the government and work for the people in
a better way.
4. The act envisages building better-informed citizens who would keep necessary vigil
about the functioning of the government machinery.
Important provisions under the Right to Information Act, 2005

 Section 2(h): Public authorities mean all authorities and bodies under the union
government, state government or local bodies. The civil societies that are substantially
funded, directly or indirectly, by the public funds also fall within the ambit of RTI.
 Section 4 1(b): Government has to maintain and proactively disclose information.
 Section 6: Prescribes a simple procedure for securing information.
 Section 7: Prescribes a time frame for providing information(s) by PIOs.
 Section 8: Only minimum information exempted from disclosure.
 Section 8 (1) mentions exemptions against furnishing information under the RTI Act.
 Section 8 (2) provides for disclosure of information exempted under the Official Secrets
Act, 1923 if the larger public interest is served.
 Section 19: Two-tier mechanism for appeal.
 Section 20: Provides penalties in case of failure to provide information on time, incorrect,
incomplete or misleading or distorted information.
 Section 23: Lower courts are barred from entertaining suits or applications. However, the
writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India and high courts under Articles 32 and 226
of the Constitution remains unaffected.
CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. (2011)

Issue 
In CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. (2011), the main issue before the
Supreme Court was whether or not an examinee’s right to information under
the RTI Act 2005 includes the right of for the student to view and inspect
his/her evaluated answer books in a public examination, and also whether or
not the examinee has the right to take certified copies of the same. The
examining body, which was CBSE, had claimed that it held the information
without giving it out to the student in a relationship of trust (fiduciary
relationship). CBSE claimed that this was exempted under Section 8(1)(e) of
the RTI Act. 

Observation of Court (Judgement) 

Para 18 of the Judgement reads as follows – “Section 22 of RTI Act provides
that the all provisions of the RTI Act will have an effect, notwithstanding
anything that is not consistent or else contained in any other law for the time
in force. Therefore the provisions of the RTI Act will continue to prevail over
the provisions of the bye-laws/rules of the examining bodies in regard to all
exams. As a result, unless and until  the examining body is able to
demonstrate that the answer-books fall under the exempted category of
information described in clause (e) of  section 8(1) of RTI Act, the examining
body will be bound to provide access to an examinee to inspect and take
copies of his evaluated answer-books, even if such inspection or taking
copies is barred under the rules/bye-laws of the examining body governing
the examinations.”

Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central

Information Commission & Ors. (2013)

Issue 
In Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commission & Ors.
(2013),  whether or not the information like movable/immovable property,
assets liabilities and information with reference to the career of a public
servant may be denied. The defendant argued that the information which
was sought for is qualified to be personal information as exempted in Section
8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. 
Observation of the Court (Judgement)
Para 14 – “The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are
“personal information” which stand exempted from disclosure under clause
(j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, unless involves a larger public interest and
the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer
or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies
the disclosure of such information

Karnataka Information Commissioner v. PIO

 The State Information Commission disagreed with the PIO. 
 It ordered for information to be provided to the applicant under the
RTI Act. 
 PIO later challenged the Commission’s order in the High Court,
which names the applicant as the respondent in this case. 
 The commission’s order was set aside by the Karnataka High Court. 
 A Petition was filed by an Information Commissioner and the
Commission challenged this order before the Supreme Court. 
 The Supreme Court later considered the petition, being filed by an
Information Commissioner to be offensive. 
 It said that the commissioner, as well as the commission, had no
‘locus standi’. 

 Conclusion--The freedom to Information has not achieved its full objectives due to

some impediments created due to systematic failures. It was made to achieve social
justice, transparency and to make an accountable government.
 This law provides us with a priceless opportunity to redesign the processes of
governance, particularly at the grassroots level where the citizens’ interface is maximum.
 It is well recognized that the right to information is necessary, but not sufficient, to
improve governance. A lot more needs to be done to usher in accountability in
governance, including protection of whistleblowers, decentralization of power and fusion
of authority with accountability at all levels.
 As observed by Delhi High Court that misuse of the RTI Act has to be appropriately dealt
with; otherwise the public would lose faith and confidence in this “sunshine Act

 Bibliography ---https://rti.gov.in/index.asp

 M.P. Jain’s Indian Constitutional Law

Rti act of parliament