Empowering India through the Right to Information Act,

2005
INTRODUCTION:
In a democracy, an ordinary citizen finds it daunting to take on the Government
and its administrative machinery the bureaucracy. For an ordinary citizen, the
functioning of the bureaucracy is complex, often times convoluted, and invariably
opaque. Without a simple option of being able to have free and quick access to
information which would shed light on the decision making and functioning of the
bureaucracy, the ordinary citizen would not stand a chance against the omnipotent
bureaucracy. This is where Right to Information legislations in several democracies
of the world seek to empower the ordinary citizen.
A 2003 World Bank study found that, more transparent governments govern better
for a wide variety of governance indicators such as government effectiveness,
regulatory burden, corruption, voice and accountability, the rule of law,
bureaucratic efficiency, contract repudiation, expropriation risk 1
My project, whilst focusing on the legislation in India and its impact at ground level,
also draws a comparison with similar legislations in the Asia Pacific Region.

The advent of Right to Information in India:

In order to ensure greater and more effective access to information, the
Government of India resolved that the Freedom of Information Act, 2002 enacted
by the Parliament needed to be made more progressive, participatory and

Roumeen Islam, Do more transparent governments govern better? (World Bank 2003).

1|Page

meaningful. The National Advisory Council deliberated on the issue and suggested
certain important changes to be incorporated in the existing Act to ensure smoother
and greater access to information. The government examined the suggestions
made by the National Advisory Council and others and decided to make a number
of changes in the law.2
The important changes proposed to be incorporated, included establishment of an
appellate machinery with investigating powers to review decisions of the Public
Information Officers, penal provisions for failure to provide information as per law,
provisions to ensure maximum disclosure and minimum exemptions, consistent
with the constitutional provisions, and effective mechanism for access to
information and disclosure by authorities, etc. In view of significant changes
proposed in the existing Act, the Government also decided to repeal the Freedom
of Information Act, 2002.3

The mechanics of the Right to Information Act, 2005:

The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) is applicable to all public authorities
at all levels of government (except for the State of Jammu and Kashmir due to its
special status within the Indian constitution), and all bodies substantially financed
by the government are also covered within the ambit of the RTI Act. However,
private entities are outside the purview of the RTI Act. Exemptions include typical
categories related to national security, foreign affairs and commercial interests.
However, a public interest override exists for all exemptions. The Public
Information Officer (PIO) must respond within 30 days to each application. In

2
3

Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Ibid.

2|Page

cases related to life and liberty, the time limit is 48 hours. If an applicant is not
supplied information within the prescribed time of thirty days or 48 hours, or is not
satisfied with the information furnished to him/her, he/she may prefer an appeal to
the first appellate authority who is an officer senior in rank to the PIO. The first
appellate authority is required to dispose of the appeal within a period of thirty days
or in exceptional cases within 45 days of the date of filing of the appeal. If the first
appellate authority fails to pass an order on the appeal within the prescribed period
or if the appellant is not satisfied with the order of the first appellate authority,
he/she may prefer a second appeal with the Information Commission.
This in a nutshell is a brief overview of the mechanics of the RTI Act.

A case study of how the Right to Information Act, 2005 has worked in
practice:

(i)

Supreme Court of India Civil Appeal No. 1102 of 2014 [Godrej & Boyce Mfg.
Co. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.]

Decided on January 30, 2014 by a Bench of 3 Judges.4

Facts of the case:

The judgement is reported in [--] [--] Supreme Court Cases [--], from where I have obtained the facts of the
case.

3|Page

From June 25, 1975 till March 21, 1977, the then Prime Minister of India, Mrs.
Indira Gandhi unilaterally had a state of emergency declared throughout India.5
In effect, during this darkest period for democracy in India, the Constitution of
India was in large measure abrogated, permitting Indira Gandhi to rule by
decree, suspend elections and severely curb civil liberties. 6 During this period
of emergency, several draconian legislations were enacted one such
legislation was the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975 which
in effect provided for automatic vesting of private property in the State
Government as on August 30, 1975, without providing for any personal hearing
to the aggrieved party. One such provision of the Act resulted in automatic
vesting of private property merely if a notice under the provisions of an earlier
legislation, the Indian Forest Act, 1927, had been issued to the land owner as
to why his land should not be regulated as if it were forest land.

In several cases, despite a notice having been issued under the Indian Forest
Act, 1927, the State Government did not take any steps under the 1975 Act to
take possession of certain affected lands. As a result, in 2005 by an order of
the Bombay High Court, the State Government was directed to update the land
records in the State. This lead to the State imposing a covenant on certain lands
to the effect that they were affected by the provisions of the 1975 Act, and
hence, all further development on these lands was brought a grinding halt.

5
6

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_(India)
Ibid.

4|Page

It is in this context that 20 aggrieved parties filed proceedings in the Bombay

High Court, which ultimately reached the Supreme Court of India. In the course
of these proceedings, one or more of the aggrieved parties relied on the
provisions of the RTI Act in order to ascertain the status of the notices issued
under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the steps taken thereafter by the State
Government pursuant to these notices. These enquiries revealed that the
notices under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 were issued as far back as 1956-57
and there were no records to show that these notices had even been served
upon the parties in question. These revelations, together with the fact that the
Government had willing permitted these lands to be developed went a long way
in the Supreme Court holding that the lands did not vest in the Government.

My email interview with Ms. Gauri Gandhi, Vice-President, Legal of Godrej

& Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd is based in Mumbai, and I interviewed Ms. Gauri
Gandhi over email. The salient excerpts of the interview are set out below:

Ms. Gandhi, I have familiarised myself with the facts of Civil Appeal No. 1102
of 2014 which was decided in 2014 by the Supreme Court of India.

Question: Do you believe that the provisions of the RTI Act are potent enough
to empower an ordinary citizen of India to procure information and documents
which previously would not have been easily accessible?

5|Page

Answer: The RTI Act is revolutionary in empowering ordinary citizens of

India. Since colonial British rule several laws have been enacted to prohibit
the important right to information. Ordinary citizens only had as much
information as provided by the government and could not comprehend what
transpired in the political-bureaucratic nexus. The RTI Act holds ordinary
citizens on equal footing with members of Parliament and information that
cannot be denied to the Parliament or State Legislature cannot be denied to
an ordinary citizen. The Right to Information Act also applies to any private
bodies, NGOs, Civil society, or any bodies which is receiving monetary
funding from government fully or partially. Though Section 8 and 9 of the RTI
Act restrict disseminating information to citizens of India is certain respects,
the RTI Act has been a useful tool in enforcement of the right to information.

Question: In your opinion are the provisions of the RTI Act simple enough for
an ordinary citizen to understand and comply with or would he/she need the
assistance of a lawyer?

Answer: The RTI Act though may be worded like any other law of the land
using legal language, the implementation of the RTI is very friendly to ordinary
citizens. There are also several NGOs that aid the poor in rural areas to
realize their rights through RTI Act. An RTI Application can be made in
English or Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application
is being made and may be made in not more than 500 words. It may be made
in writing or through electronic means. The application fees are a mere
Rs.10/- hence making it simple and user friendly for the ordinary citizen.
6|Page

Question: Do you believe that the provisions of the RTI Act can or have been
misused by people in any way or do the benefits of the RTI Act far outweigh
any disadvantages?

Answer: There have been cases of misuse of the RTI Act by people using it
as a weapon to harass officers or seek details of an officer or beneficiarys
private life. Cases of misuse of the RTI system by filing number of RTI
applications chocking entire administration have also occurred. The benefits
of the RTI Act indeed are manifold as compared to the cases of its abuse. The
benefit of the right to information has empowered ordinary citizens by
providing them opportunity to participate in the public affairs by granting them
access to the basic and relevant information. RTI has made public servants
accountable, citizen friendly and sensitive fostering an ethical work culture.

(ii)

Bombay High Court Revocation Petition No. 75 of 2015 [Mohamed Obedulla

Chinoy & Others vs. Yunus Kasam Namakwala]

Decided on: July 28, 2016 by Mr. Justice G. S. Patel

Facts of the case:

The father of the Petitioners, Suleman Hajee Mohamed Chinoy (Suleman

Chinoy) was a wealthy man, who owned several immoveable properties in

7|Page

Mumbai. During his lifetime, the Government acquired large tracts of land
belonging to Suleman Chinoy in Kole Kalyan (now a suburb of Mumbai) for a
public purpose of setting up a suburban campus of the Bombay University.

Suleman Chinoy was born in Mumbai in 1898, and till his death, he resided in
Mumbai. On November 30, 1978 Suleman Chinoy died in Mumbai, leaving
behind him, his wife and five children. Suleman Chinoy had made a Will dated
July 27, 1939.

On September 24, 1979 the children of the deceased filed proceedings in the
Bombay High Court seeking Letters of Administration with the Will annexed in
respect of their fathers Will. However, the children did not actively pursue these
proceedings.

In the meantime, large portions of the land acquired by the Government from
Suleman Chinoy were not put to use for the purpose for which they were
acquired. As a result, this failure on the part of the Government presents an
opportunity for the heirs of Suleman Chinoy to try and have the land released
and restored back to them.

In order to try and take advantage of this opportunity, the Respondent, Yunus
Kasam Namakwala fabricated a Will of his so called uncle, who he claimed had
the same name as Suleman Chinoy. Relying on this fabricated Will, the
Respondent fraudulently obtained probate thereof from the Bombay High Court
on March 31, 2012 in Testamentary Petition No. 310 of 2012. Annexed to

8|Page

Testamentary Petition No. 310 of 2012, the Respondent produced a false death
certificate allegedly issued by the Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal
Corporation7 on February 18, 2013.

On the strength of the aforesaid probate granted by the Bombay High Court,
and attaching another false death certificate also allegedly issued by the
Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation, the Respondent attempted to
have some of the land standing in the name of Suleman Chinoy transferred to
his name.

At this stage, the children of Suleman Chinoy discovered the fraud committed
by the Respondent. In order to successfully revoke the probate fraudulently
obtained by the Respondent from the Bombay High Court, it was imperative for
them to prove that the death certificates relied upon by the Respondent were,
in fact, false death certificates.

Accordingly, the Petitioners through their Advocate made an application dated

January 15, 2014 to the Authority concerned under the RTI Act to provide,
among other things, information about the original record of death of Suleman
Chinoy in the Register of Deaths of the Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal
Corporation, the date of registration of the death, etc. On February 18, 2014 the
RTI Office addressed a letter requesting for time of 15 days to provide the
information sought. Since the Petitioners did not receive any further response
from the RTI Office within the prescribed period of 30 days, the Petitioners filed

Bhiwandi is city, approximately 40 Kms. north east of Mumbai.

9|Page

an Appeal through their Advocate before the First Appellate Authority on March
27, 2014. At the hearing of the Appeal, an officer of the Bhiwandi Nizampur City
Municipal Corporation was present, and submitted that the Birth and Death
Register and the documents relating to the Petitioners RTI application were
missing. The First Appellate Authority directed the officer to undertake a further
search. On May 23, 2014 the First Appellate Authority disposed of the Appeal
recording that the details sought were not available. Ultimately, by a letter dated
June 21, 2014 the Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation informed the
Petitioners Advocate that the documents relating to the death of Suleman
Chinoy were not available with them.
Decision in the case:
The results of the enquiry by the Petitioners under the RTI Act, ultimately
weighed with the Learned Judge of the Bombay High Court (Mr. Justice G. S.
Patel), who concluded that the death certificates produced by the Respondent
were not valid in law, and hence, the Respondent had fraudulently obtained
probate from the Bombay High Court. Accordingly, the probate granted on
March 30, 2012 was set aside by the judgement and order dated July 28, 2016
passed by the Learned Judge.8

(iii)

Manjunath M. Hosamani, a resident of the State of Karnataka9 successfully

used the RTI Act to ensure that the Hubli Dharwad Municipal Corporation, which
had withheld his scholarship for Rs. 750 (equivalent to US $11) for 3 years

I accessed a copy of the judgement and order dated July 28, 2016 from the website of the Bombay High Court
from which I have gleaned the facts.
9
The State of Karnataka is in South India.

10 | P a g e

without justification, disbursed the scholarship. Later, he became entitled to a

scholarship of Rs. 5,000 (equivalent to US $73.50).10

(iv)

Shyam Kumar Tyagi, a resident of Roorkee11 was distraught that despite having
complained to the local Municipal Corporation, the street light near his house
had not been repaired for over two months. Using the RTI Act to good effect,
Mr. Tyagi applied to the local Municipal Corporation to disclose the reasons for
inaction on their part. As a result, the street light was promptly repaired.12

(v)

S. K. Verma suspected corrupt dealings in the public tender process initiated

by Expotech Division of Rites Limited, a government owned company set up
under the aegis of the Indian Railways. Through the RTI Act, he applied for
copies of all relevant documents in connection with the tender process. He
ultimately procured the documents in second appeal from the Information
Commissioner. On the basis of these documents he lodged a complaint with
the Central Vigilance Commission which has been set up on the
recommendation of the Committee on Prevention of Corruption to advise and
guide the Central Government agencies in the field of vigilance. His complaint
was sent for investigation, and the investigative agencies have recommended
that action be taken against the officers concerned.13

A Comparative Analysis of Right to Information Legislations in the Asia

Pacific Region:

10

These facts have been accessed from http://rti.gov.in/rti-thanks/report.aspx

Roorkee is a city in the State of Uttarakhand in North India, and is 165 kms. north of New Delhi.
12
These facts have been accessed from http://rti.gov.in/rti-thanks/report.aspx
13
These facts have been accessed from http://rti.gov.in/rti-thanks/report.aspx
11

11 | P a g e

Over 100 countries have adopted comprehensive right to information (RTI) or

freedom of information (FOI) laws ranging from the largest countries (China,
India, USA, Indonesia, Brazil, and Nigeria) to some of the smallest (Cook Islands,
St Vincent and the Grenadines), covering over 80 per cent of the worlds
population.14 The laws are substantially similar, with significant differences in the
structures and effects of the laws a reflection of the different legal heritages of
each country.15

In the Asia Pacific region, countries like Japan and Thailand were the pioneers in
enacting RTI legislations, but now have outdated legislations in need of drastic
overhaul.16 In contrast, countries like India and Indonesia, though late bloomers,
are now world leaders in RTI legislations which have created progressive
mechanisms for access and enforcement.17 Whereas countries such as Philippines
find themselves still on the drawing board, and have a long way to go before they
enact RTI legislations.

Wednesday, September 28, 2016 was International Day for Universal Access to
Information, and to mark this day, the Centre for Law and Democracy and Access
Info Europe released a worldwide comparative assessment of national legal

14

Asia Disclosed: A Review of the Right to Information across Asia 2015 Published by : ARTICLE 19 Free Word
Centre 60 Farringdon Road London EC1R 3GA United Kingdom.
15

Ibid.
Ibid.
17
Ibid.
16

12 | P a g e

frameworks for the right to information.18 The top 10 countries in the list of 112
countries were as follows19:
(i)

Mexico

(ii)

Serbia

(iii)

Slovenia

(iv)

India

(v)

Croatia

(vi)

Liberia

(vii)

El Salvador

(viii)

Sierra Leone

(ix)

Sri Lanka

(x)

Tunisia

In Asia Disclosed: A Review of the Right to Information across Asia 201520 it was
observed as follows:
Legislating alone is not enough though. Implementation is vital and civil
society engagement and empowerment is key. In India, which has one
of the worlds best laws, civil society regularly uses the right to
information to get their other rights fulfilled. In Indonesia, civil societys
use of the right to information is just starting to take off. Implementation
in other countries remains problematic. Transparency during disasters
has been particularly poor, from Japans nuclear meltdown and the
following cover-up, to the Nepali governments response to the 2015
earthquake.
Secrecy in the name of national security has also proven a barrier to the
free flow of information across Asia. Archaic colonial as well as more

18

Article titled India 4th on the Right to Information List published in the Economic Times, Mumbai Edition on
September 29, 2016.
19
Ibid.
20
Ibid.

13 | P a g e

modern laws exist region-wide, such as on sedition in Malaysia or Official

Secrets in India, or state security as in China and Japan.

Dissemination of the information about the RTI Act to villages in India:

Since my research on the RTI Act in India revealed that although it was utilised
regularly by citizens and organisations, there was a lack of awareness in the
smaller villages in India.

In an effort to disseminate the benefits and virtues of the RTI Act to villagers in
India, I held a camp in Village Awas, in the State of Maharashtra on November 2,
2016.

In all, 30 villagers attended my camp. I interacted with them for an hour and a half
and gave them basic information about the existence of the RTI Act and how it
could be used to improve their lives by addressing, and possibly resolving, their
concerns.

even

assisted

several

villagers

fill

in

applications

for

information/documents under the RTI Act, and offered the rest my support and
assistance in the future to assist them in any way with the RTI Act.

Conclusion:
The RTI Act is potent legislation in India, the benefits of which need to be
disseminated to people in the lowest strata of our society to empower them to fight
for their rights. This project has been a fulfilling experience which has essentially
taught me the power behind Freedom of Information in a diverse, democratic
society like India.
14 | P a g e