Introduction
Public officials play a vital role in implementing the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. They act as the main link between citizens and the government. Designated officers like Public Information Officers (PIOs) and Assistant Public Information Officers (APIOs) handle RTI requests, process applications, and ensure timely responses. Their duties are central to ensuring transparency, accountability, and good governance. Without the active participation of these officials, the purpose of the RTI Act cannot be fulfilled.
When Should The Public Authority Appoint Public Information Officers?
Under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, every public authority must appoint Central Public Information Officers (CPIOs) or State Public Information Officers (SPIOs) within 100 days of the Act’s commencement.
These officers must be placed in all administrative units or offices to ensure that they can provide requested information to citizens.
In addition, each public authority must designate Assistant Public Information Officers (APIOs) at the sub-divisional or sub-district level. These APIOs are responsible for receiving applications or appeals under the RTI Act and forwarding them to the relevant CPIO, SPIO, senior officer under Section 19(1), or to the Central or State Information Commission.
If a person submits an application or appeal to an APIO, authorities must add five extra days to the response time specified under Section 7(1).
CPIOs and SPIOs have the duty to process RTI requests and offer reasonable assistance to applicants. They must help individuals understand and submit their requests properly. If needed, a CPIO or SPIO can seek help from any other officer to carry out their responsibilities. Any officer who provides such assistance must fully cooperate. Moreover, if there is a breach of duty under the Act, the assisting officer will be considered a PIO and held equally accountable.
Case Law References
CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay
The Supreme Court emphasized the statutory duty of PIOs to provide access to information and clarified the role and responsibility of public authorities in complying with the RTI Act.
Manoj Kumar Singh v. CPIO, Ministry of Environment and Forests
The Central Information Commission (CIC) held that failure to designate adequate numbers of PIOs in field offices violated the RTI Act’s mandate, delaying access to information.
Shri R.K. Jain v. Ministry of Finance
The CIC highlighted that PIOs must provide reasonable assistance and cannot reject applications on technical grounds. This reinforced the requirement under Section 5(3) of the RTI Act.
Subhash Chandra Agrawal v. Department of Personnel and Training
The CIC ruled that when PIOs fail to seek assistance from relevant officers, they neglect their duty under Section 5(4), which may lead to penalties under Section 20.
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
Though primarily a privacy case, the judgment affirmed the balance between the right to information and right to privacy. It reinforced the need for PIOs to act carefully when handling sensitive data, thereby underscoring their responsibilities.
How Can a Person Submit A Request To The Public Information Officer?
Any person who wants information under the RTI Act must submit a written request. They can also apply through electronic means. The request can be made in English, Hindi, or the official language of the area. The applicant must also pay the prescribed fee. They should address the request to the Central or State Public Information Officer (CPIO or SPIO), or to the Assistant Public Information Officer (APIO) of the relevant public authority. The request must clearly mention the details of the information sought.
If the person cannot write the request, the concerned PIO must provide reasonable assistance. The officer must help convert the oral request into written form.
Applicants do not need to give reasons for their requests. They also do not need to share personal details, except for contact information.
If another public authority holds the requested information or the request relates to another authority’s function, the receiving authority must transfer the application.
The authority must notify the applicant about the transfer immediately.
It must complete the transfer within five days of receiving the application.
Section 7 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005: Disposal of Requests
Section 7 of the RTI Act outlines how authorities must handle information requests. It sets strict timelines for providing information. Public Information Officers (CPIOs/SPIOs) must reply within 30 days of receiving the application. However, if the information concerns the life or liberty of a person, they must respond within 48 hours.
If the officer fails to respond within the specified time, the request is treated as refused. This is known as deemed refusal. The Act ensures that such delays do not go unnoticed or unaccounted for.
When additional fees are required, the officer must inform the applicant in writing. This communication must include the fee amount and the method used to calculate it. The time the applicant takes to pay is not counted in the 30-day limit.
If the authority fails to respond within the deadline, it must provide the information free of cost. This provision enforces accountability and encourages timely replies.
For applicants who are sensorily disabled, officers must offer suitable assistance. The goal is to make the information accessible, regardless of physical limitations.
Applicants must pay the prescribed fees for information. However, people living below the poverty line are exempt from this fee. The law ensures financial barriers do not restrict access to public information.
Additionally, the officer must inform the applicant about their right to challenge the fee amount or the form in which access is granted. The officer must also share details of the authority where the applicant can file an appeal.
Section 7 ensures a fair, timely, and inclusive system for accessing public information. It protects the rights of applicants and holds public authorities accountable for delays.
Conclusion
Public officials are the backbone of the RTI framework. Their efficiency and dedication directly impact a citizen’s right to access information. By complying with timelines, assisting applicants, and upholding legal responsibilities, they help strengthen democratic values. Ensuring their accountability and support is key to achieving the true objectives of the RTI Act.
