Right to Information Act, 2005

S.1 Short title, extent and commencement.

(1) This Act may be called the Right to Information Act, 2005.

(2) It extends to the whole of India ¹***.

(3) The provisions of sub-section (1) of section 4, sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 5, sections 12, 13, 15,16, 24, 27 and 28 shall come into force at once, and the remaining provisions of this Act shall come into force on the one hundred and twentieth day of its enactment.

S.3 Right to information.

Subject to the provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right to information.

S.4 Obligations of public authorities.

(1) Every public authority shall--

(a) maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated;

(b) publish within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this Act,--

(i) the particulars of its organisation, functions and duties;

S.5 Designation of Public Information Officers.

(1) Every public authority shall, within one hundred days of the enactment of this Act, designate as many officers as the Central Public Information Officers or State Public Information Officers, as the case may be, in all administrative units or offices under it as may be necessary to provide information to persons requesting for the information under this Act.

(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), every public authority shall designate an officer, within one hundred days of the enactment of this Act, at each sub-divisional level or other subdistrict level as a Central Assistant Public Information Officer or a State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, to receive the applications for information or appeals under this Act for forwarding the same forthwith to the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or

S.6 Request for obtaining information.

(1) A person, who desires to obtain any information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application is being made, accompanying such fee as may be prescribed, to--

(a) the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of the concerned public authority;

(b) the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be,

specifying the particulars of the information sought by him or her:

Provided that where such request cannot be made in writing, the Cen

S.7 Disposal of request.

(1) Subject to the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 5 or the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 6, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, on receipt of a request under section 6 shall, as expeditiously as possible, and in any case within thirty days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of such fee as may be prescribed or reject the request for any of the reasons specified in sections 8 and 9:

Provided that where the information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall be provided within forty-eight hours of the receipt of the request.

(2) If the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, fails to give decision

S.8 Exemption from disclosure of information.

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen,--

(a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence;

(b) information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court;

Without prejudice to the provisions of section 8, a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may reject a request for information where such a request for providing access would involve an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than the State.

S.11 Third party information.

(1) Where a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose any information or record, or part thereof on a request made under this Act, which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall, within five days from the receipt of the request, give a written notice to such third party of the request and of the fact that the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, intends to disclose the information or record, or part thereof, and invite the third party to make a submission in writing or orally, regarding whether the information should be disclosed, and such submission of the third party shall be kept in view while taking a decision about disclosure of information:

S.12 Constitution of Central Information Commission.

(1) The Central Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute a body to be known as the Central Information Commission to exercise the powers conferred on, and to perform the functions assigned to, it under this Act.

(2) The Central Information Commission shall consist of--

(a) the Chief Information Commissioner; and

(b) such number of Central Information Commissioners, not exceeding ten, as may be deemed necessary.

(3) The Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners shall be appointed by the President on the recommendation of a committee consisting of--

(1) The Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office ¹[for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government] and shall not be eligible for reappointment:

Provided that no Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office as such after he has attained the age of sixty-five years.

(2) Every Information Commissioner shall hold office ¹[for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government] or till he attains the age of sixty-five years, whichever is earlier, and shall not be eligible for reappointment as such Information Commissioner:

Provided that every Information Commissioner shall, on vacating his office under this sub-section be eligible for appointment as the Chief Information Comm

S.14 Removal of Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner.

(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), the Chief Information Commissioner or any Information Commissioner shall be removed from his office only by order of the President on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after the Supreme Court, on a reference made to it by the President, has, on inquiry, reported that the Chief Information Commissioner or any Information Commissioner, as the case may be, ought on such ground be removed.

(2) The President may suspend from office, and if deem necessary prohibit also from attending the office during inquiry, the Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner in respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court under sub-section (1) until the President has passed orders on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such reference.

S.15 Constitution of State Information Commission.

(1) Every State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute a body to be known as the ......... (name of the State) Information Commission to exercise the powers conferred on, and to perform the functions assigned to, it under this Act.

(2) The State Information Commission shall consist of--

(a) the State Chief Information Commissioner, and

(b) such number of State Information Commissioners, not exceeding ten, as may be deemed necessary.

(3) The State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners shall be appointed by the Governor on the recommendation of a committee consisting of--

S.16 Term of office and conditions of service.

(1) The State Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office ¹[for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government] and shall not be eligible for reappointment:

Provided that no State Chief Information Commissioner shall hold office as such after he has attained the age of sixty-five years.

(2) Every State Information Commissioner shall hold office ¹[for such term as may be prescribed by the Central Government] or till he attains the age of sixty-five years, whichever is earlier, and shall not be eligible for reappointment as such State Information Commissioner:

Provided that every State Information Commissioner shall, on vacating his office under this subsection, be eligible for appointment

S.17 Removal of State Chief Information Commissioner or State Information Commissioner.

(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner shall be removed from his office only by order of the Governor on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity after the Supreme Court, on a reference made to it by the Governor, has on inquiry, reported that the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner, as the case may be, ought on such ground be removed.

(2) The Governor may suspend from office, and if deem necessary prohibit also from attending the office during inquiry, the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner in respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court under sub-section (1) until the Governor has passed orders on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such reference.

S.18 Powers and functions of Information Commissions.

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, it shall be the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person,--

(a) who has been unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, either by reason that no such officer has been appointed under this Act, or because the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has refused to accept his or her application for information or appeal under this Act for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer or senior officer specified in sub-section (1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State

S.19 Appeal.

(1) Any person who, does not receive a decision within the time specified in sub-section (1) or clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 7, or is aggrieved by a decision of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may within thirty days from the expiry of such period or from the receipt of such a decision prefer an appeal to such officer who is senior in rank to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer as the case may be, in each public authority:

Provided that such officer may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of thirty days if he or she is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.

(2) Where an appeal is preferred against a

S.20 Penalties.

(1)Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees:

No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act or any rule made thereunder.

S.22 Act to have overriding effect.

The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act.

S.23 Bar of jurisdiction of courts.

No court shall entertain any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any order made under this Act and no such order shall be called in question otherwise than by way of an appeal under this Act.

S.24 Act not to apply to certain organisations.

(1) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, being organisations established by the Central Government or any information furnished by such organisations to that Government:

Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section:

Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the Central Information Commission, and notwithstanding anything contained in section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.

S.25 Monitoring and reporting.

(1) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall, as soon as practicable after the end of each year, prepare a report on the implementation of the provisions of this Act during that year and forward a copy thereof to the appropriate Government.

(2) Each Ministry or Department shall, in relation to the public authorities within their jurisdiction, collect and provide such information to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, as is required to prepare the report under this section and comply with the requirements concerning the furnishing of that information and keeping of records for the purposes of this section.

(3) Each report shall state in respect of the year to which the report relates,--

(1) The appropriate Government may, to the extent of availability of financial and other resources,--

(a) develop and organise educational programmes to advance the understanding of the public, in particular of disadvantaged communities as to how to exercise the rights contemplated under this Act;

(b) encourage public authorities to participate in the development and organisation of programmes referred to in clause (a) and to undertake such programmes themselves;

S.27 Power to make rules by appropriate Government.

(1) The appropriate Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:--

(a) the cost of the medium or print cost price of the materials to be disseminated under sub-section (4) of section 4;

(b) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 6;

(1) The competent authority may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:--

(i) the cost of the medium or print cost price of the materials to be disseminated under sub-section (4) of section 4;

(ii) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 6;

(iii) the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 7; and

S.29 Laying of rules.

(1) Every rule made by the Central Government under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or both Houses agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be; so, however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that rule.

(2) Every rule made under this Act by a State Government shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is notified, before the State Legislature.

S.30 Power to remove difficulties.

(1) If any difficulty arises in giving effect to the provisions of this Act, the Central Government may, by order published in the Official Gazette, make such provisions not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act as appear to it to be necessary or expedient for removal of the difficulty:

Provided that no such order shall be made after the expiry of a period of two years from the date of the commencement of this Act.

(2) Every order made under this section shall, as soon as may be after it is made, be laid before each House of Parliament.

S.31 Repeal.

The Freedom of Information Act, 2002 (5 of 2003) is hereby repealed.

S.2 Definitions.

In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,--

(a) "appropriate Government" means in relation to a public authority which is established, constituted, owned, controlled or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly--

(i) by the Central Government or the Union territory administration, the Central Government;

(ii) by the State Government, the State Government;

(b) "Central Information Commission" means the Central Information Commission constituted under s

Legal Comments- "Definition-2(f)" - RTI information includes any material in any form held by public authority or accessible from private bodies accessible under other laws - [00400061366]- "Public Authority-2(h)" - Public authority includes bodies established by Constitution, Parliament, State laws, or by Government notification, and includes bodies that are owned, controlled or substantially financed by the Government or NGOs so financed - [Bhaskar Singh Chilwal VS Union of India]- "Competent Authority-2(e)(ii)" - Chief Justice of India is a competent authority; Supreme Court/HCs public authorities; office of CJI not separate from Supreme Court for RTI purposes - [Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India VS Subhash Chandra Agarwal]- "Information-2(j)" - Right to information means information held by/under control of public authority; includes inspection, extracts, copies; held must align with 2(f) interpretation - [Belma Mawrie VS Chief Information Commissioner], [KAILASH CHANDRA PANDA VS CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION]- "Locus standi-6(2)" - Applicant need not provide reasons for seeking information; however purpose may influence public-interest/balance under Section 8 when disclosure is contested - [Lajjaram Pandey VS M. P. State Information Commission], [Satish Kumar Bhiri VS State of Punjab]- "Exemption-8(1)" - Exemptions include fiduciary relationships (8(1)(e)) and confidentiality of certain third-party info (8(1)(j)); some clauses are absolute, others qualified; public interest can override in certain cases - [Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India VS Subhash Chandra Agarwal], [COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, SHANTI NIKETAN INTER COLLEGE, GHAZIPUR VS STATE OF U. P], [State of Manipur VS Chief Information Commissioner]- "8(2) discretionary" - Disclosure under 8(2) is discretionary; if an exemption applies, disclosure cannot be compelled as a blanket rule - [Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India VS Subhash Chandra Agarwal]- "Section 11- third party" - Third-party information requires opportunity to be heard; balance test with public interest; non-disclosure can be required if warranted - [Antar Singh Darbar VS Kailash Vijayvargiya], [Ahmedabad Education Society VS Union of India], [The Tamil Nadu Ambedkar, Law University, rep. By its Registrar D. Gopal, D. G. S. Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai VS The Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, rep. By Asst. Registrar, Teynampet, Chennai]- "Section 3-4 harmony" - RTI aims to balance transparency with other public interests; it overrides conflicting laws via Section 22; not a license to bypass procedural safeguards - [KAILASH CHANDRA PANDA VS CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION], [Aseer Jamal VS Union of India]- "Public-interest test" - Courts emphasize public interest in disclosure, especially for transparency and accountability in governance and judiciary; private data may be disclosed if outweighed by public interest - [State Bank of India VS Central Information Commission], [State of Manipur VS Chief Information Commissioner], [Secretary General, Supreme Court of India VS Subhash Chandra Agarwal]- "Judiciary as public authority" - Supreme Court and High Courts are public authorities; Chief Justice’s office not standalone; asset declarations and judicial information can be disclosed under strict tests balancing privacy and independence - [Secretary General, Supreme Court of India VS Subhash Chandra Agarwal], [Ahmedabad Education Society VS Union of India], [Army Welfare Housing Organisation VS Adjutant General’s Branch]- "Language and accessibility-4(1)(b)" - RTI obligations include dissemination in local language as feasible; records should be accessible in the requested language where applicable - [COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, SHANTI NIKETAN INTER COLLEGE, GHAZIPUR VS STATE OF U. P]- "Education institutions-2(h)" - Educational institutions receiving government grants or substantially financed by the government fall within public authority; private unaided institutions may still be covered if substantially financed - [Appellate Authority & Chairman Shikshan Prasarak Mandali VS State Information Commissioner], [02100048875], [Karanathi Tamil Sangam VS R. Sivaprakasam & Another]- "Answer scripts-2(f)/(2(i)) & 8(1)(g)" - Examinee rights to access answer scripts; exemptions for examiner identities; parts of answer books can be severed to protect examiner identity while granting non-exempted portions - [Central Board of Secondary Education VS Aditya Bandopadhyay], [State of Manipur VS Chief Information Commissioner]- "Muntakt-nama/public documents" - RTI overrides conflicting laws; public documents (e.g., Muntakhabnama) must be disclosed unless exempt under Section 8; third-party rights preserved via Section 11 - [The Public Information Officer/ Joint Secretary to Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally, Hyderabad VS A. P. Information Commissioner]- "Penalty under Section 20" - Penalties apply to PIOs for non-disclosure; appellate authorities are generally not subject to penalty under Section 20; legality depends on good faith and compliance - [Lajjaram Pandey VS M. P. State Information Commission]- "Section 24(1) limitation" - Section 24 governs RTI applicability to security/intelligence while balancing public authorities; some bodies may be outside its reach if not public authorities for certain information - [Bhaskar Singh Chilwal VS Union of India]- "Severability and partial disclosure-10" - When information contains both disclosable and exempt parts, non-exempt portions can be disclosed after severability assessment; exemptions apply to exempt parts only - [Antar Singh Darbar VS Kailash Vijayvargiya]- "Overriding effect of RTI-22" - RTI Act has overriding effect over conflicting laws; information held by/accessible to public authorities from private bodies under other laws can be provided to seekers - [Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India VS Subhash Chandra Agarwal], [MOHIT SHARDA VS BANK OF BARODA]- "Role of Rules vs Act" - Subordinate rules cannot override fundamental sections of RTI; rules must be consistent with the Act; courts can examine constitutional validity of rules where raised - [The Tamil Nadu Ambedkar, Law University, rep. By its Registrar D. Gopal, D. G. S. Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai VS The Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, rep. By Asst. Registrar, Teynampet, Chennai], [Bhaskar Singh Chilwal VS Union of India]- "Duty to publish basic information" - Public authorities should proactively publish information (Section 4) to promote transparency and reduce repetitive requests - [The Public Information Officer/ Joint Secretary to Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Nampally, Hyderabad VS A. P. Information Commissioner], [ICAI vs Central Information Commissioner]- "Appeals and remedies" - RTI provides two-tier appeal (PIO -> FAA/CIC/SIC); failure to decide within time enables deemed refusal under Section 7(2); remedies include writs under Article 226 - [JAYAPRAKASH K. K. S/O LATE KESAVAN VS STATE OF KERALA], [Union of India vs R.K. Jain]- "Photographs/third-party information" - Publication of third-party details requires careful process including notices, hearings, and balancing rights; non-compliance may void orders and require non-disclosure unless public interest justifies - [Lalbhai Dalpatbhai Bharatiya Sanskriti Vidya Mandir VS Gujarat State Information Commission], [The Superintendent, Office of the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai VS The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Information Commission, Chennai & Another]- "Specific exemptions-privacy vs public interest" - Privacy-related exemptions require careful assessment; public interest and data protection considerations are increasingly integrated into RTI jurisprudence - [COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, SHANTI NIKETAN INTER COLLEGE, GHAZIPUR VS STATE OF U. P], [Public Information Officer/ Administrator General & Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu Chennai VS S. Majeed]- "Medical records and life privacy" - RTI can override some privacy claims in medical contexts where life/health rights are engaged; exemptions under 8(1)(j) apply to private data while respecting privacy - [Surupsingh Hrya Naik VS State of Maharashtra]- "Public authorities vs NGOs" - NGOs substantially financed by government can be public authorities for RTI purposes; funds and governance structures determine applicability - [Karanthai Tamil Sangam VS R. Sivaprakasham], [Karanathi Tamil Sangam VS R. Sivaprakasam & Another]- "Preservation and retention limits" - RTI rights relate to information held or preserved; CIC cannot compel preservation beyond statutory retention norms - [State of Manipur VS Chief Information Commissioner]

Note: The bullet points above synthesize points with sources provided. Where a point relies on multiple cases or where a specific detail is not clearly supported by the given sources, it is omitted. References are included in square brackets after each point as requested.

S.10 Severability.

(1) Where a request for access to information is rejected on the ground that it is in relation to information which is exempt from disclosure, then, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, access may be provided to that part of the record which does not contain any information which is exempt from disclosure under this Act and which can reasonably be severed from any part that contains exempt information.

(2) Where access is granted to a part of the record under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall give a notice to the applicant, informing--

(a) that only part of the record requested, after severance of the record containing information which is exempt from disclosure, is being provided;

Legal Comments

"Introduction" - RTI Act, 2005 aims to secure access to information held by public authorities and promote transparency; Section 10 deals with severability of information when some parts are exempt [: RTI-Act_English.pdf].
"What Section Says" - Section 10 (Severability) permits disclosure of non-exempt information where parts of a record can be severed from exempt portions; the public authority must furnish the accessible portion after severance [: RTI-Act_English.pdf].
"Essential ingredients" - (i) existence of a request for information; (ii) identification of information; (iii) severability analysis to separate exempt from non-exempt; (iv) furnishing non-exempt material while withholding exempt parts; (v) objective application of mind by PIO/SPO in determining severability [: RTI-Act_English.pdf].
"Essential ingredients" - Case law confirms severability is a doctrinal tool to balance transparency with exemptions, ensuring information of public interest is released where possible [Udham Singh Nagar Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd. VS Uttarakhand Information Commission: Namit Sharma v. UOI; 2013 SCC references].
"Scope of Section" - Section 10 applies after a record is located; it governs severability rather than broad denial, allowing partial disclosure when some data is exempt under other sections (e.g., privacy, investigations) [: RTI-Act_English.pdf].
"Scope of Section" - It interacts with exemptions in Section 8 (personal/privacy) and other RTI provisions; severability helps implement Section 3/4OBJECT of RTI by releasing public-interest information while protecting sensitive parts [Mahendra Kumar Jain VS State of West Bengal; P. Shanmugam VS State Coordinator, Bharat Petroleum Corporation].
"Punishment for Section" - The provided sources focus on severability and exemptions; penalties under RTI (for non-compliance) are governed by Sections 19-20, not Section 10; Section 10 itself does not prescribe penalties but guides disclosure after severance; penalties arise for failure to furnish information within time under Sec. 20 [S. P. Arora VS State Information Commission Haryana; ].
"Punishment for Section" - Where non-disclosure results from improper categorization of information (without valid severability reasoning), RTI authorities may be subject to penalties/appeals under Sections 19-20; ensure reasoned severability to avoid penalties [S. P. Arora VS State Information Commission Haryana; Rajasthan Public Service Commission VS Pooja Meena].
"Judicial treatment" - Courts emphasize that RTI is not unlimited; Section 10 severability is a tool to reconcile the right to information with legitimate exemptions; improper denial can be corrected by providing the non-exempt portion [Udham Singh Nagar Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd. VS Uttarakhand Information Commission; Rajasthan Public Service Commission VS Pooja Meena].
"Third-party information" - In balancing, Section 11 procedures may apply for third-party objections; severability decisions should consider privacy interests, ensuring non-exempt disclosures do not infringe third-party rights [Mahendra Kumar Jain VS State of West Bengal].
"Public interest vs privacy" - Exemption under Section 8(1)(j) for personal information requires a larger public-interest justification; Section 10 can still permit disclosure of non-exempt data if its release serves public interest [Pritam Rooj VS University of Calcutta; Kunche Durga Prasad VS Public Information Officer, Rajahmundry].
"Public records disclosure" - When information is part of public records and not personal data, Section 6/8 interact; severability under Section 10 allows release of non-sensitive public information from otherwise exempt records [FERANI HOTELS PVT. LTD. VS STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER GREATER MUMBAI; K. Subbammal VS Senior Area Manager, Indane Area Office, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. ].
"Relation to other acts" - RTI’s severability doctrine aligns with broader statutory limits; if information is exempt under other laws or court orders, only the non-exempt portion should be disclosed [; Ramnikbhai Ramjibhai VS State of Gujarat Thro. Vilasini Ramchandran, IAS].
"Appeals and remedies" - If an authority fails to sever properly or discloses exempt data, citizens may file appeals under Section 19; appellate bodies must scrutinize severability rationales to ensure compliance [P. Shanmugam VS State Coordinator, Bharat Petroleum Corporation; S. P. Arora VS State Information Commission Haryana].
"Proportional disclosure" - RTI jurisprudence supports releasing as much information as possible; Section 10 supports a proportionate approach—non-exempt portions should be supplied subject to appropriate redactions [; Sonu alias Abdul Naieem S/o Abdul Rahim VS State of Rajasthan through the Public Prosecutor].
"Operational guidance" - Public Information Officers should document the severability reasoning in their orders; vague or mechanical refusals risk illegal denial and potential remedy under RTI framework [Rajasthan Public Service Commission VS Pooja Meena; Pritam Rooj VS University Of Calcutta].
"Context from precedents" - Supreme Court discussions emphasize that severability must be grounded in the statute and the public interest; blanket refusals are disfavored when non-exempt data exists [Udham Singh Nagar Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd. VS Uttarakhand Information Commission; Rajasthan Public Service Commission VS Pooja Meena].
"Financial/commercial data" - When information touches trade secrets or commercially sensitive data, severability may permit disclosure of factual data without confidential elements; refer to applicable exemptions and copyright/public-interest exceptions as relevant [FERANI HOTELS PVT. LTD. VS STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER GREATER MUMBAI; ].
"Practical effect" - In practice, Section 10 enables agencies to partially comply with RTI requests, reducing blanket denial and increasing transparency while preserving legitimate exemptions [; Kunche Durga Prasad VS Public Information Officer, Rajahmundry].
"Limitations" - If the entire document is of public-record nature with minimal exempt data, Section 10 may be less frequently engaged; severability is most pertinent when exemptions blanket large portions of a record [FERANI HOTELS PVT. LTD. VS STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER GREATER MUMBAI; Ramnikbhai Ramjibhai VS State of Gujarat Thro. Vilasini Ramchandran, IAS].
"Policy takeaway" - The RTI framework, including Section 10, fosters accountability by enabling disclosure of non-exempt information and requires authorities to articulate a reasoned severability decision to withstand scrutiny [Mahendra Kumar Jain VS State of West Bengal; K. Subbammal VS Senior Area Manager, Indane Area Office, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. ].
"Cautionary note" - Courts warn against overbroad reliance on exemptions; robust severability reasoning helps avoid misuse of Section 8 exemptions and supports faithful implementation of RTI’s transparency mandate [Rajasthan Public Service Commission VS Pooja Meena; N. T. P. C. VS Union of India].
"Final synthesis" - Section 10 operates as a vital tool to realize RTI’s objective: maximum disclosure consistent with law; it requires careful, reasoned, and documentable severance to balance public interest, privacy, and legitimate exemptions [; Udham Singh Nagar Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd. VS Uttarakhand Information Commission].