सूचना के अधिकार पर छत्तीसगढ़ हाईकोर्ट का बड़ा फैसला; डीएवी स्कूल को आरटीआई से मिली छूट, दंड भी रद

Nai Dunia: Bilaspur: Saturday, 20 June 2026.
हाईकोर्ट ने कोरबा स्थित डीएवी पब्लिक स्कूल से जुड़े एक अहम मामले में निजी स्कूलों को बड़ी राहत दी है। कोर्ट ने केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग के उस आदेश को निरस्त कर दिया है जिसमें स्कूल को आरटीआई के दायरे में लाने और प्राचार्य को दंडित करने की बात कही गई थी। न्यायाधीश अमितेंद्र किशोर प्रसाद की पीठ ने स्पष्ट किया कि डीएवी एक निजी संस्थान है

हाईकोर्ट ने एक महत्वपूर्ण निर्णय देते हुए स्पष्ट किया है कि डीएवी डीएवी पब्लिक स्कूल, जो एक निजी और स्व-वित्तपोषित शिक्षण संस्थान है, उसे ''''सूचना का अधिकार'''' आरटीआई अधिनियम के तहत ''''सार्वजनिक प्राधिकरण'''' नहीं माना जा सकता। कोर्ट ने केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग के उन आदेशों को निरस्त कर दिया है, जिनमें स्कूल को आरटीआई के दायरे में लाकर उसके प्राचार्य को ''''डीम्ड पीआईओ'''' के रूप में दंडित किया गया था।
यह मामला कोरबा स्थित डीएवी पब्लिक स्कूल से जुड़ा है। स्कूल प्रबंधन ने हाईकोर्ट में कई याचिकाएं दायर कर केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग के आदेशों को चुनौती दी थी। विवाद तब शुरू हुआ जब स्कूल में कार्यरत एक कर्मचारी की सेवा समाप्ति के बाद, उनके परिजनों ने आरटीआई के तहत स्कूल की आंतरिक कार्यप्रणाली और सेवा मामलों से जुड़ी जानकारी मांगी।
याचिकाकर्ता स्कूल की ओर से तर्क दिया गया कि डीएवी स्कूल एक निजी संस्था है, जिसे ''''दयानंद एंग्लो वैदिक कॉलेज ट्रस्ट एंड मैनेजमेंट सोसाइटी'''' द्वारा संचालित किया जाता है। स्कूल का न तो सरकारीकरण है और न ही इसे सरकार या एसईसीएल एसईसीएल से कोई ''''पर्याप्त वित्तीय सहायता'''' प्राप्त होती है, जो इसे आरटीआई के दायरे में लाए।
हाईकोर्ट की महत्वपूर्ण टिप्पणी
मामले की सुनवाई करते हुए हाईकोर्ट के न्यायाधीश अमितेंद्र किशोर प्रसाद की पीठ ने कानूनी बिंदुओं का गहन विश्लेषण किया। कोर्ट ने अपने आदेश में कहा कि स्कूल अपनी आय स्वयं फीस और अन्य माध्यमों से जुटाता है। एसईसीएल के साथ हुआ समझौता केवल एक अनुबंधात्मक व्यवस्था है, जिसमें एसईसीएल कर्मचारियों के बच्चों की फीस के घाटे की भरपाई की जाती है, जो ''''पर्याप्त वित्तीय सहायता'''' नहीं मानी जा सकती। स्कूल के प्रबंधन, प्रशासन या नीतिगत निर्णयों पर सरकार या किसी सरकारी निकाय का ''''गहरा और व्यापक नियंत्रण'''' नहीं है। आरटीआई अधिनियम की धारा 2(एच) के तहत ''''सार्वजनिक प्राधिकरण'''' होने के लिए स्वामित्व, नियंत्रण या पर्याप्त वित्तपोषण अनिवार्य है, जो इस मामले में सिद्ध नहीं होता।
अदालत का निर्णय
कोर्ट ने स्पष्ट किया कि जब संस्था स्वयं ही ''''सार्वजनिक प्राधिकरण'''' नहीं है, तो उसके प्राचार्य को ''''डीम्ड पीआईओ'''' मानना पूरी तरह से कानून सम्मत नहीं है। इस आधार पर हाईकोर्ट ने केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग के उन आदेशों को खारिज कर दिया, जिनमें स्कूल प्रबंधन को आरटीआई के तहत जानकारी देने और दंडित करने का निर्देश दिया गया था।

(Click here to Download Judgement)

RTI rule revamp by Maharashtra govt ignites transparency debate

The Live Nagpur: Nagpur: Saturday, 20 June 2026.

The Maharashtra Government has notified the Maharashtra Right to Information (RTI) Rules, 2026, bringing in a series of major changes to the process through which citizens seek information from public authorities. While the state has described the new rules as an attempt to improve efficiency and streamline implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005, the move has triggered concerns among transparency campaigners and opposition parties, who argue that the changes could make accessing information more cumbersome and costly.
Among the most notable provisions is the introduction of a single-subject requirement. RTI applications will generally be restricted to one issue and must not exceed 150 words. Applicants seeking information on multiple subjects will now have to file separate applications, a requirement critics say could increase both procedural burden and expenses.
The revised rules also make it compulsory for applicants to submit a self-attested photo identity document as proof of Indian citizenship while filing an RTI request. Public Information Officers (PIOs) have been empowered to return applications that fail to include the prescribed identity proof.
The fee structure has undergone a substantial revision. The application fee has been increased from Rs 10 to Rs 30, while charges for photocopies, scanned records and digital copies have risen from Rs 2 to Rs 5 per page. Appeal fees have also been enhanced, with first appeals now costing Rs 50 and second appeals Rs 100.
Citizens seeking inspection of records will be allowed one hour of free inspection, after which a fee of Rs 50 per hour will be charged. Additional postal charges will also apply for bulky documents and information packets exceeding specified limits.
Under another provision, information already available on government websites may not be separately certified by Public Information Officers. Applicants may instead be directed to access such information online. Likewise, repeated RTI applications seeking information that has already been supplied earlier may be disposed of by referring applicants to previous responses.
The new rules further widen the scope for withholding personal information. Information that is unrelated to public activity or public interest, or which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy, can be denied unless the applicant demonstrates a larger public interest. The responsibility for establishing such public interest has been placed on the applicant.
At the same time, the government has strengthened provisions relating to proactive disclosure. Heads of public offices have been made more accountable for ensuring compliance with Section 4 of the RTI Act, which requires public authorities to proactively publish key information. Failure to comply could invite disciplinary action under relevant service rules.
The rules also incorporate digital communication into the RTI mechanism. Notices, replies and information may now be delivered through email and online RTI platforms, while payments can be made through digital modes, including UPI.
In another significant reform, hearings before the State Information Commission can now be conducted either physically or through video conferencing. The commission has also been authorised to dismiss appeals if appellants repeatedly fail to appear for hearings without sufficient justification.
The Maharashtra RTI Rules, 2026, replace the earlier rules governing the state’s RTI framework and are expected to significantly influence how citizens access government information. While the government maintains that the changes promote administrative efficiency and digitisation, critics contend that some of the new requirements could undermine the spirit of the RTI Act by creating additional procedural barriers for information seekers.

Dengue overtakes malaria as Maharashtra’s deadliest mosquitoborne disease: RTI

Nagpur Today: Nagpur: Saturday, 20 June 2026.
RTI data reveals 119 dengue deaths against 67 malaria fatalities since 2023, despite malaria recording higher number of infections across the State

While malaria continues to be Maharashtra’s most widespread mosquito-borne disease, dengue has emerged as the deadliest, claiming nearly twice as many lives despite infecting fewer people, according to information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The data, secured by Nagpur-based RTI activist Abhay Kolarkar from the office of the Joint Director of Health Services (Vector-Borne Diseases), Pune, reveals the alarming impact of vector-borne diseases across the State between January 2023 and April 2026.
According to the figures, Maharashtra reported 63,550 malaria cases during the period, making it the most prevalent mosquito-borne disease. However, malaria was responsible for 67 deaths, significantly lower than dengue, which claimed 119 lives despite recording 54,112 cases.
The data highlights dengue’s growing threat to public health, with the disease emerging as the leading cause of death among major vector-borne illnesses in Maharashtra.
A year-wise analysis shows that malaria cases stood at 16,159 in 2023, increased to 21,078 in 2024, and further rose to 23,247 in 2025. By April 30, 2026, the State had already reported 3,066 malaria cases.
Dengue infections remained persistently high throughout the period. Maharashtra recorded 19,034 dengue cases in 2023, 19,385 in 2024, and 14,168 in 2025. In the first four months of 2026 alone, 1,525 dengue cases were reported.
Other vector-borne diseases accounted for a comparatively smaller disease burden. Chikungunya registered 9,702 cases during the period but did not record a single death. Japanese Encephalitis reported only 18 cases, but resulted in three fatalities, while filariasis (commonly known as Hatti Paay) accounted for 895 cases without any deaths.
Medical experts attribute dengue’s higher mortality rate to its potential to trigger life-threatening complications, including dengue shock syndrome, severe internal bleeding and multi-organ failure.
“Dengue can rapidly affect multiple organs and become fatal if patients do not receive timely medical attention. While malaria is more widespread, most cases respond well to treatment. However, falciparum malaria can also cause severe complications if left untreated,” a health expert explained.
The RTI documents also reveal that the Maharashtra Government has been spending several crores of rupees annually on vector-borne disease control measures. These include surveillance programmes, fogging operations, larvicidal treatment, distribution of mosquito nets and extensive public awareness campaigns.
Despite these sustained efforts, mosquito-borne diseases continue to pose a major public health challenge across urban and rural areas of the State. Health officials and experts believe that changing weather patterns, rapid urbanisation, water stagnation and inadequate sanitation in certain pockets continue to contribute to the spread of disease-carrying mosquitoes.
The latest figures have once again underlined the need for stronger preventive measures, early diagnosis, community participation and improved public health infrastructure to curb the growing burden of vector-borne diseases in Maharashtra.

Right to Privacy Cannot Shield a Forger: Andhra Pradesh High Court : By Saket Sourav

Law Street Journal: Andhra Pradesh: Saturday, 20 June 2026.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that Aadhaar-linked biometric information may be disclosed to investigating authorities in cases involving serious allegations of forgery, and that a person accused of committing such an offence cannot be permitted to evade investigation by claiming the protection of the right to privacy.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice R. Raghunandan Rao delivered the judgment on 7 May 2026 in Writ Appeal No. 252 of 2026, while setting aside a contrary order passed by a learned Single Judge of the same Court.
The appellant, Shri Sitaramanjaneyulu Elaprolu, alleged that an unknown person impersonated him using a forged Aadhaar card and executed two sale deeds in favour of a third party, fraudulently transferring agricultural land situated in Saripalli Village, Visakhapatnam District.
Upon discovering the alleged fraud, the appellant lodged an FIR at Pendurthi Police Station and also instituted a civil suit seeking a declaration that the sale deeds were null and void, in which an interim injunction was granted in his favour. Separately, the District Registrar cancelled the disputed sale deeds on 2 November 2021, though that order was subsequently challenged before the High Court by the purchaser.
To identify the impersonator, the appellant sought Aadhaar and biometric details linked to the fraudulent Aadhaar card under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The request was rejected under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act on the ground that the information constituted personal information exempt from disclosure. Alleging inaction on the part of the investigating authorities in obtaining the information through official channels, the appellant approached the High Court seeking a direction for disclosure.
The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on 22 December 2025, holding that disclosure of Aadhaar information is governed by Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, which permits disclosure only pursuant to an order of a court not inferior to a High Court. Since no such request had been made by the Commissioner of Police, the Court declined to direct disclosure in the petition as framed.
The Division Bench, however, reversed the Single Judge’s decision and allowed the writ appeal. It held that Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act does not impose an absolute prohibition on disclosure of Aadhaar-linked information but merely prescribes safeguards by requiring an order of a High Court or a higher court, or in certain cases an order on grounds of national security. According to the Court, these conditions regulate the process of disclosure and are not intended to completely bar access in cases involving serious allegations of criminal fraud.
On the central question of whether the right to privacy could operate as a bar, the Court was unequivocal:
“A person who is alleged to have committed an offence of forgery for personal gain, cannot be permitted to get away with such an offence, if he has committed such an offence, on the ground of protection of his privacy.”
The Court further noted that the fraudulent Aadhaar card had been issued in the appellant’s own name, even though it was allegedly created by an impersonator. In such circumstances, the Court observed that any claim to privacy by the impersonator in relation to that document stood considerably weakened.
Accordingly, the Division Bench set aside the order of the Single Judge and directed the concerned UIDAI authorities to furnish the Aadhaar-linked information to the Station House Officer of Pendurthi Police Station within three weeks. The Court clarified that only such information as is permissible under the Aadhaar Act, 2016, could be disclosed, thereby preserving the statutory safeguards while enabling the criminal investigation to proceed. The SHO was also authorised to share the information with the Investigating Officer in Crime No. 430 of 2021.
Case Title: Shri Sitaramanjaneyulu Elaprolu v. The Union of India and Others, Writ Appeal No. 252 of 2026.
[Read Judgment]

હવે અકસ્માતના દસ્તાવેજો માટે પોલીસ સ્ટેશનના ધક્કા નહીં!:પીડિત પરિવાર અને ઇન્સ્યુરન્સ એજન્ટને FIR, પીએમ રિપોર્ટ સહિતના દસ્તાવેજો વિનામૂલ્યે મળશે.

Divyabhaskar: Ahmedabad: Friday, June 19, 2026.

રોડ અકસ્માતોનો ભોગ બનેલા પીડિતોના પરિવારોને વીમા ક્લેમ અને વળતર મેળવવામાં પડતી હાલાકીનો અંત લાવવા માટે ગુજરાત માહિતી આયોગે ઐતિહાસિક નિર્ણય કર્યો છે. હવે મોટર અકસ્માત દાવા ટ્રિબ્યુનલ (MACT) સંબંધિત કેસોમાં પીડિત પરિવાર અથવા ઇન્સ્યુરન્સ કંપનીના અધિકૃત એજન્ટને FIR, પંચનામું, FSL રિપોર્ટ અને પોસ્ટમોર્ટમ રિપોર્ટ સહિતના તમામ કાયદાકીય દસ્તાવેજો કોઈપણ ચાર્જ લીધા વિના 'વિનામૂલ્યે' ઉપલબ્ધ કરાવવા પોલીસ તંત્રને કડક આદેશ આપવામાં આવ્યા છે.

ઇન્સ્યુરન્સ એજન્ટની અરજી પર માહિતી આયોગનો મોટો સપાટો તાજેતરમાં એક ઇન્સ્યુરન્સ કંપનીના અધિકૃત એજન્ટ દ્વારા બે અલગ-અલગ અકસ્માત કેસોના જરૂરી દસ્તાવેજો મેળવવા માટે અરજી કરવામાં આવી હતી. જોકે, સંબંધિત પોલીસ સ્ટેશન અને સ્થાનિક કોર્ટ દ્વારા આ માહિતી આપવાનો ઇનકાર કરાતાં મામલો આખરે રાજ્ય માહિતી આયોગ સુધી પહોંચ્યો હતો. આ કેસની સુનાવણી દરમિયાન આયોગે ગંભીર નોંધ લીધી હતી કે એમ.એ.સી.ટી. એક્ટ (સુધારા)-2022 અને સુપ્રીમ કોર્ટના અગાઉના કડક નિર્દેશો અનુસાર, અકસ્માત સંબંધિત તમામ માહિતી નિર્ધારિત સમયમર્યાદામાં અરજદારોને આપવી કાયદેસર રીતે ફરજિયાત છે.

સમયમર્યાદા નક્કી, કયો અહેવાલ કેટલા સમયમાં આપવો પડશે?

પ્રથમ અકસ્માત અહેવાલ (FAR): 48 કલાકમાં

વચગાળાનો અકસ્માત અહેવાલ (IAR): 50 દિવસમાં

વિગતવાર અકસ્માત અહેવાલ (DAR): 90 દિવસમાં

DGP ને કડક આદેશ: 

હવે RTI હેઠળ અલગથી અરજી કરવાની જરૂર નથી આયોગે સ્પષ્ટ કર્યું છે કે અકસ્માતમાં ભોગ બનનાર વ્યક્તિ, મૃત્યુના કિસ્સામાં તેમના કાયદેસરના વારસદારો તેમજ વીમા કંપનીના અધિકૃત પ્રતિનિધિને આ તમામ દસ્તાવેજો નિઃશુલ્ક આપવાની જવાબદારી પોલીસની જ છે. આ માટે નાગરિકોને માહિતી અધિકાર (RTI) હેઠળ અલગથી ધક્કા ખાવા ન પડે તેવી પૂર્વવ્યવસ્થા ગોઠવવા સૂચવાયું છે. આ અંગે આયોગે રાજ્યના મુખ્ય પોલીસ અધિકારી અને પોલીસ મહાનિદેશક (DGP)ને ખાસ પરિપત્ર બહાર પાડીને રાજ્યના તમામ પોલીસ સ્ટેશનોમાં આ નિયમનું 100% કડક પાલન થાય તેવી સિસ્ટમ ગોઠવવા આદેશ કર્યો છે.

આ નિર્ણયથી શું ફાયદો થશે? અકસ્માત જેવા કપરા સમયે પરિવારોને વળતર મેળવવા માટે પોલીસ સ્ટેશન કે કોર્ટના ચક્કર કાપવામાંથી કાયમી મુક્તિ મળશે. દસ્તાવેજો સમયસર અને મફત મળવાને કારણે વીમા ક્લેમ મંજૂર થવાની પ્રક્રિયા અત્યંત ઝડપી અને પારદર્શક બનશે.

Police must give MACT case details to insurance agents, victims: Gujarat Information Commission

Times of India: Ahmedabad: Friday, June 19, 2026.

The Gujarat Information Commission (GIC) has directed that documents such as the FIR, panchnama, FSL report, inquest panchnama, postmortem report, and related records be supplied free of cost to insurance agents and accident victims.

The order was given in a case where an agent of an insurance company had requested the Kamrej police station for the aforementioned records along with other papers pertaining to two accident cases. In response, the police station had asked him to approach the court.

When he contacted the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), he was informed that the procedure requires him to obtain the papers from the Kamrej police station itself. The complainant then approached the GIC, which ruled that the public information officer of Kamrej police station had not acted in accordance with the provisions of the MACT Act (Amendment) 2022.

Under the amended MACT Act, the investigating officer is required to submit the first accident report to the MACT; authorised agent of the insurance company and the accident victim or legal heirs in case of death, within 48 hours; the interim accident report within 60 days; and the detailed accident report within 90 days.

The commission also directed state police to ensure that, in cases where such reports have already been sent to the MACT but not forwarded to the authorised insurance agent and the victim/legal heirs, they are now sent to them.

These directions are intended to ensure compliance with the legal framework so that accident victims/their heirs can obtain insurance claims more quickly in MACT matters, the commission said in its order. The order is expected to provide major relief to the families of victims, insurance company agents handling claim procedures, besides helping victims secure justice without delays.

Pankti Jog, general secretary of Mahiti Adhikar Gujarat Pahel (MAGP) said there are several such cases where help is sought by people on the MAGP helpline and that the commission’s order will now expedite settlement of insurance claims.

AAI denies RTI request on Jamshedpur’s Dhalbhumgarh airport, Chakulia airstrip inspection report.

Avenuemail: Ranchi: Friday, June 19, 2026.

The Airports Authority of India (AAI) has declined to provide a copy of the site inspection report prepared by its five-member technical team following visits to the proposed Dhalbhumgarh Airport site and Chakulia Airstrip on April 11 and 12, 2026.

The information was sought under the Right to Information (RTI) Act by applicant Shashank Shekhar Swain. In its reply issued by the Airport Director’s office at Birsa Munda Airport, Ranchi, AAI stated that the inspection report is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005. The provision allows public authorities to withhold information containing commercial confidence, trade secrets, or intellectual property if its disclosure could harm the competitive position of a third party.

The applicant had also sought clarification on whether AAI had accepted a revised project map for the proposed Dhalbhumgarh Airport and the likely runway length after the exclusion of certain disputed land parcels. AAI responded that these queries were in the nature of questions and did not fall within the definition of “information” under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.

In addition, AAI did not provide details of coordination committee meetings held with the Jharkhand government regarding forest clearance issues for the airport project, stating that the query was not specific.

The response was issued on June 12, 2026, by Airport Director Vinod Kumar. The applicant has been informed of his right to file a first appeal before the designated appellate authority.

Persistent delay in restoring the Information Commission is unacceptable : Shamsul Bari and Ruhi Naz

The Daily Star: Bangladesh: Thursday, 18 June 2026.

It is true that observers have so far viewed the performance of the BNP government, which took office in February 2026 following a year-and-a-half-long interim administration, with cautious optimism. But many have been dismayed by the government’s failure to appoint the country’s three information commissioners since the previous ones, like numerous officials serving in comparable institutions, vacated their positions in the aftermath of the July uprising. Nearly four months into its tenure, the government’s continued inaction about restoring the Information Commission to full strength has disappointed those who hoped that the political transition would mark a decisive shift towards more democratic, transparent, and accountable governance.
The much-invoked spirit of the July uprising rekindled hopes for a genuine transformation in governance one in which citizens’ voices would be respected, the rule of law upheld, and the laws of the land used to advance citizens’ interests rather than suppress them. Among more vigilant citizens, there was also the expectation that their right to know how the government functions would be meaningfully guaranteed through, inter alia, the effective implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2009.
The failure to move convincingly towards the RTI regime has inevitably raised troubling questions. Is the government hesitating to embrace the transparency and accountability the RTI Act seeks to advance by opening public institutions to citizen scrutiny? Or is it genuinely struggling to identify suitable candidates for the vacant positions? More worryingly, does the prolonged delay suggest an attempt to quietly render the institution ineffective? Citizens deserve a clear answer.
It is necessary to continue highlighting the tremendous potential of the RTI Act as a tool for good governance and to promote meaningful citizen participation in public affairs. To this end, we turn to the concerns raised in a recent editorial published by this daily.
The editorial titled “Address the rot in our infrastructure sector” (May 23, 2026) raises troubling questions about corruption, waste, and the entrenched lack of accountability in the country’s development sector. The alleged irregularities in the South Asia Subregional Economic Cooperation (SASEC) Road Connectivity Project-2 under the Roads and Highways Department (RHD) paint a disturbing picture of how public infrastructure projects can become vehicles for private enrichment rather than instruments of public welfare.
According to the editorial, funds allocated to upgrade the 190-km Elenga-Rangpur highway to a four-lane road were allegedly also used to construct extravagant facilities in Paikpara, Dhaka, far removed from the project area. It further highlights allegations of inflated costs, repeated revisions benefiting contractors, environmental destruction, and even the demolition of structures designed by renowned architect Mazharul Islam. The project cost, initially estimated at around Tk 11,000 crore, reportedly rose to more than Tk 19,000 crore following repeated modifications and deadline extensions.
The editorial rightly questions how such extensive irregularities could occur without political patronage and systemic weaknesses in oversight. More importantly, it calls upon the authorities to investigate the allegations thoroughly and restore public confidence in the management of development projects.
While the allegations surrounding this particular project are deeply troubling, the broader issue is far more significant: the chronic absence of transparency and accountability in Bangladesh’s infrastructure sector. This is precisely where the importance of the RTI law becomes most evident.
The RTI Act was enacted to ensure citizens’ access to information held by public authorities. It recognises that transparency is not merely an administrative formality but a cornerstone of democratic governance. Citizens have the right to know how public money is spent, contracts are awarded, project costs escalate, and whether environmental and social safeguards are respected.
Had the RTI framework been actively and effectively utilised, many of the questions might have surfaced much earlier. Journalists, civil society organisations, researchers, environmental groups, and ordinary citizens could have sought official documents relating to procurement, contract revisions, feasibility studies, environmental assessments, and cost escalations. Public scrutiny of such records often serves as one of the strongest deterrents against corruption and abuse of power.
Unfortunately, the RTI regime in Bangladesh has become weakened in recent years. The prolonged absence of information commissioners and the resulting institutional paralysis have significantly undermined the law’s effectiveness. At a time when large development projects involve enormous public expenditure and foreign loans, weakened access to information creates an environment in which irregularities can flourish with little fear of accountability.
Therefore, the concerns raised in the editorial should not be viewed merely as an isolated scandal. Rather, they should serve as a reminder that development without transparency inevitably risks becoming distorted by corruption, patronage, and waste. Roads, bridges, and buildings alone cannot define progress if public trust is eroded. So, reviving and strengthening the RTI regime is essential if Bangladesh wishes to ensure that development genuinely serves the public interest. This requires not only the immediate appointment of competent and independent information commissioners, but also the cultivation of a governance culture in which disclosure of public information becomes the norm rather than the exception.
The challenge now is whether policymakers, public institutions, and citizens alike will respond by demanding greater transparency and accountability across all sectors. In that endeavour, the Right to Information Act remains one of the most powerful tools available to the people of the country. The responsibility now rests squarely with the government. Citizens naturally look forward to the early restoration of a fully functional RTI regime that safeguards transparency and accountability in public life. The manner in which the government addresses this issue will serve as an important indicator of its commitment to advancing the democratic governance and openness that it has repeatedly pledged to uphold.
(Dr Shamsul Bari and Ruhi Naz are chairman and deputy director (RTI), respectively, at Research Initiatives, Bangladesh (RIB). They can be reached at rib@citech-bd.com.)
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.

RTI Commission must crack down on unlawful information charges – Zakariah Tanko Musah

My Joy Online: Ghana: Thursday, 18 June 2026.
Private legal practitioner and lecturer at the University of Media, Arts and Communication's Institute of Journalism, Zakariah Tanko Musah, has called on the Right to Information (RTI) Commission to strictly enforce the RTI Act against public institutions that impose unlawful charges for access to information.

According to him, stronger sanctions are needed to deter public officials from creating barriers that undermine transparency, accountability and citizens' constitutional right to information.
Speaking on Joy FM's Corruption Watch on Wednesday, Mr Tanko Musah urged the Commission to exercise its enforcement powers in a manner that sends a clear message to institutions that fail to comply with the law.
"I think the way to solve this problem is for the RTI Commission to start enforcing its powers in a way that sends a very clear signal to institutions that the RTI law is a very important law that would help our democracy to thrive," he said.
He argued that any attempt to obstruct access to public information weakens democratic governance and undermines the objectives of the RTI Act.
"If you're going to put any impediment in the way of achieving an effective and efficient access-to-information regime, then according to the law, they have the authority and the right to impose administrative fines," he stated.
Mr Tanko Musah, however, expressed concern that existing penalties have had little impact because fines are often paid by institutions rather than the individual officers responsible for withholding information.
"The tragedy is that when they administer those administrative charges, people are not paying out of their own pockets," he said.
"People are negligently or recklessly refusing to provide information and then throwing up their hands to say, 'So what?' At the end of the day, if my institution is fined, it doesn't come out of my pocket."
He argued that the solution lies in enforcing provisions of the RTI Act that hold individual officers personally accountable for refusing to release information without lawful justification.
"That's why we have to go back to the provisions in the RTI law, which actually say that if you, as an individual, recklessly refuse or fail to provide information that you are supposed to provide, you can be charged as an individual," he explained.
His comments come amid growing concerns over the high fees some public institutions charge for information requests made under the RTI Act.
During the programme, freelance journalist and editor of media start-up The Treasure, Benjamin Tinkram, disclosed that the Ghana Meteorological Agency (GMet) demanded GH¢10,400 for a seven-page document and an Excel spreadsheet containing rainfall and weather data requested under the RTI Act.
Mr Tanko Musah described such charges as inconsistent with the spirit and intent of the law, stressing that access to information should not be restricted by prohibitive fees.
"The idea is not to make access difficult. It is to make it easy for people to access information," he said.
He explained that the RTI Act permits institutions to recover only the reasonable cost of reproducing documents and does not support excessive charges that effectively deny access to information.
Mr Tanko Musah further maintained that the RTI Act supersedes any conflicting provisions in other legislation relating to access to public information, and therefore, public institutions cannot rely on their own enabling laws to justify exorbitant fees.
He emphasised that improving access to information is critical to exposing corruption, promoting transparency and strengthening democratic accountability.
"That's the only way we can promote access to information and ensure that our institutions remain accountable, transparent and responsive to the people they serve," he said.
DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.

State Information Officer has no power to ‘blacklist’ RTI applicants: State Commission - By Bhartesh Singh Thakur

The Tribune: Haryana: Thursday, 18 June 2026.
The complainant had filed an RTI application before Shahbad Sugar Mills Limited in Kurukshetra on November 12, 2025; however, the SPIO in his response purportedly restrained the complainant from filing RTI applications on the ground that he had submitted repeated requests

The State Information Commission, Haryana, has ruled that a State Public Information Officer (SPIO) serves only as a statutory facilitator and has no legal jurisdiction, authority, or power to “restrain, bar, or blacklist an appellant/complainant” from filing Right to Information (RTI) applications.
Complainant Sandeep Sharan had filed an RTI application before Shahbad Sugar Mills Limited in Kurukshetra on November 12, 2025. However, the SPIO in his response dated January 21 purportedly restrained the complainant from filing RTI applications on the ground that he had submitted repeated RTI requests. While denying the information, SPIO further stated in his response that action may be taken against the complainant for disrupting the discharge of official duties if he did not desist from filing RTI applications.
Aggrieved by the response, the complainant filed a complaint before the State Information Commission on January 27. The Commission observed that SPIO failed to furnish the complainant with correct and complete information.
After hearing both parties, State Information Commissioner Dr Ajay Kumar Sura observed, “Even in cases where an appellant/complainant files voluminous, repetitive, or allegedly vexatious requests, the SPIO cannot issue any injunction, embargo, or blanket prohibition against such appellant/complainant. The SPIO is required to deal with each RTI application independently and on a case-to-case basis, and may invoke only those exemptions specifically provided under Sections 8 and 9 of the RTI Act, 2005.”
He added, “The RTI Act also contains no provision empowering an SPIO to issue a restraining order against an information seeker. Any such action is clearly ultra vires the provisions of the Act and is therefore without legal sanction. Needless to mention, an SPIO is an authority created by statute and can exercise only those powers which are expressly conferred upon him by the statute.”
The Commissioner’s order, dated June 12, pointed out, “While the misuse of the RTI Act by chronic litigants may, in certain circumstances, impose an administrative burden upon public authorities, neither the public authority nor its SPIO can pass administrative orders restraining a citizen from exercising a statutory right conferred under law.”
The State Information Commissioner then directed the SPIO of Shahabad Sugar Mills Limited to refurnish the complete information to the appellant through registered post within 15 days. Further, the SPIO was directed to submit a detailed explanation specifying the provisions, if any, under the RTI Act, 2005, “which empower an SPIO to debar or restrain an appellant/complainant from filing RTI applications merely on the ground that the appellant/complainant has submitted multiple RTI requests.”

Hindon loses 16 routes as Jewar airport emerges as NCR's new aviation hub: RTI

India Today: Noida: Thursday, 18 June 2026.
An RTI response accessed by India Today has revealed that Hindon Airport in Ghaziabad has lost at least 16 flight routes in recent months, with airlines steadily scaling back services from the facility that was once projected as a key regional aviation hub.

As Jewar takes off, Hindon loses altitude: RTI reveals 16 routes cut from NCR's first alternative airport (Photo: ITG)

As Noida International Airport (NIA) at Jewar opens its doors to commercial flights and ushers the National Capital Region (NCR) into the era of dual airports, the region's first attempt at creating an alternative aviation hub is quietly losing ground. An RTI response accessed by India Today reveals that Hindon Airport, launched with much fanfare under the Centre's UDAN scheme, has lost at least 16 routes as airlines steadily scale back operations.
In March 2019, Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the civilian terminal at the Indian Air Force's Hindon airbase under the Centre's flagship UDAN (Ude Desh Ka Aam Nagrik) scheme. Located in Ghaziabad, Hindon was envisioned as a low-cost airport aimed at improving regional connectivity and easing the burden on Delhi's Indira Gandhi International Airport.
More than seven years later, however, the airport is grappling with shrinking connectivity and a steady decline in traffic.
Information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act shows that at least 16 routes have been discontinued from Hindon. Air India Express and IndiGo have withdrawn services to several cities, including Mumbai, Bengaluru, Chennai, Bhubaneswar, Goa, Kolkata, Patna, Jaipur, Varanasi, Ahmedabad and Indore.
The Airports Authority of India (AAI) attributed most of the route suspensions to "operational reasons", while Air India Express's Mumbai and Bengaluru services ended following a "cessation of operations".
TRAFFIC DROPS AFTER PEAK IN 2025
The retreat of airlines is reflected in the airport's traffic figures. Hindon recorded its highest-ever traffic in August 2025, with 1,168 aircraft movements. By October that year, more than 40 flights were operating daily to and from 16 cities after carriers such as Air India Express and IndiGo expanded their presence at the airport.
Since then, traffic has fallen sharply. AAI data shows domestic aircraft movements declined from 638 in February 2026 to 614 in March and further to 404 in April. Passenger traffic also dropped significantly, from 89,073 in February to 79,161 in March and then nearly halved to 44,326 in April.
AAI also confirmed that Air India Express discontinued operations from Hindon due to operational reasons. However, it declined to share correspondence exchanged with the airline regarding the closure of services, citing exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act.
AAI PLANS TERMINAL EXPANSION, PUSH FOR NEW ROUTES
The RTI response also sheds light on efforts underway to arrest the decline in connectivity.
AAI said expansion of the terminal building towards the city side is currently in progress to enhance passenger facilities and meet future requirements. The airport operator further stated that discussions are underway with the Central government, state governments and other stakeholders to restore connectivity and attract new airlines and routes to Hindon.
The revival push comes as Jewar's Noida International Airport begins commercial operations, intensifying competition for passengers and airlines in the NCR aviation market.

Maharashtra’s new RTI rules spark outrage over fee hikes, word limits

Times of India: Pune: Thursday, 18 June 2026.
Right to Information (RTI) activists and regular users have raised an alarm over the state govt’s newly notified RTI Rules, 2026. Critics alleged that several provisions will create significant barriers for citizens, effectively diluting the spirit of the landmark 2005 transparency law.

The new rules, notified on June 12, replaced the previous framework governing RTI applications in Maharashtra. While the state maintained that these changes were designed to streamline processes and prevent “misuse,” activists argued they imposed unnecessary hurdles on information seekers.
Among the most significant changes is a threefold increase in RTI application fee from Rs10 to Rs30. Charges for obtaining copies of documents have also been raised from Rs2 to Rs5 per page. Citizens seeking to inspect records will have to pay Rs50 per hour after the first free hour, while appeals against decisions of public information officers will now attract fees of Rs50 for first appeals and Rs100 for second appeals before the State Information Commission.
Beyond fees, the 2026 rules introduce strict structural constraints. Every RTI application must now be restricted to a single subject limited to approximately 150 words. Under the new guidelines, if an application contains multiple queries, the Public Information Officer (PIO) may process only the first issue and direct the applicant to file separate applications for the rest.
Furthermore, applicants are now required to submit self-attested photo identification to establish citizenship with every application. Failure to provide ID may result in the application being returned.
Activists argued these requirements contradict the RTI Act’s core objective: providing a simple, citizen-friendly mechanism for accountability.
“No amendment can be made that goes beyond the basic tenets of Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, which states that an applicant shall not be required to give any reason for requesting information,” said activist Vihar Durve. “Mandating citizenship proof at the application stage and imposing word limits will only increase litigation and discourage the common man.”
The rules also grant PIOs more discretion to deny copies. If information is already available on a government website, authorities can simply direct the applicant to the link rather than providing physical or digital copies. Additionally, “repetitive” applications can now be disposed of without a detailed hearing.
The 2026 rules do include some modernising touches. RTI fees can now be paid via UPI and other electronic modes, and communication through email is now formally recognised. Citizens below the poverty line (BPL) remain exempt from fees, though this is now capped only the first 50 pages of voluminous information will be provided free of cost.
Activists contend that the cumulative effect of higher fees, word counts, and identity requirements will stifle transparency. “The RTI Act was designed to make information accessible. Any measure that increases costs and procedural barriers risks weakening the public’s ability to hold the govt accountable,” said another veteran activist.
The rules are now in force across Maharashtra. Legal experts and RTI unions are currently examining the provisions to determine if they can withstand a challenge in the high court for potentially overstepping the parent RTI Act of 2005.

Maharashtra tightens RTI rules, hikes fees

Hindustan Times: Mumbai: Thursday, 18 June 2026.
Under the newly notified Maharashtra Right to Information Rules, 2026, the application fee has been raised from ₹10 to ₹30, while the cost of obtaining copies of documents has increased from ₹2 to ₹5 per page

The Maharashtra government said the amendments are aimed at improving transparency and streamlining the processing of RTI applications. (PTI)

Obtaining information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act in Maharashtra is set to become costlier, with the state government amending the rules governing the law.
Under the newly notified Maharashtra Right to Information Rules, 2026, the application fee has been raised from ₹10 to ₹30, while the cost of obtaining copies of documents has increased from ₹2 to ₹5 per page. The rules were notified on June 12.
The state government said the amendments are aimed at improving transparency and streamlining the processing of RTI applications. However, RTI activists have criticised the move, calling the new rules restrictive.
Among the key changes is a 150-word limit for RTI applications and a restriction that each application can deal with only one subject. If multiple subjects are included, the information officer will respond only to the first subject.
Applicants must now attach a self-attested photo identity proof with every application, with the government saying the objective is to contain bogus applications.
Citizens inspecting original records at government offices will continue to get the first hour free of charge, but will have to pay ₹50 for every additional hour. While persons below the poverty line (BPL) were earlier entitled to receive information free of cost, they will now receive only the first 50 pages free.
During the inspection, applicants must use only pencils and are prohibited from making any marks on documents. Other writing instruments must be deposited with the information officer.
However, failure to proactively disclose information is now explicitly deemed a dereliction of duty, warranting disciplinary action against the head of the relevant office. Information delivered via e-mail or any electronic mode is now deemed valid delivery under the Act.
Fees can now be paid via UPI or electronic means, recognising online RTI filings. This can save time spent visiting government offices just to pay fees. Appellants can appear via video conferencing if documents are submitted two days prior and the facility is available, the amendments state.
Social activist Anjali Damania questioned the legality of some of the changes. “The RTI Act was passed by Parliament. The state can’t modify it. The Centre has to make the amendment. Providing an explanation for seeking information was not a part of the Act. If the information officer feels that information sought is unnecessary or harass someone, he can levy a fine.”
RTI activist Vijay Kumbhar said, “Democracy is in doldrums and these new rules are detrimental. One has to now give a reason for seeking information. There is a 100% to 300% rise in charges. Maharashtra was the first state to introduce RTI, and now they are killing it.”

‘Can you provide Rs 1,000 cr?’: Karnataka High Court bins plea for online hearing for RTI appeal

The Indian Express: Karnataka: Wednesday, 17 June 2026.
The Karnataka High Court said the Supreme Court has only urged the states to allow online hearings and not made it mandatory.

The petitioner, a law student, argued his case in the Karnataka High Court in person. (File Photo)

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday disposed of a law student’s petition seeking directions for the Karnataka State Law University and the state government to allow him to appear online for the hearing of an appeal filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj refused the relief to the petitioner, Pranava K N, and asked, “Are you willing to provide Rs 1,000 crore and provide the facility… Who is going to give them (authorities) Rs 1,000 crore to enable this facility in each of the departments?”
Pranava, who argued in person, relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Swapnil Tripathi v Supreme Court of India (2017) and said that online hearings are a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The judge then said the principle applies only if the authorities have the facilities.
The high court said in its order, “Though the Apex court has indicated that state should endeavor to provide online hearing, there is no mandate as such and the same is a policy decision by the state government.”
The court also noted the additional government advocate’s submission that allowing online hearings would require huge investments and expenses.
The order added, “Providing online hearing being a policy decision of the University and State of Karnataka, the above relief cannot be granted, the petition stands disposed.”
The court said that in the petitioner’s case, appeals before the first appellate authority need to be filed at the department or university level.
Pranava approached the court to quash a November 25, 2025, communication from the first appellate authority under the RTI Act that denied him permission for online appearance and directed him to appear physically to argue his appeal.
Further, he sought a direction for the government to ensure that all first appellate authorities under the RTI Act provide an online or hybrid hearing option for RTI first appeals.
As per section 19 of the RTI Act, anyone who does not receive a decision on his application or is aggrieved by a decision of the central or state public information officer (PIO) may, within 30 days from the expiry of such period or from the receipt of such a decision, appeal to the PIO in each public authority.

NTA's salary bill remains a secret as agency denies RTI request

India Today: New Delhi: Wednesday, 17 June 2026.
NTA has refused to disclose its salary bill and top officials' pay under RTI, despite having 198 personnel. The move comes as a reform panel urges reduced outsourcing after the 2024 exam controversies.

NTA's salary bill remains a secret as agency denies RTI request

The National Testing Agency (NTA), the body that conducts high-stakes examinations such as NEET, JEE Main and CUET for millions of students, has declined to reveal how much it spends on salaries and staff or how much its highest paid officials earn.
In response to a Right to Information (RTI) application filed by India Today, the agency refused to provide details of its salary expenditure and the remuneration of its top officials, stating that the information was not available in the format sought.
The RTI application sought year wise details of expenditure incurred by the NTA on salaries, allowances and other staff-related payments since its inception, along with information on the agency's ten highest paid officials, including their designation, annual salary, allowances and total annual remuneration.
"The data is not available in the desired format, as requested by the applicant," the agency said in its reply dated June 13, 2026.
The NTA invoked Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, arguing that public authorities are required to provide only information that already exists in their records. "Creation of new data, compilation of information from different sources, or collation of details amounts to generating information, which is beyond the scope of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005," the reply stated.
The response is likely to raise questions about transparency in an organisation that occupies a critical position in India's education system. Notably, the NTA did not state that the information does not exist. Instead, it maintained that the data was not available in the format sought and that compiling it would amount to creating new information.
The RTI response assumes significance because the agency's staffing structure is already in the public domain. In a reply to Parliament in December 2024, the Ministry of Education disclosed that the NTA had 198 personnel, comprising 22 employees on deputation, 38 contractual employees, and 138 outsourced staff.
The issue assumes added importance in light of the recommendations of the K Radhakrishnan Committee, constituted in 2024 after controversies surrounding national entrance examinations.
The committee had recommended minimising the outsourcing of examination staff and centres, stressing that high-stakes examination functions should not rely excessively on temporary or weakly supervised delivery chains.
Against this backdrop, details of NTA's expenditure on personnel and the remuneration structure of its senior officials acquire greater public interest significance.