Punjab civic bodies paying Rs 10 lakh waste penalty, daily Fail to comply with disposal norms: RTI

Tribune India: Punjab: Thursday, January 29, 2026.
All 166 urban local bodies (ULBs) in Punjab, including municipal councils and municipal corporations, are collectively paying a daily penalty of around Rs 10 lakh for failing to comply with solid waste management and legacy waste remediation norms.

The penalties are being paid as environmental compensation to the Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB), according to information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The fines have been imposed for continued violation of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, and for non-compliance with repeated directions issued by the National Green Tribunal (NGT).
Official documents reveal that most civic bodies have failed to prepare or submit proposals for scientific processing and disposal of solid waste since April 1, 2020, despite repeated reminders and notices.
Under the NGT-approved framework, each ULB is liable to pay environmental compensation based on its population. Municipalities with a population above 10 lakh are required to pay Rs 10 lakh per month, those with a population between 5 lakh and 10 lakh are charged Rs 5 lakh per month, while other ULBs are required to pay Rs 1 lakh per month.
On an average, the PPCB has been imposing penalties of nearly Rs 3 crore per month on ULBs across the state for non-compliance since July 1, 2020. Between July 1, 2020, and June 30, 2025, the PPCB imposed a cumulative environmental compensation of Rs 170.12 crore on all 166 ULBs. During this period, the pollution board issued seven notices to the Local Government Department, urging corrective action.
Year-wise details of the penalties reveal that Rs 31.84 crore was imposed between July 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. This was followed by penalties of Rs 35.26 crore from April 1, 2021, to February 28, 2022; Rs 50.43 crore from March 1, 2022, to September 30, 2023 (a period of 19 months); Rs 14.76 crore from October 1, 2023, to March 31, 2024; Rs 7.65 crore from April 1, 2024, to June 30, 2024; Rs 15.12 crore from July 1, 2024, to December 31, 2024; and Rs 15.06 crore from January 1, 2025, to June 30, 2025.
Sources said the persistent failure of ULBs to establish waste processing facilities, ensure segregation at source and clear legacy dump sites poses a serious threat to public health, groundwater and the environment. The PPCB has warned that continued non-compliance could invite further penalties and legal action.
Advocate Kamal Anand, who obtained the information under the RTI Act, criticised the civic bodies for their “irresponsible and negligent attitude”. “Instead of investing in proper management and disposal of solid waste, municipalities in the state are paying an average of Rs 10 lakh per day as compensation. This ultimately burdens taxpayers,” he said. “At the same time, residents continue to face serious health hazards due to mounting heaps of garbage in almost every part of the state,” added Anand.
Maximum dues on Ludhiana, Amritsar MCs
The Ludhiana and Amritsar Municipal Corporations have accumulated the highest environmental compensation dues of Rs 6 crore each, followed by the Jalandhar MC at Rs 3 crore.

Transparency Tested Inside a Government Hospital : By Ashish Singh

Countercurrents: Raebareli: Thursday, January 29, 2026.
The Right to Information Act was enacted to correct a structural imbalance between the citizen and the State. In a constitutional democracy, information generated using public funds does not belong to officials or institutions; it belongs to the public. The RTI Act converts this principle into enforceable law by imposing binding duties on public authorities and empowering citizens to question, examine, and audit governance. Nowhere is this obligation more critical than in a government district hospital, where public money, administrative discretion, and human life intersect on a daily basis.

Rana Beni Madhav Singh District Hospital, Raebareli, is a government district hospital and therefore squarely falls within the definition of a public authority under the RTI Act. Its records are not optional disclosures or administrative favours. They are statutory responsibilities. Decisions relating to staffing, procurement, inspections, expenditure, and service delivery are created in the name of the public and must withstand public scrutiny. Any denial of such information must meet the strict legal standards laid down in the Act.

Section 5 of the RTI Act mandates the appointment of Public Information Officers and fixes personal responsibility for compliance. This provision exists to ensure that information flows to citizens efficiently and without obstruction. It does not, in any form, authorize the denial of information. Citing Section 5 as a ground for non-disclosure either reflects a serious misunderstanding of the law or an attempt to cloak denial in procedural language. The section creates accountability; it does not dilute it.
Section 7 governs timelines and procedure for providing information. It reinforces the idea that information delayed is information denied. In the context of a public hospital, where records often relate to essential services and public welfare, delay or evasion defeats the very purpose of transparency. Invoking Section 7 while withholding information reverses the logic of the Act and undermines its intent.
Section 8 provides limited exemptions, not blanket immunity. These exemptions are narrow, conditional, and must be justified with reasons. Section 8(1)(j), which protects personal information, applies only where disclosure has no relationship to public activity or public interest. Administrative records of a government hospital cannot be classified as private simply because disclosure may be uncomfortable or embarrassing. The Act itself makes it clear that even exempt information must be disclosed where a larger public interest exists. In public healthcare institutions, public interest is not incidental; it is inherent.
The most disturbing aspect of the RTI response is the inclusion of Sections 16, 44, 46, and 66 as grounds for denial. These provisions have no role whatsoever in refusing information. Section 16 safeguards the independence of Information Commissions. Section 44 mandates annual reporting on RTI implementation. Section 46 gives the Act overriding effect over inconsistent laws. Section 66 enables rule-making for effective implementation. None of these sections empower a public authority to reject an RTI application. Their invocation serves no legal purpose except to confuse, overwhelm, or intimidate the applicant.
The usage of these sections is not a harmless clerical error. It gives rise to a reasonable apprehension that legal provisions are being selectively deployed to create the appearance of legality while, in effect, obstructing transparency. This practice transforms the RTI reply into a bureaucratic shield rather than a democratic instrument. It signals an institutional mindset that views transparency as a threat to be managed rather than a duty to be fulfilled.
The RTI Act does not permit authorities to assemble a list of sections and present it as a substitute for reasoned justification. The law demands clarity. Every denial must demonstrate how the requested information specifically falls within a valid exemption. Anything less reduces the Act to a procedural ritual devoid of substance.
Transparency in a government hospital is not an abstract principle. It directly affects service quality, resource allocation, and public trust. District hospitals serve citizens who often have no alternative access to healthcare. When such institutions resist scrutiny, the consequences are borne not in legal theory but in lived reality.
The RTI Act was designed to pierce administrative opacity, not legitimize it. When a government hospital responds to public queries by misusing statutory provisions, the issue transcends one application. It raises fundamental questions about how public institutions understand accountability and their relationship with the citizens they are meant to serve.
Democracy is not judged by the existence of laws alone, but by the integrity with which they are applied. The misuse of RTI provisions is not merely a legal lapse; it is a democratic failure. When transparency is obstructed through legal obfuscation, accountability becomes performative and governance loses its moral authority.

Students learn importance of RTI through Quizzes in Rajshahi

BSS: Bangladesh: Wednesday, 28 January 2026.
An orientation session on the Right to  Information (RTI) was held for students at Nowhata Government High School  under Paba upazila of the district.

"Access to information is your right" a response from the stage came  instantly against a raising question "Is it really possible to get  information if we ask for it?" from a student at the session.
The auditorium turned into silence while such a question was raised but the entire hall erupted in applause after hearing the answer.
The orientation session included such a lively and dramatic atmosphere-filled  with quizzes, question-and-answer sessions, and real-life stories.
At the meeting, held this (Tuesday) morning on the school premises, speakers  said that it is not possible to build an accountable and transparent system  of governance without ensuring the right to access information. The human  desire to know is eternal, they added.
As citizens, the right to seek and receive information is known as the Right  to Information. Information means power, which plays an effective role in  establishing good governance and combating corruption.
The United Nations and the Constitution of Bangladesh recognize the right to  information as a fundamental right. Article 39(1) of the Constitution of  Bangladesh also mentions this right.
The meeting was organised by the Bangladesh Country Office of The Carter  Center with the aim of raising awareness among citizens about their right to  information and ensuring the effective implementation of the RTI Act to  prevent corruption. The event was held under the initiative of the combined  office of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).
Several real-life examples of the successful application of the RTI Act were  shared at the meeting.
In some cases, irregularities were prevented by obtaining information about  development project expenditures; in others, experiences were shared on  ensuring that genuine beneficiaries receive support under social safety net  programmes.
These real stories sparked students' curiosity and clearly demonstrated that  the right to information is not merely a theoretical concept, but one deeply  connected to everyday life.
During the orientation, it was explained that the RTI is a fundamental  democratic right of citizens, through which information held by the  government and certain private institutions can be accessed.
Discussions highlighted the background, objectives, and significance of the  RTI Act 2009. Students were also given a clear understanding of the  definition of information, the appointment and responsibilities of designated  officers, institutional obligations to provide information, procedures for  submitting applications, the process of responding within stipulated time  frames, and application fees.
The quiz competition organised under the theme "Know the Law, Know Your  Rights" made the session even more engaging, with active participation from  students.
Applause for correct answers and laughter at wrong ones turned the auditorium  into an open learning space.
According to the organisers, such participatory events play an effective role  in generating interest among young people in law and civic rights.
Students also shared their reflections at the meeting.
Rimti, a sixth-grade student of Nowhata Government High School, said, "Before  today's event, the right to information was limited to textbook pages for us.
Through real examples and quizzes, we have understood how seeking information  can help stand against injustice and corruption. Now it feels like we can ask  questions too."
Eighth-grade student Ifat said, "I didn't have much idea about the Right to Information Act before. Today I learned that even as ordinary citizens, we can request information from government offices. This knowledge has boosted our confidence and inspired us to become more conscious citizens in the future."
Fazlul Bari, deputy director of the ACC, addressed the event as the chief guest saying effective implementation of the Right to Information Act 2009 increases transparency in both public and private institutions and reduces opportunities for corruption.
"The right to information is not just a law; it is a powerful tool for citizen empowerment. If awareness of this right is created among students and young people, building an accountable and corruption-free society in the future will be much easier," he added.
In her welcome address, Shammi Laila Islam, country representative of The Carter Center, said that accurate information is power.
She noted that the law plays a vital role in ensuring the free flow of information, including women's right to access information. She also remarked that rights can only be properly exercised when people are aware of them.
ACC Assistant Director Tanvir Ahmed, Headmaster of the school Omar Ali, President of the Corruption Prevention Committee Akhtar Faruk also spoke.
The awareness and confidence visible on the students' face at the end of the meeting offered a hopeful sign for building a responsible citizenry in the future.

4,902 posts vacant in govt colleges: RTI

Tribune India: Haryana: Wednesday, 28 January 2026.
Highest number of vacancies for teachers in English department

According to information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 4902 teaching posts are lying vacant across government colleges in Haryana.
The RTI reply reveals that out of 8,137 sanctioned teaching posts across 185 government colleges in the state, only 3,235 are filled, leaving 4,902 posts vacant. To address the acute shortage of regular faculty, colleges have engaged 1,971 extension lecturers and 45 guest lecturers.
The information was sought by Subhash, state convenor of the Haryana Soochna Adhikar Manch, who had filed an RTI application with the State Public Information Officer of the Higher Education Department, seeking details on the number of government colleges, sanctioned teaching posts and subject-wise vacancies.
The department's reply points to a severe shortage of teachers, which has adversely affected higher education in the state.
Subhash said that the highest number of vacancies was in the English subject. Of the 1,146 sanctioned posts for English teachers, 792 are vacant. In Geography, 508 posts are vacant out of 806; in Commerce, 486 out of 1,034; in Mathematics, 409 out of 704; in Botany, 174 out of 226; and in Chemistry, 409 out of 583 posts are vacant.
Similarly, 233 out of 476 posts in Computer Science, 335 out of 528 in Hindi, and 140 out of 199 posts in Physical Education remain unfilled. Notably, all sanctioned posts in subjects such as Environment, Anthropology, Electronics, Zoology, Management, Biology, Information Technology, Microbiology, Statistics and Urdu are vacant.
Subhash said around 4,200 teaching posts were vacant in June 2024 when he had earlier sought similar information. "The number of vacant posts has now gone up to 4,902, which indicates that new recruitments are not being carried out while teachers continue to retire on superannuation," he said.
Quoting the 2024 RTI reply, he said Gurugram had 228 vacant posts, Hisar 279, Faridabad 242, Bhiwani 214, Ambala 103, Jind 169, Karnal 145, Palwal 114, Rohtak 170, Sirsa 167, Sonepat 109 and Fatehabad 143.
Subhash described the situation in colleges as a reflection of the "deplorable" state of higher education in Haryana.
"The condition of school education in the state is also quite bad. Thousands of teaching posts are vacant in schools. Schools are being merged and teaching posts are being abolished," he alleged.

RTI Non-Compliance Costs DGHS ₹45,000 Compensation, ₹15,000 Penalty on PIO

Moneylife: Article: Wednesday, 28 January 2026.
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by the directorate general of health services (DGHS), refusing to interfere with a central information commission (CIC) order that directed disclosure of information, payment of ₹45,000 as compensation to a right to information applicant and imposed a ₹15,000 penalty on the public information officer (PIO) for obstructing access to information.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held that the CIC had acted within the scope of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, and that no perversity, procedural impropriety or illegality was made out to warrant the exercise of writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
"The Commission has, after affording due opportunity and upon an exhaustive consideration of the record, held that the said officer deliberately obstructed the flow of information, failed to comply with binding directions of the Commission and exhibited a nonchalant and evasive approach towards his statutory obligations under the RTI Act. The penalty has thus been levied in his individual capacity and is statutorily recoverable from his salary in terms of the Act. Consequently, any grievance arising out of such penalty is personal to the said officer alone, and if aggrieved, the law provides him an independent remedy. The petitioner, therefore, lacks the requisite locus standi to espouse or agitate any challenge in respect of the penalty so imposed, or to assail the findings recorded by the Commission against the said officer," the Bench says.
The case arose from an RTI application filed on 31 October 2023 by Sanjeev Kumar, who sought detailed information regarding the licensing status of Artemis Hospital in New Friends Colony during the hospitalisation of his wife on 7th April and 8 April 2023.
Mr Kumar also sought details relating to action taken on his complaint filed on the centralised public grievance redress and monitoring system (CPGRAMS) portal, claim settlements by a third-party claim therapist, correspondence with the hospital, doctor-wise fee distribution and preventive steps taken by authorities to protect patients.
The PIO of DGHS replied on 21 November 2023, stating that the Hospital was regulated under the Delhi Nursing Homes Registration Act, 1953, claimed that the Hospital held a valid licence, and rejected several queries as 'not pertaining' to the department.
Dissatisfied with the response, Mr Kumar filed a first appeal, after which the appellate authority directed the DGHS to furnish replies to certain points. A second appeal was then filed before the CIC.
During multiple hearings in 2024, the CIC found DGHS replies to be incomplete and evasive. In an interim order on 7 October 2024, the Commission noted that DGHS had failed to clearly establish whether Artemis Hospital held a valid licence during the relevant period in April 2023.
The Commission observed that the Hospital’s registration certificate was valid only till 31 March 2023, while the renewed licence came into effect from 1 August 2023, leaving the crucial period uncovered. It also found that information on claim settlements, correspondence, doctors’ fees, and preventive measures had not been properly addressed.
In its final order on 16 January 2025, the CIC strongly criticised the conduct of the then and present PIO, Sandeep Kumar Agarwal, medical superintendent of DGHS, noting a 'casual and nonchalant attitude' towards statutory obligations.
The Commission held that the PIO had deliberately obstructed the flow of information, failed to comply with earlier directions, and attempted to sidestep responsibility by merely forwarding notices to the hospital.
Accordingly, the CIC imposed a penalty of ₹15,000 on the PIO in his personal capacity, directed the DGHS to pay ₹45,000 as compensation to Mr Kumar for the harassment and detriment suffered due to the delay and inaction, and issued an advisory under Section 25(5) of the RTI Act for systemic improvements.
Challenging the CIC order, DGHS approached the High Court, arguing against the penalty, compensation and advisory.
Rejecting the plea, the Court held that the penalty imposed on the PIO is personal in nature and DGHS lacked locus standi to challenge it. “Any grievance arising out of such penalty is personal to the officer concerned,” the Court says.
On compensation, the Court upheld the CIC’s power under Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act, observing that the provision is remedial and intended to redress loss or hardship caused by unlawful denial or delay of information.
The advisory issued by the CIC is held to be purely recommendatory and non-enforceable, carrying no civil or penal consequences.
Finding no illegality or perversity in the CIC’s reasoning, the Court dismissed the petition, concluding that the Commission had exercised its statutory discretion within the four corners of the law.

Husband’s income details can’t be denied to estranged wife, rules CIC

New Indian Express: New Delhi: Wednesday, 28 January 2026.
The commission said that upon verification of marital status and pendency of a matrimonial or maintenance case, the IT department shall provide the information sought in the application.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the Income Tax Department to disclose the details of the gross income of a man to his estranged wife, holding that such information cannot be denied in a matrimonial dispute on privacy grounds. Information Commissioner Vinod Kumar Tiwari passed the order on an application file by the estranged wife, who had sought the income details of her husband for the last five assessment years for the purpose of the maintenance proceedings before a court. She alleged that her estranged husband was “concealing his actual earnings to evade maintenance liability”.
The commission said that upon verification of marital status and pendency of a matrimonial or maintenance case, the IT department shall provide the information sought in the application. It, however, clarified that the details of the income tax returns and other personal information of third parties need not be disclosed.
The application was filed before the CEC after the Income Tax Department rejected the Right to Information request, citing it was the third-party personal information, protected under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act exempts personal information from disclosure if it has no relationship to public activity/ interest or causes an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
In its order, the commission said that information relating to income does not remain purely personal when sought by a legally wedded spouse for maintenance litigation and directed the appellant to submit documents establishing her marital relationship and the pendency of the case before a competent court.

ELCITA is public authority liable to disclose info, rules K’taka information commission

The Times of India: Bengaluru: Tuesday, 27 January 2026.
In a significant ruling strengthening transparency in urban governance, the Karnataka State Information Commission (KSIC) held that the Electronics City Industrial Township Authority (ELCITA) is a "public authority" under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, and is therefore bound to disclose information sought under the law.

It directed ELCITA to appoint a public information officer, an assistant public information officer, and a first appellate authority as mandated under the Act.
The commission, while hearing an appeal by Ganesh Kumar M, a resident of Doddathoguru, traced the origin of Electronics City to 1970, when the state govt established it to promote electronic industries. Spread over more than 900 acres now, the area was developed by the Karnataka State Electronics Development Corporation (Keonics), which handed over its management to ELCITA in 1997. However, the commission noted that governance of the township rests with ELCITA, a statutory body constituted under the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964, through a govt notification issued in March 2013.
The commission observed that ELCITA performs core municipal and governmental functions, including the provision of roads, water supply, sanitation, and the collection of property taxes.
State information commissioner Rudranna Harthikote ruled that ELCITA is a self-governing statutory authority exercising municipal powers, even though it does not have an elected body. Members of the authority are appointed by the govt, and senior officials from various departments serve on its board, indicating substantial govt control. The commission relied on judicial precedents, including Supreme Court rulings and decisions of the Madras high court, which consistently held that bodies performing public functions or receiving significant govt support fall under the RTI Act. It also referred to similar industrial township authorities, such as Noida, being treated as public authorities.
It ordered that the information sought by the appellant on Feb 15, 2025, be furnished within 10 days. Warning of penalties for non-compliance, the commission disposed of the case with a caution that future RTI applications must be answered within the stipulated time frame.

RTI Act now being strengthened: Rules need to be modified to prevent misuse : By Subhash Chandra Agrawal

Daily Pioneer: Article: Tuesday, 27 January 2026.
Ever since the first amendment in RTI Act was done ever since its implementation on October 12, 2005, some NGOs and opposition parties are crying that the RTI Act is diluted! But the amendment made in the year 2019 aimed to change the status and tenure of Information Commissioners, in no way affected users of the RTI Act.

Insertion of section 44(3) in “The Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023”, removing riders to section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, in fact, is necessary to preserve Parliamentary privilege and remove confusion through the term “public-interest”. It is perhaps for the first time that the Central Information Commission has the full strength of a Chief Information Commissioner and ten Information Commissioners sworn on December 15, 2025.
Otherwise also, the earlier two Commissioners went on disposing of the cases at a fast speed, with Vinod Kumar Tiwari having disposed of 12700 cases with quality judgements elaborately worded in a short span of just 24 months, while this figure does not include matters of Show-Cause notices and Non-Compliance matters. It is significant that he even heard some cases on different dates to ensure enough opportunity to respondent public-authorities to defend their case, like in his verdict dated January 16, 2025, in petition-number CIC/GNCTD/A/2024/108412 in the matter “Sanjeev Kumar versus Directorate of Health Services (GNCTD”. He even imposed a penalty on the PIO and awarded compensation to the petitioner, apart from making recommendations while highlighting malpractices in the working of private hospitals, with DHS being the mute spectator.
Even the Delhi High Court dismissed a writ-petition WPC 596/2026 against this verdict on the first day of hearing, i.e., January 16, 2026. Even the present Chief Information Commissioner Raj Kumar Goyal echoed likewise in his verdict dated January 16, 2026, observing that despite 20 years of implementation of the RTI Act, public information officers and first appellate authorities in DHS (GNCTD) were not alert to their legal responsibilities, terming it to be a serious issue.
At the same time, Vinod Kumar Tiwari praised such officers who respond to matters nicely not only while responding to RTI applications, but also while presenting their case before the Commission. An example is a decision dated November 17, 2025, in file-number CIC/DDATY/A/2024/114518 in the matter “Pawan Jindal versus Delhi Development Authority (DDA)” where he praised Rahul Gupta, PIO-cum-Executive Engineer (DDA) for his nicely presenting the case before the Commission. Such praise in a CIC verdict motivates others to do similar nice work to handle RTI matters. However, RTI rules (and not the RTI Act) need important modifications mainly to prevent misuse of the Act and minimising challenge to CIC verdicts in courts. Notification should be to declare all public-private-partnerships, sports bodies, cooperative societies, and other such bodies, public authorities under the RTI Act.
Land and Building Departments of the central and State Governments should study all cases of allotment of land or Government-accommodations at subsidised rates or lease, and declare all these as public authorities under the RTI Act. For the future, land or Government-accommodations should be provided at subsidised rates on pre-condition of beneficiaries coming under the purview of the RTI Act.
Offices like those of the President, Prime Minister, Governor, Lt Governor and Chief Minister must not act like “Post Offices” by transferring RTI applications under section 6(3) of the RTI Act to the concerned departments. These offices should entertain RTI applications pertaining to their respective offices only, and returning rest others to RTI applicants, advising applicants to file RTI applications directly to the concerned departments.
Considering the vast participation of public money in private sector banks, all private sector banks must be under the purview of the RTI Act. Already, all employees up to the highest post of CMD are public servants according to the Banking Regulation Act. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had to impose restrictions on the withdrawal of money for some time on a prominent private sector bank.
Former CMD of another prominent private sector Bank is under arrest for serious charges of misappropriation of public-money in the Bank. Inspection Reports of private banks, revealed under the RTI Act by the RBI, reveal gross misuse of public money by top management. Another private sector bank is in notoriety for a large number of Non-Performing Assets (NPAs).
Heavy fluctuation in share prices of certain private sector banks tends to doubt regarding the safety of public money in private sector banks. Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (RBIsubsidiary) has to pay a maximum of rupees five lakhs from state-funds to each depositor of the bank, including those in the private sector, which collapses due to massive irregularities, which is public funding to declare private sector banks as “public authorities” under section 2(h) of the RTI Act.
Sections 27 and 28 of the RTI Act give power to Competent Authorities and state-Governments to draft their own rules, which include fixing of RTI fees.
Several Competent Authorities and states misused their power by having RTI fees as high as rupees 500. However, the Supreme Court in its verdict dated March 20, 2018, imposed a capping of rupees fifty to be maximum RTI fees.
RTI-fees should be uniformly rupees 50, inclusive of copying charges for the first twenty copied pages. Making basic RTI-fees at rupees fifty will largely prevent misuse of the RTI Act. There must not be any fees for filing First or Second Appeals.
Handling the cost of a postal-order of value rupees ten costs the postal department about rupees fifty, with the cost of handling of postal-orders by a public-authority and bank-clearing even extra.
The Postal Department should issue special RTI stamps (like earlier stamps for licence fees of radios and TV sets) in denominations of rupees 2, 10 and 50, which will save crores of rupees annually to public-exchequers in using postal orders as a mode of payment of RTI fees.  These RTI stamps should be available at all post offices and counters of public-authorities and other convenient sale points.
Post-free RTI-applications addressed to central public-authorities should be accepted at all about 160000 post offices rather than just about 4500 post offices presently. It is not difficult because every post-office however small it may be, daily sends a post-bag to the Head Post Office with registered post, cash and unsold revenue-articles. This post-bag can carry post-free RTI-applications received at the post office.
Decision dated November  2, 2012 by Punjab & Haryana High Court in the matter “Fruit and Vegetable Union versus Unknown” (CWP 4787 of 2011) requiring ID proof compulsorily with every RTI application, First Appeal and petitions filed with Information Commissions should be compulsorily adopted throughout the country Police-enquiry conducted at behest of some Indian missions abroad established that a petitioner approached Central Information Commission with name and address both of which did not exist.
RTI-responses and orders of First Appellate Authorities should be auto-emailed rather than RTI-applicants required to search portals for viewing of RTI-responses and orders by First Appellate Authorities.
Websites designed by the National Informatics Centre (NIC) for central public authorities should be mandatorily for all states. This has become necessary for state like Odisha, which has made online filing of RTI-applications a mockery when it is compulsory to download an online-filled RTI-application, and then send it by post to the concerned department.
Delhi High Court in its order dated August 8, 2018, in WPC 8278 of 2018 in the matter “Anil Dutt Sharma versus Government of NCT Delhi and others” mentioned This Court is of the prima facie view that the Right-To-Information Act, 2005 would now override the Delhi Right To Information Act, 2001.
The DRTI Act has lost all with the implementation of the RTI Act 2005. Very few applications are filed under the DRTI Act. All such acts legislated by individual states, before the RTI Act 2005 came into existence, must be repealed.
(The writer is an RTI consultant holding the Guinness World record for most letters published in newspapers; views are personal)

RTI के दुरुपयोग पर बड़ा एक्शन, राज्य सूचना आयोग ने 1007 अपीलें एक साथ खारिज कीं : अपूर्वा नायक

Navbharat: Maharashtra: Monday, January 26, 2026.
आरटीआई कानून के दुरुपयोग का बड़ा मामला सामने आया है। राज्य सूचना आयोग की नाशिक खंडपीठ ने एक RTI कार्यकर्ता की 1007 द्वितीय अपीलें खारिज कर दीं और कानूनी कार्रवाई की चेतावनी दी।

सूचना का अधिकार कानून के दुरुपयोग का एक गंभीर मामला सामने आया है। राज्य सूचना आयोग की नाशिक खंडपीठ ने एक आरटीआई कार्यकर्ता की एक साथ 1007 अपीलें खारिज करते हुए इस प्रवृत्ति पर बड़ा प्रहार किया है।
राज्य सूचना आयोग द्वारा एक साथ इतनी द्वितीय अपीलें खारिज करना यह पहला मौका है। आयोग ने अपीलें खारिज करते हुए कानूनी कार्रवाई पर विचार करने की चेतावनी भी दी है। बीड के वकील केशव निंबालकर ने राज्य सूचना आयोग की नाशिक खंडपीठ के समक्ष हजारों की संख्या में द्वितीय अपीले दायर की थीं।
निंबालकर ने तीन वर्षों के कार्यकाल में अहमदनगर, नाशिक, धुले, जलगांव और नंदुरबार जिलों के लगभग सभी तहसीलों से लेकर जिला स्तर के सरकारी कार्यालयों में आरटीआई के तहत आवेदन डालकर विभिन्न प्रकार की सूचनाएं मांगी थीं।
मांगी गई सूचनाएं पुरानी और विस्तृत स्वरूप की थीं। इसके अलावा एक ही सूचना के लिए एक से अधिक बार अलग-अलग आवेदन दायर किए गए। जब जनसूचना अधिकारी से सूचना नहीं मिली, तो निंबालकर ने राज्य सूचना आयोग में द्वितीय अपील दायर कर दी।
एक ही प्रकार की सूचना के लिए सैकड़ों आवेदन:

• राज्य सूचना आयुक्त भूपेंद्र गुरव के समक्ष हाल ही में इन अपीलों की सुनवाई हुई। सुनवाई में पत्ता चला कि एक ही प्रकार की सूचना के लिए सैकड़ों आवेदन किए गए, जिससे कर्मचारियों का काफी समय बर्बाद हुआ।
  
• कुछ सूचनाएं तैयार थी, लेकिन शुल्क भरकर उन्हें लेने के बजाय निंबालकर ने उन्हें नहीं लिया और सीधे आयोग में अपील दायर कर दी। आयोग ने इसे व्यवस्था के दुरुपयोग के रूप में देखते हुए गंभीर संज्ञान लिया। आयोग ने कहा कि भविष्य में ऐसा कोई मामला सामने आने पर गंभीर कार्रवाई की जाएगी।
  
• वरिष्ठ समाजसेवी अन्ना हजारे द्वारा लाए गए इस कानून का दुधारी तलवार की तरह इस्तेमाल हो रहा है, जिससे इसमे सुधार की आवश्यकता महसूस की जा रही है।

RTI Commission upholds MIIF’s decision to defer publication of 2024 Financial Statements

Business & Financial Times: Ghana: Monday, January 26, 2026.
The Right to Information (RTI) Commission has upheld the decision of the Minerals Income Investment Fund (“MIIF” or “the Fund”) to defer the disclosure of its 2024 financial statements, granting the Fund a statutory period of 90 days to complete the process.

It will be recalled that a former Board Member of the Fund, had petitioned MIIF to publish its 2024 financial report. He further escalated the matter to the RTI Commission, seeking to compel the Fund to disclose the information and sharing it on various print and social media platforms.
However, in a letter dated January 12, 2026, MIIF maintained its stance and informed the Commission that some issues had been identified during the initial audit process of the 2024 financial statements.
The Fund insisted that releasing the report at that stage could result in the dissemination of incomplete, inaccurate, or potentially misleading information to the public.
However, in a response letter addressed to the Fund, the commission stated that: “The Commission has considered the matter and concurs with the Minerals Income Investment Fund’s (MIIF) position that disclosure of the requested information at this stage would be premature and may result in the dissemination of incomplete, inaccurate, or potentially misleading information.”
“Accordingly, the Commission agrees with the decision of MIIF to exercise its right to defer access in accordance with section 22 of the Right to Information Act, 2019 (Act 989).”
Section 22 of the Act permits a public institution to defer access to information where the information is required to be published within 90 days of the request or where it has been prepared for submission but is yet to be finalised or submitted.
The law further requires the institution to notify the applicant of the reasons for the deferment and the likely period within which the information will be made available.
In its determination, the Commission granted MIIF a deferment period of three months. It further indicated that should the Fund fail to furnish the requested information after the expiration of the deferment period, the Commission would take the necessary steps to determine the matter.
While the decision underscores the balance between the public’s right to information, it also explicitly recognises the responsibility of public institutions such as MIIF to ensure that information released into the public domain is accurate, complete, and not misleading, a position MIIF has held in the interest of the public and investors.
MIIF is mandated under the Minerals Income Investment Fund Act, 2018 (Act 978), as amended, to manage and invest Ghana’s mineral royalties in a transparent, accountable, and sustainable manner for the benefit of present and future generations, a position the Fund has not shied away from in the public interest.
The Fund has consistently maintained that it remained committed to transparency and will publish its audited financial statements once all audit processes are duly concluded. This position has, however, not gone down well with the former board member who has rather taken to the tabloids and social media to spread falsehoods on the matter to paint the head of the Fund in bad light.
There have also been numerous misguided social media commentaries, and fabrications in select tabloids deliberately calculated to smear the CEO of MIIF just because she maintained her stance in ensuring accountability and transparency to ensure that what is finally published reflects the actual situation on the ground so that the public and investors are not misinformed.
The Commission, expressed confidence in MIIF’s cooperation and adherence to the timelines outlined in the decision.

Rights forum urges key amendments to RTI act as ordinance gets advisory council nod

The Business Standard: Bangladesh: Monday, January 26, 2026.
More than 15 years after the enactment of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2009, its promise remains only partially fulfilled, with low public awareness and prolonged delays in accessing information continuing to undermine its effectiveness, the Right to Information (RTI) Forum has said.

In a statement issued by its convenor Shaheen Anam today (25 January), the Forum said structural weaknesses and procedural bottlenecks have limited the act's impact, making amendments essential to expand its use and ensure meaningful access to information.
As the government moves forward with the amendment process, the Forum has urged the adviser to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to ensure that several urgent recommendations are incorporated into the ordinance.
Among the key proposals is expanding the definition of "information" to explicitly include note sheets, arguing that these documents are critical for understanding who made decisions, how they were taken, and the roles played by individual officials. The Forum said note sheets should be included under Section 2(f) of the Act.
The Forum has also called for broadening the scope of authorities covered by the law. It proposed bringing government, autonomous and local government bodies explicitly within the act's ambit, alongside statutory institutions. In addition, it recommended extending the law to private entities that perform government work under contract, licence, permit or approval, as well as political parties registered with the Election Commission.
On institutional reform, the Forum suggested formally adding "Bangladesh" to the name of the Information Commission under Section 11(1) and introducing a new provision requiring that vacancies in the posts of Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioners be filled within a maximum of 45 days.
To strengthen the independence of the commission, the Forum proposed aligning the rank, remuneration and benefits of the chief information commissioner and information commissioners with those of judges of the Appellate Division and the High Court Division, in line with other constitutional bodies such as the National Human Rights Commission.
The Forum also recommended amending the penalty provisions under Section 27 to enhance accountability, particularly in cases where responsible or appellate officers refuse to accept information requests or appeals without reasonable cause.
While welcoming the move to amend the law through an ordinance, the Forum said a comprehensive amendment incorporating the remaining proposals is necessary to ensure effective implementation of the RTI Act and to achieve its original objective of guaranteeing citizens' right to information.

Uttarakhand MPs divert Rs 1.28 crore of constituency funds to other states, RTI reveals :Narendra Sethi

New Indian Express: Uttarakhand: Monday, January 26, 2026.
A startling revelation under the Right to Information (RTI) Act has exposed that several MPs from Uttarakhand are allocating significant portions of their Constituency Development Funds (CDF) to projects in neighboring states like Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, even as remote areas within Uttarakhand continue to grapple with severe infrastructure deficits, including basic amenities like clean water.

Documents obtained via RTI show that MPs have sanctioned approximately Rs 1.28 crore for works such as installing tube wells, constructing community halls, and improving drainage systems in other states.
This practice has ignited sharp criticism from the opposition Congress, which accuses the ruling party of prioritising sectarian politics over regional development.
The data highlights that Tehri Garhwal MP, Mala Rajya Lakshmi Shah, leads the list in allocating funds outside the state. She has reportedly focused substantial aid on the Agra district in Uttar Pradesh, sanctioning a total of Rs 1 crore for the financial year 2024–25 for projects including footpaths, pedestrian ways, and drinking water schemes.
Rajya Sabha MP Naresh Bansal also appears on the list, having allocated Rs 25 lakh for school, college, and community building projects in Haryana.
Even funds sanctioned years ago continue to be utilised elsewhere. Former Rajya Sabha MP Tarun Vijay’s allocation from his 2010–2016 tenure, sanctioned as late as December 10, 2025, saw Rs 3 lakh approved for drainage and road works in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh.
Almora MP Ajay Tamta also directed funds toward a neighboring district, approving Rs 5 lakh for constructing rooms and halls in schools and colleges in Nainital, despite the broader state needs.
This ability to spend CDF outside the constituency stems from recent amendments to the guidelines. A letter from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation dated August 13, 2024, revised the rules, now allowing MPs to recommend development works anywhere in the country, subject to a maximum limit of Rs 50 lakh per financial year.
Defending the expenditure, Tehri MP Mala Rajya Lakshmi Shah stated that the people of Uttarakhand reside across the nation.
“Some individuals approached me with genuine needs, and based on that, certain works were approved,” Shah commented. “The development of Tehri remains my primary focus, and the majority of my fund is spent here.”
However, the opposition has slammed this allocation strategy amidst the state’s ongoing challenges with migration, fueled by a lack of development.
Garima Mahara Dasouni, Chief Spokesperson of the Congress Party, launched a scathing attack, stating, “While Members of Parliament may cite technical discretion in the use of Constituency Development Funds, it is nothing short of a betrayal of Uttarakhand to ignore the large-scale migration from its hill regions driven by neglect, unemployment, and lack of basic infrastructure - only to divert public funds to projects outside the state.”
She further added, “What is even more disturbing is the growing pattern of these funds being channelled towards private institutions, raising serious questions about intent, transparency, and possible misuse of public money. This selective generosity towards private entities reeks of impropriety and demands immediate scrutiny.”
Dasouni asserted, “The BJP has completely abandoned the people of Uttarakhand. Instead of focusing on roads, healthcare, education, and employment in the hills, the party is obsessed with the politics of temples, mosques, and shrines. Symbolism has replaced substance, and propaganda has replaced governance.”

Criminal action if records deliberately misplaced, orders Punjab info panel

Times of India: Chandigarh: Sunday, January 25, 2026.
Expressing strong displeasure over officials dragging their feet in providing information, the Punjab State Information Commission has directed departmental proceedings to be initiated if official records are missing, and criminal action be taken if records are intentionally misplaced.

The directions were issued by state information commissioner Dr Bhupinder Batth while hearing an appeal filed by a Nawanshahr resident, who sought information from the block development and panchayat officer (BDPO), Nawanshahr block, which was pending since Sept 28, 2023.
During the previous hearing, the BDPO was directed to appear personally before the commission. However, the appellant submitted that complete information was still not provided. At the last hearing, the panchayat secretary appeared on behalf of the respondent and sought additional time.
During the course of the hearing, the appellant informed the commission that he inspected records as directed, but complete information was not provided. He said copies of bills sought through his RTI application were not supplied. The respondent stated that the copies of bills demanded by the appellant were not available in official records, adding that the bills were not handed over by the previous panchayat secretary.
On perusal of the case file, the commission noted the information sought by the appellant remained incomplete. Despite clear directions during the earlier hearing, the BDPO failed to appear and did not file any reply.
The commission observed complete negligence and laxity on the part of the public authority in dealing with the RTI application. It noted such conduct reflected disregard for the Right to Information Act, 2005, which was enacted to ensure transparency and effective public access to information.
Describing the respondent's approach as "casual and callous", the commission, while expressing its displeasure, said the conduct of the respondent was against the spirit of RTI Act, and such conduct by a govt servant deserved strong condemnation.
It added such employees needed to be taught a good lesson so that the rest of the workforce received the right message to discharge their duties under the RTI Act, ensuring complete transparency and due accountability in the governance of public authorities.
However, in the interest of justice, the commission granted one last opportunity to BDPO, Nawanshahr, to appear personally at the next hearing along with the complete information or to furnish an affidavit explaining the status of the records. "If the record is missing, departmental proceedings need to be held, and if it is intentionally misplaced, criminal action is to be taken," the order reads. Both parties were directed to appear in person at the next hearing scheduled for April 28, 2026, failing which the matter will be decided on merit, ex parte.

UP Information Commission rejects RTI plea for hospital CCTV footage

Hindustan Times: Lucknow: Sunday, January 25, 2026.
“A hospital is a public health institution where hundreds of patients, their relatives, medical professionals and staff move around every day. CCTV footage does not capture only the appellant but also records the activities of many other individuals. This concerns their privacy, and unless there is a justified reason or larger public interest, the RTI Act does not permit the violation of anyone’s privacy,” the information commissioner observed.

In a ruling aimed at safeguarding patient privacy, the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission has held that CCTV footage from hospitals cannot be shared with individuals merely on request under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, unless it forms part of a police investigation or is sought under a court order.
Information commissioner Mohammad Nadeem passed the order on January 21 while hearing an appeal filed by Kulwant Singh, who had sought CCTV footage from a hospital in Bijnor district.
The information commissioner emphasised that hospitals are sensitive public health spaces where the privacy of patients, their attendants, doctors and staff must be protected.
“A hospital is a public health institution where hundreds of patients, their relatives, medical professionals and staff move around every day. CCTV footage does not capture only the appellant but also records the activities of many other individuals. This concerns their privacy, and unless there is a justified reason or larger public interest, the RTI Act does not permit the violation of anyone’s privacy,” he observed.
He further noted that allowing one person access to hospital CCTV footage to substantiate a personal complaint could compromise the privacy of numerous unrelated individuals.
“We cannot give one individual the right to intrude into the privacy of hundreds of others simply to support his grievance,” the order stated.
The commission clarified that hospital CCTV footage may be disclosed only when it is part of a police investigation or when directed by a competent court. Beyond these circumstances, disclosure can be considered only if it can be ensured that no third party’s privacy is affected a condition the commission said would be rare in hospital settings.
In the case before the commission, the appellant had alleged irregularities related to medical documentation. The information commissioner said that even if such allegations were true, the appropriate forums for examination would be a police investigation, a court of law or departmental disciplinary proceedings.
“The RTI Act cannot be turned into a substitute for investigation or trial,” the order said.

Can't Use RTI To Seek Any Material Not Linked To Investigation: Official

NDTV: Lucknow: Sunday, January 25, 2026.
The RTI Act, he said, cannot be treated as a substitute for investigation or trial.

The Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission has ruled that CCTV footage can be provided only if it forms part of a court order or a police probe, noting that the RTI Act can not be treated as a substitute for investigation or trial.
The ruling was given by a bench headed by State Information Commissioner (SIC) Mohammad Nadeem, while hearing a plea under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking CCTV footage from a hospital in the Bijnor district.
In his order, the information commissioner said, "Unless the CCTV footage of a hospital premises is part of a police investigation or a judicial order, it cannot be made available to any individual merely on demand." Hearing an appeal filed by Kulwant Singh, the SIC observed that even if allegations related to fake medical practices are assumed to be true, their examination should be carried out through a police investigation, a competent court or departmental disciplinary proceedings.
The RTI Act, he said, cannot be treated as a substitute for investigation or trial.
He noted that hospitals are public health institutions where hundreds of patients, their attendants, doctors and staff move daily.
According to an official statement, Nadeem said CCTV footage records not only the activities of the appellant but also those of many other patients and individuals, making it an issue directly linked to their privacy.
"Unless there is a valid reason or larger public interest, the RTI law does not permit violation of anyone's privacy. We cannot grant one person the right to intrude into the privacy of hundreds of others to substantiate his complaint," he said.
The SIC further said, apart from cases where footage is part of a police investigation or produced under a court order, directing its disclosure in any other situation can be considered only when it does not affect the privacy of others.
He added that demands for hospital CCTV footage to substantiate routine personal complaints cannot be accepted.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Twenty Years of RTI: Transparency at a Crossroads - By Praveen Kumar

TMV: Article: Sunday, January 25, 2026.

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, which came into force on October 12, 2005, marked a watershed moment in India’s democratic journey. For the first time, citizens were legally empowered to demand information from the government, transforming transparency from a moral appeal into a justiciable right. Over two decades, the law has exposed corruption, improved accountability, and strengthened citizen participation. Yet, the journey has not been without challenges, and the promise of RTI is increasingly threatened by systemic delays, vacancies, and bureaucratic inertia.
Since its inception, millions of RTI applications have been filed across India. According to data compiled from the Central Information Commission (CIC) and various State Information Commissions (SICs), more than 5.5 lakh cases remain pending, even as countless others have been resolved. The CIC alone has around 1.7 lakh pending cases, while state commissions collectively account for over 3.8 lakh cases , reflecting widespread delays across nearly all states and union territories. The highest pendency is reported in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, and Tamil Nadu, while smaller states and union territories also struggle with significant backlogs.
Departments with the most RTI cases typically include those dealing with public services, regulatory compliance, and health, such as municipal authorities, health departments, revenue and land records offices, and social welfare departments . The Delhi Health Department, for instance, came under recent scrutiny when information regarding a private hospital was provided to a citizen only eight months after the RTI request, far beyond the statutory 30-day period. The CIC described the delay as “inordinate” and a “serious issue”, issuing a show-cause notice to the responsible Public Information Officer (PIO).
While the law has been transformative, these delays undermine its purpose. Experts attribute the pendency to vacant commissioner posts, limited staffing, and procedural lapses by PIOs and First Appellate Authorities. Recent amendments in 2019, altering tenure and service conditions for Information Commissioners, have further weakened the institutional independence of commissions , affecting their ability to dispose of cases in a timely manner.
Citizens seeking to exercise their right to information can file requests either online or offline. Online applications are accepted through the official RTI portal (https://rtionline.gov.in), where applicants can register, submit requests, pay a nominal fee, and track the status of their applications. Offline applications can be submitted directly to the PIO of the concerned department, with the required fee paid via postal order or cash. If a response is not received within 30 days or is unsatisfactory, citizens may file a first appeal with the department’s First Appellate Authority. Failure to resolve the matter may lead to a second appeal with the CIC or the respective SIC, which has the power to summon hearings and impose penalties of up to ₹25,000 for non-compliance.
Despite the challenges, the RTI Act remains one of India’s most powerful tools for citizen-led accountability, with landmark disclosures in corruption, land allotment, welfare benefits, and public service delivery highlighting its transformative impact. Experts recommend a combination of proactive disclosure by departments, timely appointments of commissioners, enhanced training of PIOs, and strict enforcement of penalties to restore the law’s effectiveness.
As India commemorates 20 years of the RTI Act , the substantial backlog across more than 30 states and union territories serves as a stark reminder that the promise of transparency is only meaningful if enforced. Citizens are urged to make informed use of RTI, following statutory procedures diligently, while the government must ensure that institutional mechanisms function efficiently. The law, after all, is only as strong as its implementation, and the health of Indian democracy depends on a timely, accountable, and transparent government.