Appeal, Orders in Appeal under RTI Act 2005

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 provides for two types of appeals in case of dissatisfaction with a decision made by a Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) or a First Appellate Authority (FAA):

The appeal process falls under section 19 of the Act and envisages a two-step process: firstly, an appeal to the Appellate Authority and secondly, an appeal to one of the newly established Information Commissions. The appeals process is supposed to be a quicker, cheaper way of enabling requesters to get a decision reviewed, than going to the courts. Section 19(6) of the RTI Act provides that the first Appellate Authority should dispose – of the appeal within thirty days of the receipt of the appeal.

Deciding appeals under the RTI is a quasi-judicial function. Therefore, the appellate authority must see to it that justice is not only done but should also appear to have been done. To do so, the order passed by the appellate authority should be a speaking order giving justification for the decision arrived at.

First Appeal to the Appellate Authority

An officer above the rank of Public Information Officer (PIO) has been designated as an Appellate Authority to hear appeals in every office. The original decision or rejection notice the applicant receives from the PIO should include contact details for the relevant Appellate Authority so that you know who you can go to get the decision reviewed. If the notice is deficient, he may want to check the website of the public authority or contact the PIO directly and ask for the Appellate Authority’s details.

The applicant can appeal to the Appellate Authority if:

(a) He/ She is aggrieved by the decision made;

(b) If no decision was made within the proper time limits;

(c) He or She is a third party (A third party is a person other than the citizen making the request, and includes a public authority), consulted during the application process, and he or she is unhappy with the decision made by the PIO.

The applicant needs to send your appeal to the Appellate Authority in writing within 30 days from the date on which you received the decision (or you should have received a decision) from the PIO. However, if he/she misses that deadline but the Appellate Authority feels that he/she has been prevented from appealing within this time limit for justifiable reasons, he/she the authority may allow the applicant to submit an appeal even after the 30 days have expired. The Central Act requires that the internal Appellate Authority dispose- of the appeal within 30 days or 45 days if an extension is necessary.

Some State Governments have prescribed forms for filing appeals. You should check the Rules in your particular State to see what you will need to do or you can check directly with the Appellate Authority. You can file appeals directly by handing them over in person or send them by post/courier. Additionally, you can also send the appeal to the APIO in the relevant public authority who then must forward it to the relevant Appellate Authority.

The Central Act does not permit any fee to be levied on an applicant for filing an appeal to an Appellate Authority (or the Information Commission). Unfortunately, some State Governments, like Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, have prescribed Rules that impose an appeal fee. It is not legal to impose an appeal fee or reject an appeal because of non-payment. If your State Government has prescribed an appeal fee, you can either move the relevant Information Commission or your High Court to consider the matter or attempt to bring up the issue before your State Legislative Assembly for debate.

The Appellate Authority must offer you an opportunity to be heard before a decision on your appeal is reached. The Central Act specifies that in any appeal, it is the responsibility of the body denying the request to prove that the denial was justified. This means that it is the PIO who needs to prove to the Appellate Authority that they made the right decision.

Second Appeal to the Infomation Commission

If the applicant is unhappy or dissatisfied with the decision of the Appellate Authority, the Central Act provides you with the option of filing a second appeal with the newly constituted Information Commissions at the Centre or the States. A second appeal against a decision of an Appellate Authority to the Information Commission must be made within 90 days from the date on which the decision should have been made or from the date a decision was received. However, the Information Commission has the discretion to allow appeals after this period has expired.

In matters relating to Central Government public authorities, you need to send your appeal to the Central Information Commission. For matters relating to State Government public authorities, you will need to send your appeal to the concerned State Information Commission. Appeals against Panchayats will be sent to the relevant State Information Commission.

The Central Government and some State Governments have issued Rules about what information needs to be included in an appeal to the Information Commissions. In addition to basic information about your application and how it was processed, your appeal should attach supporting documents, including self-attested copies of the orders/decision notice against which the appeal is being made; and copies of any additional documents you are relying upon which are referred to in your appeal.

The Central and State Information Commissions manage appeals by procedures prescribed under the relevant Appeal Rules. Commissions have the power to take oral or written evidence on oath/affidavit; inspect documents or copies; hear and receive affidavits from the PIO against whom the appeal has been made and/or the Appellate Authority who has decided the first appeal; and to hear from you. If the decision of a PIO or Appellate Authority relates to a third party, then that third party also has the right to be heard by the Information Commission before it makes a decision.

Appeals proceedings at the Information Commissions are not meant to be formal, like a court proceeding. It should not be necessary to hire a lawyer to plead your case before the Information Commission. Proceedings are meant to be informal and non-confrontational. Although the Commission does have the powers of a civil court under the Central Act, nonetheless, the Commission is not supposed to operate like a court. If you feel uncomfortable during an appeals or complaints proceeding you should inform the Information Commission and you should be able to seek assistance from someone during your hearing. In any case, the Information Commission is an openness champion, and the Commissioners and their staff should be alert to ensure that arguments in favour of disclosure are not overlooked simply because you did not use a lawyer.

The Central Act does not prescribe a time limit for the Information Commission to decide on an appeal and no time limit has yet been included in any of the Appeal Rules which have been prescribed. However, best practice would support a deadline of 30-45 days to dispose of any appeal just like the Appellate Authorities.

If an Information Commission decides that your appeal was justified, the Commission will need to give you a written decision. The Information Commission has broad and binding powers to:

(a) Order the public authority to take concrete steps towards meeting its duties under the Act, for example, by providing access to the information you requested, by ordering information be provided in a different form, or by reducing the amount of fees you need to pay;

(b) Order the public authority to compensate you for any loss you may have suffered in the process;

(c) Impose penalties on the PIO or any other official who failed in their duties under the Act.

If the Information Commission decides that your case is groundless, it will reject your appeal. In either case, the Commission must give notice of its decision to you and the public authority, which should include any right of appeal.

Instead of making an appeal to the Appellate Authority and then the Information Commission, you also have the option of approaching the Information Commission directly and submitting a complaint under section 18(1) of the Act if you are not satisfied with the decision of a PIO or if you think a public authority is failing to comply with its information duties under the Act. This is a particularly useful route if you wish to immediately seek a penalty for the PIO or compensation for yourself. The Appellate Authority does not have the power to order either of these, but Information Commissions do. By approaching the Information Commission directly you can bypass the Appellate Authority, although the lack of time limit for the Information Commission to give its decision is one drawback to this procedure. The Appellate Authority has to give its decision within a maximum of 45 days. It is for you to decide which method is best in your case carefully.