• Anyone may submit an RTI request for information to the PIO, and each authority covered by the RTI Act is required to appoint a Public Information Officer (PIO). The PIO is required by the Act to disclose information to Indian citizens who request it.
• Let’s say the information you’re looking for is from another government agency (in whole or part). In that scenario, the PIO must transfer the relevant elements of the request within five working days to the PIO of the relevant authority.
• The Central Information Commission was founded under the Right to Information Act of 2005. The CIC has jurisdiction over all Central Public Authorities. The Commission’s powers and functions are broadly connected to adjudication in the second appeal for information; recordkeeping direction, suo moto disclosures, receiving and investigating a complaint on inability to file RTI, and so on.
• The State Information Commission is established by a Gazette announcement issued by the respective state governments. One State Chief Information Commissioner (SCIC) and no more than 10 State Information Commissioners are appointed by the Governor (SIC).

The Limits for Replying the Request:

The Act specifies different time limits for replying to the information requests:

• When a request for information is sent to the PIO (Public Information Officer), the response must be received within 30 days.
• The response to a request directed to the Assistant Public Information Officer (APIO) must be provided within 35 days of receipt.
• If the PIO forwards the request to another public authority, the public authority has 30 days to respond. However, this time is calculated from the day the transferee authority’s PIO gets it.
• When the information concerns corruption and human rights violations by scheduled Security agencies (those mentioned in the Second Schedule), it must be disclosed within 45 days, but only with the Central Information Commission’s prior consent. However, when a person’s life or liberty is at stake, the PIO must respond within 48 hours of receiving the request.
• It is considered a refusal if the information is not submitted within the dates mentioned above and whether or not there are reasons for the refusal, it can be used as a basis for an appeal or complaint. Furthermore, information that is not provided within the stated time limits must be made available without charge.

Information Exclusions under the RTI Act:

Various types of information are exempt from disclosure under Section 8 of the Act:

• Information that, if revealed, could jeopardise the sovereignty, integrity, or security “strategic, scientific or economic” interests and foreign relations of India.
• When any court specifically forbids the publication of any information.
• Information that would jeopardise Parliament’s/State Legislature’s privilege if disclosed.
• Confidential commercial information, trade secrets, patents, or intellectual property that, if released, could harm a third party.
• The information that a person in a fiduciary relationship has access to.
• Confidential information obtained while interacting with a foreign government; information that if revealed would endanger the life of any person or reveal the source of confidential information or assistance provided for law enforcement or security objectives.
• Information that would obstruct the investigation, apprehending, and prosecuting of criminals.
• Confidential files include records of Council of Ministers, Secretaries, and other officers’ deliberations.
• Personal information that has no bearing on public policy and whose revelation could jeopardise an individual’s right to privacy.
• A public body may provide access to information despite any of the aforementioned exclusions if the public interest in exposing the information outweighs the harm to the protected interests. This does not apply, however, to the revealing of “trade or commercial secrets that are legally protected.”

In Rakesh Sanghi v. International Advanced Centre for Powder Metallurgy & New Materials,

Hyderabad case, the CIC held that the citizen’s right to seek information is not absolute but is conditioned by the Government’s right to invoke exemptions, wherever such exemption is applicable.