B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 8 Right to Information 2017 Jun Question Paper with Solutions

For full marks, cover: the two halves of the statement (empowering citizens; the shift from subjects to citizens (Raj Narain); democratic governance "in its true colour"); what "true colour" means: democracy between elections, not only at them; empowerment through rights, not favours: the right, no reasons, low cost, deadlines, appeals, complaints and personal penalties (sections 3, 6(2), 7, 18 to 20); democratic governance through five qualities, each with the Act's tool and a decided case: openness (section 4; S.P. Gupta), accountability for public money (Chander Shekhar v. BSNL, Kuldeep Singh Yadav), equality before power (Subhash Chandra Agarwal), participation (sections 4(1)(c), 4(1)(d)), clean politics (Association for Democratic Reforms 2024); the qualifications: exemptions, privacy since 2025, weak enforcement (Anjali Bhardwaj), unprotected users; a balanced verdict.

Empowerment: rights, not favours

Before 2005, a citizen who wanted a government record had to request it as a favour, and officers could refuse without reason. The Act changed the relationship in six ways.

1. A legal right. "All citizens shall have the right to information" (section 3).
2. No questions asked. The applicant need give no reason (section 6(2)).
3. Low cost. Ten rupees, and nothing for those below the poverty line (section 7(5)).
4. Fixed deadlines. Thirty days, or forty-eight hours where life or liberty is at stake (section 7(1)); silence counts as refusal (section 7(2)).
5. Independent remedies. Appeals and complaints to Information Commissions (sections 18 and 19).
6. Personal liability of officers. A PIO who refuses or delays without cause pays a penalty from his own pocket (section 20).

These features shift power from the officer to the citizen. The citizen no longer asks; he demands, and the State must answer.

2. Accountability for public money. Democratic governments spend the people's money and must account for it. In Chander Shekhar v. BSNL (CIC/AD/A/2009/001366, 10 November 2009), an applicant sought the bid values and item-wise quotes in a large BSNL tender after the bids were opened. BSNL pleaded commercial confidence under a non-disclosure agreement. The Central Information Commission held that once bids are opened and evaluated, the information is public. A public activity using public money cannot be kept secret. In Kuldeep Singh Yadav v. Irrigation and Flood Control Department (CIC/SG/A/2009/001385/4113, 14 July 2009), a citizen sought the works, budgets and contractors of a department in his constituency. The Commission directed the department to give the details of a road identified at the hearing, or to admit it had not built it. Citizens can now check whether the roads they paid for exist.

3. Equality before power. In a true democracy no office is above accountability. In Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal (13 November 2019), the Supreme Court's own PIO resisted a citizen's request about judges' asset declarations. A Constitution Bench held that the Chief Justice's office is part of a public authority. The fact of declarations had to be disclosed. Even the highest court answered a citizen's question under the Act.

2. The file notings show where her papers have lain untouched, and for how long.
3. The officer concerned now knows that his delay is on record and may be examined by the Information Commission.

Often the pension is sanctioned before the reply is even sent, because the office knows its delay will be seen. The widow did not need a lawyer, a court or a political patron. She needed only a right, a form and a deadline. This is empowerment in practice. The poorest citizen gains the power to make an office account for its inaction, which is democratic governance at its most direct.

Qualifications

The statement is true, but not without limits.

1. Exemptions. Section 8 protects security, privacy, commercial secrets and investigations. Some information that citizens want will rightly remain closed.
2. Privacy since 2025. Section 8(1)(j), as substituted from 13 November 2025, exempts "information which relates to personal information". Critics fear officials will use it to shield public servants.

Conclusion. The RTI Act empowers citizens by turning access to information into an enforceable right. It is cheap, needs no reasons, has fixed deadlines and independent remedies, and makes officers personally liable. It serves democratic governance in its true colour by making government open (S.P. Gupta) and accountable for public money (Chander Shekhar, Kuldeep Singh Yadav). It brings every office within reach (Subhash Chandra Agarwal), invites participation and opens political funding (Association for Democratic Reforms). Exemptions, the 2025 privacy change, vacancies and threats to users qualify the claim, but do not defeat it.