Section 20 RTI Act: Penalties

Right to Information Act, 2005

Section 20 RTI Act at a Glance

Section 20 RTI Act requires an Information Commission to impose a civil penalty of ₹250 per day, up to ₹25,000, on a Public Information Officer who defaults without reasonable cause. For persistent default, the Commission must recommend disciplinary action.

Section 20 RTI Act Bare Act Text

20. Penalties.
(1)Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed twenty-five thousand rupees:
Provided that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on him:
Provided further that the burden of proving that he acted reasonably and diligently shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be.
(2) Where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has, without any reasonable cause and persistently, failed to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it shall recommend for disciplinary action against the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, under the service rules applicable to him.

Section 20 RTI Act in Simple Words

Section 20 RTI Act sets out the monetary penalty and disciplinary recommendation that apply when a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer fails to carry out duties under the RTI Act. Under Section 20(1) RTI Act, when the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission decides a complaint or an appeal (such as an appeal under Section 19 RTI Act), the Commission examines whether the officer acted without any reasonable cause. Six defaults trigger a penalty: refusing to receive an application for information, failing to furnish information within the time limit in Section 7(1) RTI Act (30 days from receipt, or 48 hours where the request concerns a person's life or liberty), malafidely denying a request, knowingly giving incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information, destroying information that was the subject of the request, or obstructing the furnishing of information in any manner.

Where the Information Commission forms the opinion that one of these defaults occurred without reasonable cause, Section 20(1) RTI Act requires the Commission to impose a penalty of ₹250 for each day until the application is received or the information is furnished. The total penalty cannot exceed ₹25,000. This is a civil penalty imposed on the Public Information Officer by the Information Commission, not imprisonment and not a fine imposed by a criminal court.

Two provisos to Section 20(1) RTI Act govern how the penalty is decided. Under the first proviso, the Information Commission must give the Central or State Public Information Officer a reasonable opportunity of being heard before imposing any penalty. Under the second proviso, the burden of proving reasonable and diligent conduct rests on the Public Information Officer, meaning the officer must establish this defence before the Commission rather than the applicant having to prove the opposite.

Section 20(2) RTI Act addresses persistent misconduct discovered when the Central or State Information Commission decides a complaint or an appeal. If the Commission forms the opinion that the Central or State Public Information Officer has, without any reasonable cause and persistently, failed to receive an application for information or committed any of the other five defaults listed in Section 20(1) RTI Act, the Commission must recommend disciplinary action against that officer under the service rules applicable to that officer. Disciplinary action here means departmental action under the employment rules governing the officer's service.

When Section 20 RTI Act Applies

The Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission is deciding a complaint or an appeal.
The Commission forms the opinion that a Central or State Public Information Officer acted without any reasonable cause in refusing to receive an RTI application, missing the Section 7(1) RTI Act time limit, malafidely denying a request, knowingly giving incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information, destroying requested information, or obstructing disclosure.
Before imposing a monetary penalty under Section 20(1) RTI Act, the Commission gives the Public Information Officer a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
The Public Information Officer bears the burden of proving reasonable and diligent conduct.
Under Section 20(1) RTI Act, the Commission imposes a civil penalty of ₹250 per day until the application is received or the information is furnished, up to ₹25,000.
Under Section 20(2) RTI Act, if the default was without reasonable cause and persistent, the Commission recommends disciplinary action against the officer under the applicable service rules.

Example of Section 20 RTI Act

Fatima submits a written RTI request under Section 6 RTI Act to a state department in Guwahati seeking copies of public tender records. Prakash, the State Public Information Officer, neither provides the records nor rejects the request within the 30 days set by Section 7(1) RTI Act. After a first appeal fails to resolve the delay, Fatima files a second appeal under Section 19 RTI Act before the State Information Commission. The Commission gives Prakash a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and Prakash is unable to prove reasonable and diligent conduct for withholding the records. Under Section 20(1) RTI Act, the State Information Commission imposes a civil penalty of ₹250 for each day until the information is furnished, subject to the statutory cap of ₹25,000.

When Section 20 RTI Act Does Not Apply

Where the Central or State Public Information Officer proves reasonable cause and shows that the officer acted reasonably and diligently.
Before the Central or State Public Information Officer has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard, as required by the first proviso to Section 20(1) RTI Act.
Beyond a total penalty of ₹25,000 under Section 20(1) RTI Act, since the daily ₹250 penalty is capped at that ceiling.
For a recommendation of disciplinary action under Section 20(2) RTI Act, where the default by the Public Information Officer was not persistent.

FAQs on Section 20 RTI Act

What is Section 20 RTI Act?▼

Section 20 RTI Act provides for civil penalties and disciplinary recommendations against a Central or State Public Information Officer who defaults on RTI duties without reasonable cause. While deciding a complaint or appeal, the Information Commission must impose ₹250 per day up to ₹25,000 under Section 20(1) RTI Act, and must recommend disciplinary action under the service rules for persistent defaults under Section 20(2) RTI Act.

What is the maximum penalty under Section 20(1) RTI Act?▼

₹25,000. Section 20(1) RTI Act sets a civil penalty of ₹250 for each day until the RTI application is received or the information is furnished, capped at a total of ₹25,000.

Who pays the penalty under Section 20 RTI Act?▼

The Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer. The Central or State Information Commission imposes this civil penalty on the defaulting officer after giving that officer a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Who has the burden of proof in a penalty proceeding under Section 20(1) RTI Act?▼

The Public Information Officer. Under the second proviso to Section 20(1) RTI Act, the Central or State Public Information Officer bears the burden of proving that the officer acted reasonably and diligently.

Can the Information Commission impose a penalty under Section 20(1) RTI Act without hearing the officer?▼

No. The first proviso to Section 20(1) RTI Act requires that the Central or State Public Information Officer be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed.

When does the Information Commission recommend disciplinary action under Section 20(2) RTI Act?▼

When the default is both without reasonable cause and persistent. If the Commission forms that opinion while deciding a complaint or appeal, Section 20(2) RTI Act requires the Commission to recommend disciplinary action against the Public Information Officer under the applicable service rules.

Have questions about Section 20 RTI Act?

Ask NyayGuru about your situation and get an answer based on the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Ask NyayGuru →

Disclaimer: This is for informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.

Sources: Bare Act Text, Right to Information Act, 2005 ·