You are a Public Information Officer (PIO) in a government department. You are aware that the RTI Act 2005 envisages transparency and accountability in administration. The act has functioned as a check on the supposedly arbitrarily administrative behaviour and actions. However, as a PIO you have observed that there are citizens who filed RTI applications not for themselves but on behalf of such stakeholders who purportedly want to have access to information to further their own interests. At the same time there are these RTI activists who routinely file RTI applications and attempt to extort money from the decision makers. This type of RTI activism has affected the functioning of the administration adversely and also possibly jeopardises the genuineness of the applications which are essentially aimed at getting justice.
What measures would you suggest to separate genuine and non-genuine applications? Give merits and demerits of your suggestions.
You are a Public Information Officer (PIO) in a government department. You are aware that the RTI Act 2005 envisages transparency and accountability in administration. The act has functioned as a check on the supposedly arbitrarily administrative behaviour and actions. However, as a PIO you have observed that there are citizens who filed RTI applications not for themselves but on behalf of such stakeholders who purportedly want to have access to information to further their own interests. At the same time there are these RTI activists who routinely file RTI applications and attempt to extort money from the decision makers. This type of RTI activism has affected the functioning of the administration adversely and also possibly jeopardises the genuineness of the applications which are essentially aimed at getting justice.
What measures would you suggest to separate genuine and non-genuine applications? Give merits and demerits of your suggestions.
The RTI Act 2005 faces challenges from misuse by vested interests and extortion attempts, threatening its core purpose of ensuring transparency and accountability while potentially undermining genuine applications seeking justice.
Stakeholders
- Primary Stakeholders: Genuine RTI applicants, PIO, government departments, RTI activists, decision makers
- Secondary Stakeholders: Civil society, media, judiciary, general public
Measures to Separate Genuine and Non-Genuine Applications
Measure 1: Enhanced Application Scrutiny System
- Implement mandatory declaration of purpose and public interest involved
- Require applicant's identity verification through Aadhaar linkage
- Establish pattern analysis to identify repetitive frivolous applications
- Create database tracking applicant history and complaint patterns
Merits:
- Deters misuse while maintaining accessibility for genuine applicants
- Enables identification of serial abusers through data analytics
- Reduces administrative burden on PIOs
- Protects Article 19(1)(a) rights while preventing abuse
Demerits:
- May discourage legitimate whistleblowers fearing identity exposure
- Additional verification processes could delay genuine applications
- Risk of subjective interpretation by PIOs leading to bias
- Potential violation of RTI Act's liberal access provisions
Measure 2: Graded Fee Structure Based on Application Volume
- Implement progressive fee increase for multiple applications by same applicant
- Introduce higher fees for commercial entities versus individual citizens
- Establish annual application limits with escalating costs beyond threshold
- Create exemptions for BPL cardholders and marginalized communities
Merits:
- Financially disincentivizes bulk filing and extortion attempts
- Generates revenue for better RTI infrastructure
- Maintains affordability for genuine individual applicants
- Aligns with 2nd ARC recommendations on RTI reforms
Demerits:
- May restrict legitimate research and advocacy work
- Could create economic barriers contradicting RTI's democratic spirit
- Difficult to distinguish between genuine activism and misuse
- Risk of constitutional challenge under Article 14 equality provisions
Measure 3: Fast-Track Disposal Mechanism
- Create separate channels for urgent public interest applications
- Establish 72-hour disposal for emergency-related information requests
- Implement AI-based preliminary screening for application categorization
- Introduce video conferencing for complex application clarifications
Merits:
- Ensures genuine urgent applications receive priority attention
- Reduces scope for extortion through delayed responses
- Improves overall efficiency following e-governance principles
- Demonstrates proactive transparency commitment
Demerits:
- Requires significant technological infrastructure investment
- May create two-tier system potentially discriminating against certain applicants
- Risk of technical glitches affecting application processing
- Subjective determination of "urgency" could lead to disputes
Measure 4: Collaborative Verification Framework
- Establish citizen committees for application authenticity verification
- Create peer review mechanism involving civil society organizations
- Implement random audit system for application genuineness
- Develop complaint redressal mechanism against frivolous applications
Merits:
- Ensures community participation in maintaining RTI integrity
- Reduces burden on government machinery
- Creates self-regulating ecosystem among RTI users
- Promotes participatory governance principles
Demerits:
- May lead to local power dynamics influencing verification process
- Risk of committee members having vested interests
- Additional layer could slow down application processing
- Potential for misuse of verification power against legitimate applicants
As Mahatma Gandhi emphasized, "Be the change you wish to see in the world" - implementing balanced measures that protect RTI's democratic essence while preventing misuse will strengthen public trust in transparent governance and ensure justice-seeking citizens receive rightful information access.
Answer Length
Model answers may exceed the word limit for better clarity and depth. Use them as a guide, but always frame your final answer within the exam’s prescribed limit.
Evaluate this PYQ now
Write your answer & evaluate in just 60 seconds
500+ students evaluated
Model Answers from
- 2017Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
A building permitted for three floors, while being extended illegally to 6 floors by a builder, collapses. As a consequence, a number of innocent labourers including women and children died. These labourers are migrants of different places. The government immediately announced cash relief to the aggrieved families and arrested the builder.
Give reasons for such incidents taking place across the country. Suggest measures to prevent their occurrence. - 2017Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
You are the manager of a spare parts company A and you have to negotiate a deal with the manager of a large manufacturing company B. The deal is highly competitive and sealing the deal is critical for your company. The deal is being worked out over a dinner. After dinner the manager of manufacturing company B offered to drop you to the hotel in his car. On the way to hotel he happens to hit motorcycle injuring the motorcyclist badly. You know the manager was driving fast and thus lost control. The law enforcement officer comes to investigate the issue and you are the sole eyewitness to it. Knowing the strict laws pertaining to road accidents you are aware that your honest account of the incident would lead to the prosecution of the manager and as a consequence the deal is likely to be jeopardised, which is of immense importance to your company.
What are the dilemmas you face? What will be your response to the situation? - 2017Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
You are the head of the Human Resources department of an organisation. One day one of the workers died on duty. His family was demanding compensation. However, the company denied compensation because it was revealed in investigation that he was drunk at the time of the accident. The workers of the company went to strike demanding compensation for the family of the deceased. The Chairman of the management board has asked for your recommendation.
What recommendation would you provide the management?
Discuss the merits and demerits of each of the recommendations. - 2017Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
You are aspiring to become an IAS officer and you have cleared various stages and now you have been selected for the personal interview. On the day of the interview, on the way to the venue you saw an accident where a mother and child who happen to be your relatives were badly injured. They needed immediate help.
What would you have done in such a situation? Justify your action - 2017Ethics: Case Study20 MarksView Answer
You are an honest and responsible civil servant. You often observe the following:
(a) There is a general perception that adhering to ethical conduct one may face difficulties to oneself and cause problems for the family, whereas unfair practices may help to reach the career goals.
(b) When the number of people adopting unfair means is large, a small minority having a penchant towards ethical means makes no difference.
(c) Sticking to ethical means is detrimental to the larger developmental goals.
(d) While one may not involve oneself in large unethical practices, but giving and accepting small gifts makes the system more efficient.
Examine the above statements with their merits and demerits. (250 words)
Model Answers by Subject
Crack UPSC with your
Personal AI Mentor
An AI-powered ecosystem to learn, practice, and evaluate with discipline
