What is the maximum penalty that an Information Commission can impose on a Public Information Officer under Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005?
- A.Rs 10,000
- B.Rs 25,000
- C.Rs 50,000
- D.Rs 1,00,000
Correct answer
Explanation
The correct answer is B, Rs 25,000. Section 20(1) provides that where an Information Commission finds that a Public Information Officer has refused an application without reasonable cause, has not furnished information within the time specified, has given incorrect or misleading information or has destroyed information, it may impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees for each day of delay, subject to a total ceiling of twenty-five thousand rupees. Section 20(2) adds that the Commission may also recommend disciplinary action against the officer. Option A, ten thousand rupees, and option C, fifty thousand rupees, are not figures used in the Act. Option D, one lakh rupees, is far above the statutory ceiling. Candidates should remember the pair together: two hundred and fifty rupees a day, with a maximum of twenty-five thousand rupees.
Read the full article: RTI Act 2005 and Good Governance Laws: Notes
Practice Questions
View allThe Right to Information Act, 2005 came into force fully on which date?
- A.15 June 2005
- B.12 October 2005
- C.1 January 2006
- D.26 November 2005
Show answer
The RTI Act received the assent of the President on 15 June 2005, and Section 1(3) provided that the remaining provisions would come into force on the one hundred and twentieth day of its enactment.
Read the full explanation →Under the RTI Act, 2005, information concerning the life or liberty of a person must be provided within:
- A.48 hours
- B.7 days
- C.30 days
- D.35 days
Show answer
Section 7(1) of the RTI Act lays down two limits. The ordinary limit is thirty days from the receipt of the application, but where the information sought concerns the life or liberty of a person the Public Information Officer must supply it within forty-eight hours of the request.
Read the full explanation →Which section of the RTI Act, 2005 gives it an overriding effect over the Official Secrets Act, 1923?
- A.Section 8
- B.Section 18
- C.Section 22
- D.Section 24
Show answer
Section 22 states that the provisions of the RTI Act have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent in the Official Secrets Act, 1923, in any other law in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any other law.
Read the full explanation →A second appeal under the RTI Act, 2005 lies to the Information Commission within how many days of the decision appealed against?
- A.30 days
- B.45 days
- C.60 days
- D.90 days
Show answer
The Act provides two appeals. Under Section 19(1) the first appeal is filed within thirty days of the reply or of the expiry of the time limit, and it goes to an officer senior in rank to the Public Information Officer within the same public authority, the First Appellate Authority.
Read the full explanation →The RTI Act, 2005 repealed which earlier law?
- A.The Official Secrets Act, 1923
- B.The Freedom of Information Act, 2002
- C.The Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003
- D.The Public Records Act, 1993
Show answer
That Act was passed in 2002 but was never notified, so it never came into force; the RTI Act, 2005 replaced it with a stronger scheme that added time limits, penalties and independent Information Commissions, and Section 31 of the new Act repealed it.
Read the full explanation →