Which one of the following is not a ground for rejection of an RTI app

Which one of the following is not a ground for rejection of an RTI application ?

Vague or unclear application
Application filed by an unauthorized person
Application requesting sensitive defence-related information
Application seeking information from a private entity
This question was previously asked in
UPSC Combined Section Officer – 2021-22
While a vague or unclear application can make it difficult for the Public Information Officer (PIO) to provide the requested information, it is generally not listed as a primary, explicit ground for rejection under the RTI Act in the same way that exemptions under Section 8 or the scope of the Act (e.g., applying to private entities) are.
The RTI Act focuses on the nature of the information requested and the entity holding it. Section 8 lists exemptions based on the potential harm caused by disclosure (sovereignty, security, privacy, etc.). Section 2(h) defines ‘public authority’ limiting the Act’s applicability. Applying for information from a private entity that does not fall under the definition of a public authority is a valid reason for the application to be rejected or deemed outside the Act’s purview. Requesting sensitive defence-related information is a specific exemption under Section 8(1)(a). While “unauthorized person” is ambiguous, if interpreted as someone not eligible (e.g., non-citizen, in some contexts depending on interpretation), it could potentially be a ground. However, a vague application often results in the PIO seeking clarification or being unable to process the request effectively, rather than a statutory ground for outright rejection as defined by the Act’s exemption/scope sections.
Section 6(1) requires the applicant to specify the particulars of the information sought. If these particulars are insufficient, the PIO may seek clarification. While failure to clarify or extreme vagueness can lead to the inability to provide information, the Act does not list “vague application” as a distinct exemption ground like those related to national security, privacy, or commercial confidence. The Act’s framework prioritizes denying access based on the nature of the information or the entity, not primarily the clarity of the request itself, although clarity is essential for processing.
Exit mobile version