{"id":93868,"date":"2025-06-01T11:58:52","date_gmt":"2025-06-01T11:58:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/?p=93868"},"modified":"2025-06-01T11:58:52","modified_gmt":"2025-06-01T11:58:52","slug":"consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/","title":{"rendered":"Consider the following statements :\nAccording to the RTI Act, 2005, as"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Consider the following statements :<br \/>\nAccording to the RTI Act, 2005, as far as exempted organizations are concerned, the exemption applies to<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>1. certain organizations of the Central Government as listed in the Second Schedule and to the information submitted by these organizations to Central Government.<\/li>\n<li>2. certain organizations of the State Governments as may be notified by them in the Official Gazette, but not to the information furnished by these organisations to the respective State Governments.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Which of the above statements is\/are correct ?<\/p>\n<p>[amp_mcq option1=&#8221;1 only&#8221; option2=&#8221;2 only&#8221; option3=&#8221;Both 1 and 2&#8243; option4=&#8221;Neither 1 nor 2&#8243; correct=&#8221;option2&#8243;]<\/p>\n<div class=\"psc-box-pyq-exam-year-detail\">\n<div class=\"pyq-exam\">\n<div class=\"psc-heading\">This question was previously asked in<\/div>\n<div class=\"psc-title line-ellipsis\">UPSC Combined Section Officer &#8211; 2024<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"pyq-exam-psc-buttons\"><a href=\"\/pyq\/pyq-upsc-combined-section-officer-2024.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"psc-pdf-button\" rel=\"noopener\">Download PDF<\/a><a href=\"\/pyq-upsc-combined-section-officer-2024\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"psc-attempt-button\" rel=\"noopener\">Attempt Online<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<section id=\"pyq-correct-answer\">\nStatement 1 is incorrect. Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts certain intelligence and security organizations listed in the Second Schedule (established by the Central Government) and those notified by State Governments from the purview of the Act. However, this exemption is for the organization itself and the information it holds, with a crucial proviso that information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations is not exempt. Statement 1 incorrectly suggests that the exemption also applies to information *submitted by* these organizations to the Central Government. Once information is submitted to a non-exempt public authority, its accessibility is governed by the general provisions of the Act applicable to that public authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body.<br \/>\nStatement 2 is correct. Section 24(4) allows State Governments to notify intelligence and security organizations as exempt. The proviso regarding corruption and human rights violations also applies to these state organizations. The statement correctly notes that the exemption applies to certain State Government organizations. The phrase &#8220;but not to the information furnished by these organisations to the respective State Governments&#8221; implies that information submitted by these exempted state bodies to the state government (a non-exempt entity) is not covered by the S. 24 exemption, which is consistent with the interpretation that the exemption applies to the organization and its records, not to information transmitted elsewhere.<br \/>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"pyq-key-points\">\n&#8211; Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts certain intelligence and security organizations.<br \/>\n&#8211; The exemption is primarily for the organization and the information it holds.<br \/>\n&#8211; Information pertaining to corruption and human rights violations is not exempt under Section 24.<br \/>\n&#8211; Information furnished by an exempted organization to a non-exempt public authority is generally subject to the RTI Act provisions applicable to the receiving authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body.<br \/>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"pyq-additional-information\">\nThe Second Schedule lists various Central intelligence and security agencies like IB, RAW, Directorate of Enforcement, etc. State Governments can similarly notify their intelligence and security agencies. The rationale is to protect sensitive information critical for national or state security and intelligence gathering. However, the accountability for corruption and human rights abuses by these agencies is maintained through the proviso allowing access to such information.<br \/>\n<\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Consider the following statements : According to the RTI Act, 2005, as far as exempted organizations are concerned, the exemption applies to 1. certain organizations of the Central Government as listed in the Second Schedule and to the information submitted by these organizations to Central Government. 2. certain organizations of the State Governments as may &#8230; <\/p>\n<p class=\"read-more-container\"><a title=\"Consider the following statements :\nAccording to the RTI Act, 2005, as\" class=\"read-more button\" href=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/#more-93868\">Detailed Solution<span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Consider the following statements :<br \/>\nAccording to the RTI Act, 2005, as<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1090],"tags":[1103,1099,1104],"class_list":["post-93868","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-upsc-combined-section-officer","tag-1103","tag-indian-polity-and-governance","tag-the-parliamentary-act","no-featured-image-padding"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v22.2 (Yoast SEO v23.3) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Consider the following statements : According to the RTI Act, 2005, as<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Statement 1 is incorrect. Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts certain intelligence and security organizations listed in the Second Schedule (established by the Central Government) and those notified by State Governments from the purview of the Act. However, this exemption is for the organization itself and the information it holds, with a crucial proviso that information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations is not exempt. Statement 1 incorrectly suggests that the exemption also applies to information *submitted by* these organizations to the Central Government. Once information is submitted to a non-exempt public authority, its accessibility is governed by the general provisions of the Act applicable to that public authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body. Statement 2 is correct. Section 24(4) allows State Governments to notify intelligence and security organizations as exempt. The proviso regarding corruption and human rights violations also applies to these state organizations. The statement correctly notes that the exemption applies to certain State Government organizations. The phrase &quot;but not to the information furnished by these organisations to the respective State Governments&quot; implies that information submitted by these exempted state bodies to the state government (a non-exempt entity) is not covered by the S. 24 exemption, which is consistent with the interpretation that the exemption applies to the organization and its records, not to information transmitted elsewhere. - Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts certain intelligence and security organizations. - The exemption is primarily for the organization and the information it holds. - Information pertaining to corruption and human rights violations is not exempt under Section 24. - Information furnished by an exempted organization to a non-exempt public authority is generally subject to the RTI Act provisions applicable to the receiving authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Consider the following statements : According to the RTI Act, 2005, as\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Statement 1 is incorrect. Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts certain intelligence and security organizations listed in the Second Schedule (established by the Central Government) and those notified by State Governments from the purview of the Act. However, this exemption is for the organization itself and the information it holds, with a crucial proviso that information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations is not exempt. Statement 1 incorrectly suggests that the exemption also applies to information *submitted by* these organizations to the Central Government. Once information is submitted to a non-exempt public authority, its accessibility is governed by the general provisions of the Act applicable to that public authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body. Statement 2 is correct. Section 24(4) allows State Governments to notify intelligence and security organizations as exempt. The proviso regarding corruption and human rights violations also applies to these state organizations. The statement correctly notes that the exemption applies to certain State Government organizations. The phrase &quot;but not to the information furnished by these organisations to the respective State Governments&quot; implies that information submitted by these exempted state bodies to the state government (a non-exempt entity) is not covered by the S. 24 exemption, which is consistent with the interpretation that the exemption applies to the organization and its records, not to information transmitted elsewhere. - Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts certain intelligence and security organizations. - The exemption is primarily for the organization and the information it holds. - Information pertaining to corruption and human rights violations is not exempt under Section 24. - Information furnished by an exempted organization to a non-exempt public authority is generally subject to the RTI Act provisions applicable to the receiving authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"MCQ and Quiz for Exams\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-01T11:58:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"rawan239\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"rawan239\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Consider the following statements : According to the RTI Act, 2005, as","description":"Statement 1 is incorrect. Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts certain intelligence and security organizations listed in the Second Schedule (established by the Central Government) and those notified by State Governments from the purview of the Act. However, this exemption is for the organization itself and the information it holds, with a crucial proviso that information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations is not exempt. Statement 1 incorrectly suggests that the exemption also applies to information *submitted by* these organizations to the Central Government. Once information is submitted to a non-exempt public authority, its accessibility is governed by the general provisions of the Act applicable to that public authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body. Statement 2 is correct. Section 24(4) allows State Governments to notify intelligence and security organizations as exempt. The proviso regarding corruption and human rights violations also applies to these state organizations. The statement correctly notes that the exemption applies to certain State Government organizations. The phrase \"but not to the information furnished by these organisations to the respective State Governments\" implies that information submitted by these exempted state bodies to the state government (a non-exempt entity) is not covered by the S. 24 exemption, which is consistent with the interpretation that the exemption applies to the organization and its records, not to information transmitted elsewhere. - Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts certain intelligence and security organizations. - The exemption is primarily for the organization and the information it holds. - Information pertaining to corruption and human rights violations is not exempt under Section 24. - Information furnished by an exempted organization to a non-exempt public authority is generally subject to the RTI Act provisions applicable to the receiving authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Consider the following statements : According to the RTI Act, 2005, as","og_description":"Statement 1 is incorrect. Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts certain intelligence and security organizations listed in the Second Schedule (established by the Central Government) and those notified by State Governments from the purview of the Act. However, this exemption is for the organization itself and the information it holds, with a crucial proviso that information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations is not exempt. Statement 1 incorrectly suggests that the exemption also applies to information *submitted by* these organizations to the Central Government. Once information is submitted to a non-exempt public authority, its accessibility is governed by the general provisions of the Act applicable to that public authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body. Statement 2 is correct. Section 24(4) allows State Governments to notify intelligence and security organizations as exempt. The proviso regarding corruption and human rights violations also applies to these state organizations. The statement correctly notes that the exemption applies to certain State Government organizations. The phrase \"but not to the information furnished by these organisations to the respective State Governments\" implies that information submitted by these exempted state bodies to the state government (a non-exempt entity) is not covered by the S. 24 exemption, which is consistent with the interpretation that the exemption applies to the organization and its records, not to information transmitted elsewhere. - Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts certain intelligence and security organizations. - The exemption is primarily for the organization and the information it holds. - Information pertaining to corruption and human rights violations is not exempt under Section 24. - Information furnished by an exempted organization to a non-exempt public authority is generally subject to the RTI Act provisions applicable to the receiving authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body.","og_url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/","og_site_name":"MCQ and Quiz for Exams","article_published_time":"2025-06-01T11:58:52+00:00","author":"rawan239","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"rawan239","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/","url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/","name":"Consider the following statements : According to the RTI Act, 2005, as","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-06-01T11:58:52+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-01T11:58:52+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/5807dafeb27d2ec82344d6cbd6c3d209"},"description":"Statement 1 is incorrect. Section 24 of the RTI Act, 2005 exempts certain intelligence and security organizations listed in the Second Schedule (established by the Central Government) and those notified by State Governments from the purview of the Act. However, this exemption is for the organization itself and the information it holds, with a crucial proviso that information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations is not exempt. Statement 1 incorrectly suggests that the exemption also applies to information *submitted by* these organizations to the Central Government. Once information is submitted to a non-exempt public authority, its accessibility is governed by the general provisions of the Act applicable to that public authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body. Statement 2 is correct. Section 24(4) allows State Governments to notify intelligence and security organizations as exempt. The proviso regarding corruption and human rights violations also applies to these state organizations. The statement correctly notes that the exemption applies to certain State Government organizations. The phrase \"but not to the information furnished by these organisations to the respective State Governments\" implies that information submitted by these exempted state bodies to the state government (a non-exempt entity) is not covered by the S. 24 exemption, which is consistent with the interpretation that the exemption applies to the organization and its records, not to information transmitted elsewhere. - Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts certain intelligence and security organizations. - The exemption is primarily for the organization and the information it holds. - Information pertaining to corruption and human rights violations is not exempt under Section 24. - Information furnished by an exempted organization to a non-exempt public authority is generally subject to the RTI Act provisions applicable to the receiving authority, not the S. 24 exemption of the originating body.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-according-to-the-rti-act-2005-as\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"UPSC Combined Section Officer","item":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/category\/upsc-combined-section-officer\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Consider the following statements : According to the RTI Act, 2005, as"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#website","url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/","name":"MCQ and Quiz for Exams","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/5807dafeb27d2ec82344d6cbd6c3d209","name":"rawan239","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/761a7274f9cce048fa5b921221e7934820d74514df93ef195a9d22af0c1c9001?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/761a7274f9cce048fa5b921221e7934820d74514df93ef195a9d22af0c1c9001?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"rawan239"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com"],"url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/author\/rawan239\/"}]}},"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93868","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=93868"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93868\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93868"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93868"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93868"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}