Public Authorities should keep the information indexed.

1.            Public  Authorities  should  keep  the  information  indexed. 

As per  (OFFICE  MEMORANDUM  No.  1/32/2013-IR  ,  Government  of  India  Ministry  of  Personnel,  Public  Grievances  &  Pensions  Department  of  Personnel  &  Training) Part II, para 2

2.  Proper  management  of  records  is  of  utmost  importance  for  effective  implementation  of  the  provisions  of  the  Act.  A  public  authority  should,  therefore,  maintain  all  its  records  properly.  It  should  ensure  that  the  records  are  duly  catalogued  and  indexed  in  such  a  manner  and  form  that  it  may  facilitate  the  right  to  information.   

(1) It will be in context to quote the observation made by the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in LPA 501/2009, pronounced on 12.1.2010 (matter relating to Asset Declaration of Judges of the Apex Court):

The Act does not merely oblige the public authority to give information on being asked for it by a citizen but requires it to suo moto make the information accessible. Section 4(1)(a) of the Act requires every public authority to maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under the Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerized are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerized and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated. Section 4 spells out various obligations of public authorities and Sections 6 and 7 lay down the procedure to deal with request for obtaining in formation.

(2) In fact the Hon’ble High Court of Madras even went a step further and stated that administrative difficulties and shortage of manpower cannot be cited as reasons for denying information. While dismissing WP No. 20372 of 2009 and MP No. 1 of 2009, in a Judgment dated 7.1.2010, the Hon’ble

court ruled:

The other objections that they are maintaining a large number of documents in respect of 45 departments and they are short of human resources cannot be raised to whittle down the citizens’ right to seek information. It is for them to write to the Government to provide for additional staff depending upon the volume of requests that may be forthcoming pursuant to the RTI Act. It is purely an internal matter between the petitioner archives and the State Government. The right to information having bee!? guaranteed by the law of Parliament, the administrative difficulties in pro v/ding information cannot be raised. Such pleas will defeat the very right of citizens to have access to information. Hence the objections raised by the petitioner cannot be countenanced by this court. The writ petition lacks in merit.”