2023 RTI Trends - Analyzing Central Govt. RTI Responses

The Right to Information (RTI) Act empowers Indian citizens to request transparency and accountability from government institutions. This analysis, conducted by OnlineRTI.com, focuses on RTI responses from various Central Government departments (that are listed on the rtionline.gov.in website) filed through the OnlineRTI.com platform in 2023. The study highlights departments that excelled in providing information, those that struggled, and areas for improvement in both response completeness and timing. In total, 573 RTI responses were labelled and analysed for the year 2023.

Methodology and Data Categorization

This analysis is based on data collected from OnlineRTI.com, which categorises RTI responses from Central Government departments. The data captures the following levels of information:

• RTI Replied (Yes/No): This indicator captures whether any response—informative, rejections, non-applicability, non-availability  or forward—was provided by the government. The reply rate can vary significantly between online and offline RTI filings, with central government departments demonstrating a notably higher response rate compared to state governments, being attributable to the fact that majority of the central government departments are enabled for filing through the online/website mode. Receiving any form of reply, even a rejection, reinforces citizens' trust in government accountability and assures them that their requests are acknowledged.
• Main Category: Broad classifications such as "Some Information Provided" or "No Information Provided," indicating the overall response outcome. If any of the information sought in an RTI application or partial information is provided, it is labelled as "Some Information Provided." In contrast, applications that are simply forwarded u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act without any information being provided are labelled as "No Information Provided."
• Sub Category 1: Further details within each main category, such as "Full Information Provided" or "Application Rejected," which provide additional insights into the quality or completeness of the response.
• Sub Category 2: Specifics, such as rejections under certain legal exemptions, including Section 8(1)(j) for personal information, Section 9 for information affecting intellectual property rights, and Section 24 for information excluded due to national security. These subcategories highlight instances where responses are restricted by legal provisions.

This structured categorization enabled us to quantify how many requests received complete information, partial information, or no information, offering a comprehensive view of the responsiveness of various government departments to RTI requests.

Sample Size: 573 RTI responses

Sample Time Period: 1 January 2023 - 31 December 2023

Sample Category: All responses based on RTI applications filed through OnlineRTI.com on the rtionline.gov.in website for central government departments

1. Overall Rate of Information Provided

Our analysis demonstrates a high level of government responsiveness, with every RTI receiving some form of reply, resulting in an impressive 100% reply rate. This marks a notable improvement over previous years, where some RTIs went unanswered. It also contrasts sharply with our experiences of offline RTI filings through post, where a significant number of requests frequently go unaddressed/unacknowledged. This finding not only highlights the effectiveness of digital RTI application submissions but also reinforces the potential of online systems to enhance transparency and accountability within government departments.

While receiving a reply to an RTI request is essential, the true measure of transparency of public information under the purview of government departments lies in whether the reply provides the requested information. In our analysis, we found that 81.85 % of all RTI requests received either full or partial information. This high rate of effective and proper responses reflects a strong commitment to transparency among Central Government departments, though notable variations exist across different departments. (See pie chart below for a visual breakdown of information provision rates.)

Breakdown of RTI Requests Receiving Full or Partial Information

2. Departments with the Best and Worst Response Rates

Response rates, from the context of completeness and quality, are a critical indicator of transparency, shedding light on departments excelling in their RTI responsiveness and those with room for improvement. Among departments receiving more than five RTIs, the departments with the best response rates (100%) include:

• Union Public Service Commission(UPSC) - 100% of RTIs received information.
• University Grants Commission (UGC) - 100% of RTIs received information.
• Reserve Bank of India(RBI) - 100% of RTIs received information.
• Eastern Railway - 100% of RTIs received information.
• Employees Provident Fund Organisation(EPFO) - 100% of RTIs received information.

Departments with the Highest and Lowest Rates of RTI Information Provision

Conversely, the departments with the lowest response rates highlight areas where RTI requests may not be receiving their due  attention:

• Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCA), Bangalore - Only 37.5% of RTIs received information.
• Department of Defence - 44.4% of RTIs received information.
• Canara Bank - 60.0% of RTIs received information.
• Department of Personnel & Training(DoPT) - 71.4% of RTIs received information.
• Union Bank of India(UBI) - 72.7% of RTIs received information.

These insights pinpoint departments demonstrating full responsiveness and others that could benefit from process improvements to align better with the RTI Act’s transparency objectives.

3. Average Response Time Across Departments

While the completeness of responses is crucial, response time also impacts citizens' accessibility to information. On average, Central Government departments took 22.8 days to respond to RTI requests submitted via OnlineRTI.com on the rtionline.gov.in portal. Although efficient in many cases, there is room for quicker responses. Impressively, 30% of requests received a reply within the first 10 days, highlighting the potential for prompt information access.

Notably, departments like Eastern Railway and Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCA), Bangalore, which handled significant RTI volumes, demonstrated that timely responses are achievable without sacrificing quality.

The chart below provides an overview of Days to Reply (X-axis) against the Percentage of RTI Requests Replied On Each Day (Y-axis) for each department. This visualization reveals patterns in response times.

Daily Breakdown of Government Replies to RTI Requests as a Percentage of Total Responses

4. Departments with the Fastest and Slowest Response Times

While information availability is critical, response time of departments is also an essential metric for effective transparency. Among departments receiving more than five RTIs, response times varied widely, highlighting both efficient and delayed responders.

The departments with the fastest response times were:

• Ministry of Home Affairs: Averaging 2.1 days per response.
• National Highways Authority of India (NHAI): Averaging 3.4 days per response.
• Department of Health & Family Welfare: Averaging 3.9 days per response.
• University Grants Commission (UGC): Averaging 4.2 days per response.
• Union Public Service Commission(UPSC): Averaging 4.5 days per response.

On the other hand, departments with the slowest response times were:

• Delhi Police: Averaging 43.2 days per response.
• Employees Provident Fund Organisation(EPFO): Averaging 36.8 days per response.
• Union Bank of India(UBI): Averaging 33.2 days per response.
• Canara Bank: Averaging 30.5 days per response.
• Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs: Averaging 29.7 days per response.

These differences in response times point to areas where improvements in promptness could enhance the overall effectiveness of the RTI process, better aligning with the Act's goal of timely and accessible information.

Departments with the Quickest and Slowest RTI Response Times

5. The Outliers: Longest Response Times on Record

One significant outlier was the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCA), which took 330 days—nearly a full year—to respond to an RTI. Such prolonged delays indicate a need for targeted process improvements.

Future Course of Action

To gain a more comprehensive understanding of RTI responsiveness, this study can be extended in several directions:

1. Analysing Yearly Trends: Expanding the dataset to include RTI responses from previous years will allow for a comparative analysis of response times and information-provided rates across time. This approach can reveal trends and improvements (or declines) in transparency practices.
2. Including Offline RTIs: As noted, RTIs filed through online mode receive nearly 100% responses, while RTIs filed offline i.e. through traditional post, show much lower response rates. Including offline submissions in future analytical studies would provide a more holistic view and highlight areas where processing improvements are needed for non-digital RTI submissions.
3. Expanding to State Governments: This analysis focused on Central Government departments. Extending the study to include state-level RTI responses can offer insights into transparency practices across different regions, allowing comparisons between Central and State Governments.
4. Analysing First and Second Appeals: RTI processes include first and second appeals when responses are deemed unsatisfactory or incomplete or simply when there is no response to the applications or appeal. Analysing these appeals level data could reveal departments with recurring response issues and the effectiveness of the appellate  process in resolving information gaps.

These extensions will enable a thorough examination of transparency frameworks across government levels, providing actionable insights for both policymakers and citizens.

Conclusion: Emphasizing Transparency in RTI Responses

This analysis of RTI responses for applications submitted via OnlineRTI.com on the rtionline.gov.in portal reveals both strengths and areas for improvement among Central Government departments. Departments like the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) demonstrated outstanding transparency by fully addressing all RTIs received. Conversely, departments like the AIIMS, Delhi showed room for improvement, often providing limited information or relying on exemptions.

Improving both the completeness and timeliness of RTI responses would enhance public trust and support the RTI Act’s mission. By learning from high-performing departments, all government agencies can work towards fulfilling citizens' right to information more effectively.

If anyone has suggestions or wants something else to be added in our report or research, please let us know at dolly@onlinerti.com.