UPSC Mains 2017 GS4 Q14 — RTI and Transparency
You are a Public Information Officer (PIO) in a government department. You are aware that the RTI Act, 2005 envisages transparency and accountability in administration. The act has functioned as a check on the supposedly arbitrarily administrative behaviour and actions. However, as a PIO you have observed that there are citizens who filed RTI applications not for themselves but on behalf of such stakeholders who purportedly want to have access to information to further their own interests. At the same time there are those RTI activists who routinely file RTI applications and attempt to extort money from the decision makers. This type of RTI activism has affected the functioning of the administration adversely and also possibly jeopardizes the genuineness of the applications which are essentially aimed at getting justice. What measures would you suggest to separate genuine and non-genuine applications ? Give merits and demerits of your suggestions. (250 words)
Question Decoded — examiner's intent
- Directive verbs
- suggestGive
- Scope keywords
- Public Information Officerarbitrarily administrative behaviourfurther their own interestsextort money from the decision makersseparate genuine and non-genuine applicationsmerits and demerits
- Implicit sub-parts
- How to define 'frivolous' or 'vexatious' without violating Section 6(2) of the RTI Act which states reasons for seeking information are not required.
- Institutional mechanisms to filter extortionist patterns while protecting the identity of whistleblowers.
- The ethical dilemma of a PIO balancing the duty of disclosure against the duty to protect administrative efficiency.
- Strategies for proactive disclosure under Section 4 to reduce the utility of 'targeted' RTI filings.
- Common pitfalls
- Suggesting amendments to the RTI Act that would dilute its core spirit or empower PIOs to reject applications based on subjective 'intent'.
- Failing to address the specific 'extortion' aspect mentioned in the prompt, focusing only on 'interest-based' filings.
- Proposing fees or identity requirements that would create barriers for the poor or marginalized (violating the Act's preamble).
- Ignoring the 'merits and demerits' part of the question for each suggested measure.
- Dimensions required
- Legal/Statutory (RTI Act 2005 provisions)Ethical (Integrity vs. Transparency)Administrative (Efficiency and resource management)Social (Empowerment vs. Misuse)Judicial (Supreme Court rulings on 'vexatious' RTI applications)
- Marks allocation hint
Allocate 50 words to briefly acknowledge the dual nature of RTI as a tool for justice and a potential weapon for harassment. Devote the bulk (150 words) to 3-4 concrete measures, ensuring each includes a specific merit and demerit. Reserve the final 50 words for a balanced conclusion on how 'Proactive Disclosure' (Section 4) is the ultimate solution to minimize non-genuine queries.
Unlock the full analysis for this question
You've seen the question and its examiner-intent decoding. Subscribers also get:
- 🔗 Similar Previous Year Questions — cross-year, cross-paper matches so you study the topic, not the question
- 📚 Source Map — verified citations from Laxmikanth, NCERT, PRS, Yojana, Economic Survey, Spectrum
- 🌱 How this topic is evolving — current-affairs bridge anchored to live TARS news clustering
- 🧭 Examiner's Pattern — how the topic has been framed across every year UPSC has tested it
- ✍️ Answer Skeleton — a structured outline (intro → body → conclusion) you can flesh out
- 🎯 AI evaluation — write your answer, get rubric-based scoring from gs-eval
Or browse 132+ free preview questions across all years and papers — the first 3 questions of every paper are unlocked.
Ready to practice?
Subscribers can attempt this question in 250 words and get an instant, rubric-based evaluation showing where they stand.
Subscribe to evaluate your answer →