Photo by Danish Siddiqui

Right to Know, Right to Live

Status of Information Commissions in India

during Covid-19 Crisis

Satark Nagrik Sangathan & Centre for Equity Studies

 Jointly published in May 2020 by
Satark Nagrik Sangathan (SNS) & Centre for Equity Studies (CES)

This report has been compiled by Anjali Bhardwaj, Amrita Johri, Indrani Talukdar and Sagarika
Ghatak. We are grateful to friends and activists in the RTI community for their help. We thank
the Thakur Foundation and friends at the Association for India’s Development for their
continued support.

Previous assessments of the Right to Information Act, 2005:

‘Report Card of Information Commissions in India’, SNS & CES, 2019
(http://snsindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Report-Card-2019-FINAL.pdf)
‘Adjudicating the RTI Act: Analysis of orders of the Central Information Commission’, SNS &
CES, 2019
(http://snsindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Adjudicating-the-RTI-Act-FINAL.pdf)
‘Report Card of Information Commissions in India’, SNS & CES, 2018
(http://snsindia.org/IC2018.pdf)
‘Tilting the Balance of Power - Adjudicating the RTI Act’, RaaG, SNS & Rajpal, 2017
(http://snsindia.org/Adjudicators.pdf)
‘Peoples’ Monitoring of the RTI Regime in India’, 2011-2013, RaaG & CES, 2014
(http://x.co/raagces)
‘Safeguarding The Right To Information’, RaaG & NCPRI, 2009
(Executive summary at http://snsindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/RAAG-study-
executive-summary.pdf)

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International
License. To view a copy of this license, visit:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/

Contact: anjali.sns@gmail.com, amritajohri@gmail.com, www.snsindia.org

B- 76, SFS Flats, Sheikh Sarai Phase-1, New Delhi- 110017, Ph: +919810273984
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
II. Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 1
III. Findings .............................................................................................................................. 2
1. Hearing and disposal of appeals and complaints during the COVID 19 lockdown ........ 2
2. Provision for taking up urgent matters during the lockdown ........................................ 3
3. Availability of lockdown related notifications on IC websites ........................................ 3
4. Accessibility of websites ................................................................................................. 3
5. Information commissions without any commissioners during the COVID crisis............ 3
6. Headless commissions during the lockdown .................................................................. 4
IV. Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 4
V. Snapshot of performance of commissions during the COVID 19 crisis .............................. 8
VI. Summary of notifications issued by ICs during the lockdown .......................................... 18
 I. Introduction

India went into a total lockdown on March 25, 2020 to contain the spread of the COVID 19
pandemic. For millions of workers in the country engaged in the unorganized sector, the
lockdown meant an instant cessation of income generating opportunities. Migrant workers
walking back to their villages hundreds of kilometres away1, carrying their children and
belongings on their shoulders, have become the defining images of the humanitarian crisis
gripping the country during the lockdown. For the poor and vulnerable living across the
country, the sudden loss of livelihood has meant that relief and welfare programs funded
through public money are their sole lifeline.
Experience on the ground has shown that without relevant information, it is virtually
impossible for people to access their rights and entitlements like rations, pensions and
healthcare. In this context, proper implementation of the Right to Information (RTI) Act has
assumed paramount importance.
In the fifteen years of its existence, the Indian RTI law has empowered citizens to meaningfully
participate in democracy. Every year 4 to 6 million information requests2 are filed. The
legislation has been used extensively to hold local governments and functionaries
accountable for lapses in the delivery of essential services and secure access to basic rights
and entitlements. It has also been used to question the highest authorities of the country on
their performance and decisions.
Under the RTI Act, 2005, information commissions are the final appellate authority and are
mandated to safeguard and facilitate people’s fundamental right to information. Information
commissions (ICs) have been set up at the central level (Central Information Commission) and
in the states (state information commissions) to adjudicate on appeals and complaints of
citizens who have been denied their right to information under the law.
This report examines the functioning of information commissions during the lockdown. It is
part of an effort to undertake ongoing monitoring of the performance of ICs across the
country with the objective of improving their functioning and strengthening the RTI regime.
In light of the unprecedented crisis gripping the nation, the need to scrutinize the working of
information commissions is perhaps greater than ever before.

II. Methodology

All 29 ICs (information commissions) set up under the RTI Act, 2005, have been covered for
the purpose of this assessment. The report is based on an analysis of information accessed
from the official websites of ICs. For commissions where relevant information was not
available on the website, it was obtained telephonically.
The assessment examines the functioning of ICs from the commencement of the lockdown
on March 25, 2020 till May 15, 2020 (phase 3 of the lockdown ended on May 17, 2020). The
website analysis was undertaken between May 1 and May 11 and phone calls were made to
ICs between May 14 and May 18.

1
‘India’s Coronavirus Lockdown Leaves Vast Numbers Stranded and Hungry’, March 29, 2020
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/29/world/asia/coronavirus-india-migrants.html
2 ‘Peoples’ Monitoring of the RTI Regime in India: 2011-2013’ by RaaG & CES, 2014

1
The lockdown in India has been extended in phases since March 25, 2020. At the time of
publication of this report, India is in phase 4 of the lockdown which will carry on till May 31.
For each phase, guidelines were issued by the central government3 regulating different
activities. In addition, state governments also issued guidelines. As per the Central
government guidelines, in phase 1 of the lockdown (March 25 to April 14) all government
offices, autonomous bodies and commercial establishments, other than those involved in
essential and emergency services, were to remain closed . During phase 2 (April 15 to May 3),
from April 20 onwards, among other relaxations, all government offices, autonomous bodies
and public corporations were allowed to open. All officials of the rank of Deputy Secretary
and above were to attend office, while below that rank, attendance of upto 33% of staff was
allowed.
This report examines whether the information commissions: issued any notification regarding
the status of their functioning during the lockdown; made any provision for hearing urgent
matters during the time when normal functioning was suspended, and; whether they were
hearing appeals/complaints as of May 15, 2020. In addition, information has been collated
for each commission on: the number of commissioners; quantum of backlog of
appeals/complaints; and whether the website is functional. For ICs where information on the
number of pending appeals/complaints could not be located on the website, data published
in the 2019 assessment by SNS, has been used.
The key findings of the assessment are presented in section III, followed by a set of
recommendations in section IV. A commission-wise snapshot of the performance of ICs is
presented in section V and a summary of the notifications issued by ICs in section VI.

III. Findings

1. Hearing and disposal of appeals and complaints during the COVID 19 lockdown
• 21 commissions, out of a total of 29, were not holding any hearings as of May 15,
2020. These were the state information commissions of Assam, Andhra Pradesh,
Bihar, Goa, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu,
Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal.
• 8 commissions were holding hearings and disposing cases as of May 15, 2020. The
Central Information Commission and four state information commissions of
Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Haryana and Telangana were holding hearings and
disposing appeals/complaints on all matters, though in Haryana only the Chief was
working. The SICs of Manipur, Punjab and Rajasthan were available only for urgent
matters or those involving life or liberty.
• The SIC of Andhra Pradesh was only taking up matters in which information had been
denied and was deciding these on the basis of available documents, without holding
any hearings.

3
All the guidelines can be accessed at- https://www.mha.gov.in/media/whats-new

2
2. Provision for taking up urgent matters during the lockdown
Following the announcement of the lockdown on March 24, 2020, when normal
functioning of nearly all institutions was affected, only 7 commissions, out of a total of
29, issued notifications to make provision for taking up urgent matters or those related
to life and liberty. These were the Central Information Commission and the state
information commissions of Arunachal Pradesh, Haryana, Manipur, Punjab and
Telangana. The SIC of Rajasthan made provision for hearing such matters, though only
from May 4, 2020.

3. Availability of lockdown related notifications on IC websites

Websites of 11 commissions out of 29, had no information/notification about the
functioning of the IC during lockdown. These were the commissions of Assam, Bihar,
Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland,
Sikkim and Tripura. However, the SICs of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur and Sikkim
informed us telephonically that notifications had been issued (but not uploaded on their
websites). Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Manipur ICs shared a copy of their notifications.
18 commissions which had information/notifications on their website regarding their
functioning during the lockdown were the Central Information Commission and the state
information commissions of Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Goa,
Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil
Nadu, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal.

4. Accessibility of websites
The websites of 3 ICs - Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Nagaland - were not accessible during
the lockdown even though attempts were made to reach the websites on different days
between May 1 and the May 11, 2020, when the web analysis was undertaken.
This is extremely problematic during a time when offices are shut and the primary way for
citizens to know about the functioning of commissions and the (re)scheduling of cases is
through their websites.
It appears that the website of the Bihar SIC has been inaccessible for more than 28
months. An assessment published in 2018 had also found the website to be non-
functional. Even the website of the SIC of Madhya Pradesh has been inaccessible for
several months while that of Nagaland appeared to be experiencing technical problems.

5. Information commissions without any commissioners during the COVID crisis

Of the 29 ICs, two commissions - Jharkhand and Tripura - were found to have no
commissioners for varying lengths of time. They were completely defunct as the serving
information commissioner in both retired during the period of the lockdown. These were
routine and scheduled retirements occurring due to the commissioner either completing
the stipulated tenure or attaining the age of 65 years. The Chief of the Tripura SIC, who
was appointed in September 2019, retired in April 2020 upon attaining the age of 65. He
was the only serving commissioner in the IC. The acting Chief of the Jharkhand SIC, who
was again the lone commissioner in the state, finished his tenure on May 8, 2020 and the
latest announcement on the IC website states that on account of posts of the Chief and

3
 information commissioners being vacant, all scheduled hearings of appeals and
complaints shall remain adjourned till new appointments are made.

6. Headless commissions during the lockdown

Of the 29 ICs, 4 were functioning without a Chief Information Commissioner- Bihar, Goa,
Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. The SIC of Rajasthan has been functioning without a Chief
Information Commissioner for more than 15 months, since December 2018. The Chiefs of
the Goa and Uttar Pradesh SICs retired in February 2020, while the Chief of the Bihar SIC
retired in July 2019.

IV. Recommendations

It is behind the cloak of secrecy that the rights of individuals are most frequently abrogated
and corruption thrives. The Supreme Court of India has held in several judgments that the
right to information is a fundamental right4 flowing from Article 19 and Article 21 of the
Constitution, which guarantee citizens the freedom of speech and expression and the right to
life, respectively. In a judgment dated February 15, 2019, the Supreme Court5 held that
information commissions are vital for the smooth working of the transparency law.
During the COVID 19 crisis, the role of information commissions in guaranteeing compliance
with the provisions of the transparency law, is more critical than ever before to ensure the
RTI Act is not trampled. While in the midst of a pandemic, it is reasonable to expect some
delays in processing information requests, commissions must not abdicate their statutory
role in ensuring access to information, especially related to delivery of essential commodities
and services. In fact, there are adequate provisions in the RTI Act for commissions to
accommodate delays due to extenuating circumstances. For instance, if reasonable cause can
be shown for providing information after the expiry of the stipulated time-period, the
information commission has the discretion to not impose a penalty on the PIO (Public
Information Officer). Similarly, appellate authorities can relax the limitation period for filing
appeals if the appellant can show sufficient cause for the delay.
The following steps need to be adopted to ensure that information commissions play their
role effectively in the midst of the crisis so that people can exercise their democratic right to
know and are able to hold the government accountable for delivery of their rights and
entitlements.

1. Effective and timely disposal of cases: Although challenges thrown up by the crisis are
immense, it is absolutely critical that all information commissions conduct hearings and
dispose cases to ensure people can exercise their fundamental right to information. Given
the nature of the crisis, which could result in frequent lockdowns and disruptions over the
next several months, possibly years, information commissions have the obligation to put

4
State of UP v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 865, S.P. Gupta v. President of India and Ors, AIR 1982 SC 149, Reliance
Petrochemicals Ltd vs Proprietors Of Indian Express 1989 AIR 190, Union of India v. Association for Democratic
Reforms, AIR 2002 SC 2002, Reserve Bank of India Versus Jayantilal N. Mistry (2016) 3 SCC 525, Anjali Bhardwaj
and others v. Union of India and others (Writ Petition No. 436 of 2018)
5Anjali Bhardwaj and others v. Union of India and others (Writ Petition No. 436 of 2018) http://judicialreforms.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/02/15968_2018_Judgement_15-Feb-2019.pdf

4
 in place mechanisms, including people friendly technological solutions, in case physical
hearings are not possible.
Commissions like the CIC, have shown that it is possible for commissioners to continue to
hear and adjudicate on cases despite a lockdown. Given the high penetration of phones
in even remote areas of the country, commissions should hold hearings telephonically to
connect with PIOs and appellants/complainants to hear matters. Where possible, video
calls can be set up through various commonly used applications or through government
facilities including National Informatics Centre (NIC) studios while following necessary
precautions like ensuring physical distancing.
Provision of relevant information about relief measures and expenditure of public funds
must be deemed essential during the pandemic, since without availability of information
these programs will not reach the intended beneficiaries.
The backlog of appeals and complaints was already large in many information
commissions even before the current crisis, resulting in inordinate delays in disposal of
cases. If commissions are not functional, the backlogs will further increase rendering the
law meaningless for many.

2. Prioritization of cases dealing with information related to life and liberty: Even as
commissions become fully functional, cases related to life and liberty - especially matters
regarding food distribution, social security, health and COVID 19-related issues – must be
prioritized and taken up in a time-bound manner by the ICs for hearing and disposal. This
would require the commissions to set up systems to identify and fast track such cases.
Section 7(1) of the RTI Act states that information concerning the life or liberty of a person
has to be supplied within 48 hours of the request being received. Research has repeatedly
shown that most commissions have not adopted any specific procedures for fast-tracking
appeals/complaints for such matters6. This effectively incapacitates the provision as these
appeals/complaints enter the regular cycle and are disposed after many months or years,
depending on the backlogs in the commissions.
Further, given the evolving nature of the crisis, if normal functioning of commissions
needs to be suspended in the future for any length of time, provision must be made for
atleast taking up urgent matters and those related to life and liberty.

3. Ensuring pro-active disclosure of information under Section 4 of the RTI Act: To cope
with the crisis, it is absolutely crucial that all relevant information related to relief
measures announced by governments be widely disseminated. Without transparency,
these measures are unlikely to be successful. For instance, for effective delivery of rations
under the Public Distribution System, there must be information in the public domain
about: the quantity of foodgrains and other commodities people are entitled to get; the
list of all ration shops with phone numbers and addresses; shop-wise details of people
entitled to get subsidized rations; daily stock position of all shops; and record of
distribution. In the absence of this information, ground reports have revealed that ration

6
Chapter 2, ‘Report Card of Information Commissions in India’, SNS & CES, 2018,
(http://snsindia.org/IC2018.pdf)

5
 shop keepers have been undersupplying to the beneficiaries7, and in many cases keeping
their shops closed on the pretext that they have no rations, even though ration stocks
have been supplied to them8. This is equally true for delivery of other social security,
health and basic services.
Commissions must direct public authorities to disseminate relevant information under
Section 4 of the RTI Act in local languages and in the most accessible manner. While
information must be made available on government websites, it must also be widely
disseminated through off-line modes like sms, whatsapp, public announcements and
prominent poster/boards/wall paintings in villages and slums and at points of disbursal
such as ration shops, banks and hospitals to ensure that those without access to the
internet are also able to obtain the necessary information.
Commissions must also direct relevant governments to proactively disclose information
about money received and disbursed under various relief funds, including the PM CARES
Fund and various Chief Minister relief funds, to enable public scrutiny. Transparency is
essential to ensure money is spent on the most pressing priority needs during the crisis.
A very large percentage of the population does not have the resources to file an RTI
application to ask for information and follow up with appeals/complaints in case of denial.
For them, the most effective way to obtain information is though meaningful pro-active
disclosures by public authorities. Unfortunately, research has shown that Section 4 of the
RTI Act is followed more in the breach. Nearly 70% of RTI requests filed by people seek
information that should have been proactively provided by government9. Unfortunately,
enough has not been done by commissions to ensure compliance with the provisions of
section 4. It is therefore imperative that commissions use their powers and make sure
that these provisions are strictly complied with.

4. Urgent digitization of records and proper record management: E-governance has been
an important agenda of the central and state governments in India and a large amount of
public funds have been spent over the years on ensuring that records are digitized. The
current crisis has exposed serious gaps in the digitization of public records. Lack of remote
access to records in the lockdown has been widely cited as the reason for not being able
to conduct hearings of appeals and complaints by commissions.
ICs must undertake an audit of record keeping in each public authority and use their
powers under the law including in sections 19(8) and 25(5), to ensure public authorities
undertake urgent and appropriate steps for digitization.

5. Appointment of information commissioners: The state information commissions of

Jharkhand and Tripura were found to be defunct as they had no information
commissioners. In the absence of functional commissions, information seekers have no
reprieve under the RTI Act if they are unable to access information as per the provisions
of the law. Not appointing information commissioners also results in a huge backlog of

7
‘Cardholders claim shops ‘swindle’ extra ration’, The Hindu, May 11, 2020
(https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/cardholders-claim-shops-swindle-extra-
ration/article31553726.ece)
8
‘COVID-19: Delhi PDS Shops Shut, Owners Say Lack of Supplies’, April 2, 2020
(https://www.newsclick.in/COVID-19-delhi-PDS-shops-shut-owners-lack-supplies-owners-state-lack-supplies)
9
Chapter 4, ‘Peoples’ Monitoring of the RTI Regime in India’, 2011-2013, RaaG & CES, 2014

6
 appeals and complaints, and consequent long delays in disposal of cases. This amounts to
a violation of peoples’ right to information. The Supreme Court, in its February 2019
judgment10, directed that governments must appoint adequate number of commissioners
based on the workload of each IC. It further directed that the appointments should be
made in a transparent manner and the process should be initiated atleast 1-2 months
before the date on which the vacancy is likely to occur to prevent any time-lag between
the occurrence of a vacancy and the appointment.
The central and all state governments must immediately ensure appointment of adequate
number of commissioners in keeping with the Supreme Court’s judgment.

6. Ensuring information access for all: The notification issued by the information
commission of Arunachal Pradesh states that due to the COVID crisis, appeals and
complaints will be accepted only via email. This implies that citizens who do not have
access to a computer and the internet cannot appeal against the violation of their
fundamental right to information. During the crisis, it is important to make sure that the
poor and vulnerable, who are most dependent on the government for their survival and
need information the most, are not excluded. Commissions must take into account the
digital divide in the country while taking decisions about their functioning and while
directing information disclosure.

7. Facility for online filing of RTI applications and appeals: Governments should put in place
a mechanism for online filing of RTI applications. Online portals should also provide
facilities for electronic filing of first appeals and second appeals/complaints. This is will
facilitate peoples’ right to information even during times like the current crisis when
physical movement is restricted and will save considerable cost of transportation and
postage. However, the online facility must be in addition to physical filing of requests and
appeals. At present, only the central government and the governments of Delhi,
Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh provide a portal for online filing of RTI applications.

10
Anjali Bhardwaj and others v. Union of India and others (Writ Petition No. 436 of 2018)
http://judicialreforms.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/15968_2018_Judgement_15-Feb-2019.pdf

7
V. Snapshot of performance of commissions during the COVID 19 crisis

Central Information Commission

Number of Commissioners: 7
Website accessible: Yes Status on
Matters pending on 15/5/20: 35,821 May 15:
Holding
hearings and
Provision for hearing disposing
Notification issued by IC regarding cases
urgent matters during
functioning during lockdown: Yes
lockdown: Yes

Andhra Pradesh

Status on
Number of Commissioners: 4
Website accessible: Yes May 15:
Matters pending on 31/1/20: 4,464
No hearings.
Only passing
orders in
Provision for hearing cases where
Notification issued by IC regarding information
urgent matters during
functioning during lockdown: Yes was denied
lockdown: No

Arunachal Pradesh

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: Yes Status on
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 63 May 15:
Holding
hearings and
Provision for hearing disposing
Notification issued by IC regarding cases
urgent matters during
functioning during lockdown: Yes
lockdown: Yes

8
 Assam

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/2019: 727 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: No urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Bihar

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: No
Matters pending on 15/5/20: not known Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Chhattisgarh

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: Yes Status on
Matters pending on 1/1/19: 9,137 May 15:
Holding
hearings and
Provision for hearing disposing
Notification issued by IC regarding cases
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

9
 Goa

Number of Commissioners: 2
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 170 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Gujarat

Number of Commissioners: 5
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 30/4/20: 4,888 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Haryana

Number of Commissioners: 8 Status on

Website accessible: Yes May 15:
Matters pending on 29/2/20: 3,518
Only Chief
holding
hearings and
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing disposing
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during cases
lockdown: Yes

10
 Himachal Pradesh

Number of Commissioners: 2
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 285 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing being held
functioning during lockdown: Could not be urgent matters during
located on website lockdown: Not known

Jharkhand

Number of Commissioners: 0 Status on

Website accessible: Yes May 15:
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 1,362
Defunct, as
sole
commissioner
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing retired on
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during 8/5/20
lockdown: No

Karnataka

Number of Commissioners: 10
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/17: 41,800 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

11
 Kerala

Number of Commissioners: 5
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/1/20: 9,948 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: No urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Madhya Pradesh

Number of Commissioners: 8
Website accessible: No
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 6,069 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Maharashtra

Number of Commissioners: 5
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 29/2/20: 58,185 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

12
 Manipur

Number of Commissioners: 1 Status on

Website accessible: Yes May 15:
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 140
Provision for
hearing only
matters
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing related to
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during life or liberty
lockdown: Yes

Meghalaya

Number of Commissioners: 1
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 0 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing being held
functioning during lockdown: Could not be urgent matters during
located on website lockdown: Not known

Mizoram

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 0 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: No urgent matters during
lockdown: No

13
 Nagaland

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: No
Matters pending on 1/3/19: 5 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: No urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Odisha

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: Yes Status on
Matters pending on 1/1/20: 14,689
May 15:
Not
disposing
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing cases
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

Punjab

Number of Commissioners: 9 Status on

Website accessible: Yes May 15:
Matters pending on 29/2/20: 2,258
Provision for
hearing only
matters
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing related to
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during life or liberty
lockdown: Yes

14
 Rajasthan

Number of Commissioners: 3 Status on

Website accessible: Yes May 15:
Matters pending on 28/2/19: 7,372
Provision for
hearing only
Provision for hearing matters
Notification issued by IC regarding urgent matters during related to
functioning during lockdown: Yes lockdown: Yes, May 4 life or liberty
onwards

Sikkim

Number of Commissioners: 2
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 0 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing being held
functioning during lockdown: Could not be urgent matters during
located on the website lockdown: No

Tamil Nadu

Number of Commissioners: 7
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 1/1/19: 8,756 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

15
 Telangana

Number of Commissioners: 7
Website accessible: Yes Status on
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 8,829 May 15:
Holding
hearings and
Provision for hearing disposing
Notification issued by IC regarding cases
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: Yes

Tripura

Number of Commissioners: 0 Status on

Website accessible: Yes May 15:
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 0
Defunct, as
sole
commissioner
Notification issued by IC regarding Provision for hearing retired in
functioning during lockdown: No urgent matters during April 2020
lockdown: No

Uttar Pradesh

Number of Commissioners: 10
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 1/1/20: 46,284 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

16
 Uttarakhand

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/20: 473 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

West Bengal

Number of Commissioners: 3
Website accessible: Yes
Matters pending on 31/3/19: 7,754 Status on
May 15:
No hearings
Provision for hearing being held
Notification issued by IC regarding
functioning during lockdown: Yes urgent matters during
lockdown: No

17
 VI. Summary of notifications issued by ICs regarding their functioning
during the lockdown due to the Covid-19 pandemic

Central Information Commission: As per order dated March 25, 2020, the office of Central
Information Commission was closed for a period of 21 days with effect from 25.03.2020 and
all cases scheduled for hearing were deferred. Provision was made for hearing matters of
urgency through audio conference. For such matters, people were asked to contact the
deputy registrars of information commissioners, and their phone numbers were published on
the website.
Andhra Pradesh: As per the notifications issued by the SIC, all hearings scheduled between
March 25 to May 3 were cancelled. From May 4 onwards, the notification stated that all
information commissioners will take up only those cases where no reply or decision has been
furnished to the applicant by the PIO/FAA or both and will dispose matters based on available
records. The notification stated that cases where decision/reply was furnished to the
applicant, would be heard after the lockdown is removed.
Arunachal Pradesh: As per notice dated March 20, 2020 all hearings from March 23 to April
5, 2020 were suspended. The notice stated that urgent cases shall be heard as required. As
per press release dated April 20, provisions were made to hold hearings via video conference
through an app. The commission suspended receipt of appeals/complaints in physical form
and required these to be filed only via email. As per notification dated May 4, 2020, all
pending hearings were resumed through video/audio conferencing.
Bihar: Vide notice dated March 26, 2020 all hearings scheduled till April 14, 2020 were
adjourned. The notice stated that the SIC would not accept any new appeals/complaints
during this period. Further, it clarified that the notice would stand automatically modified in
light of any follow-up orders/instructions issued by the National Disaster Management
Authority, Ministry of Home Affairs, Health Ministry or the Government of Bihar.
Chhattisgarh: As per information on the homepage of the SIC, all hearing from March 23 till
May 3, 2020 were suspended. The SIC resumed hearing matter from May 4, onwards.
Goa: As per the latest order dated April 20, 2020 on the website of the SIC, all hearings have
been suspended until further notice.
Gujarat: All hearings during the period March 20 to 27, 2020 were adjourned other than the
hearing through video conference at Bhavnagar on March 23. No further information could
be located on the website.
Haryana: All appeals/complaints scheduled for hearing upto May 1, 2020 were
adjourned. Provision was made bring to the notice of the SIC any matter of urgency or related
to life and liberty by contacting the Deputy Registrar whose contact details were provided on
the website. Further, matters listed before commissioners other than the Chief, were
adjourned for varying periods of time. Three commissioners adjourned matters till May 15,
one till May 28, two till May 31 and one till July 1, 2020.
Jharkhand: The initial notice on the SIC website postponed all hearings between March 18,
2020 and May 17, 2020. However, as the acting Chief, who was the lone commissioner,

18
finished his tenure on May 8, 2020, the notice was changed and now states that all scheduled
hearings of appeals and complaints shall remain adjourned till the appointment of the Chief
or an information commissioner.
Karnataka: As per the notifications on the SIC website, all hearings scheduled till May 16,
2020 were postponed.
Madhya Pradesh: An order of the SIC dated May 1, 2020 was accessed off line, since the
commission’s website is non-functional. It laid down the procedure for staggered working of
the staff of the commission but contained no details regarding hearing and disposal of
appeals/complaints by the SIC.
Maharashtra: A document named ‘Sunavani Cancel’ available under the link ‘Important
Letters’ on the SIC website states that hearings scheduled for March 17 and 18, 2020 were
cancelled due to the Covid-19 virus. In addition, notices regarding suspension of hearings are
available on the link to the cause lists for the Aurangabad and Nasik benches. The notice for
the Aurangabad bench states that hearings for March 23, 24 and 26 were adjourned and the
next date of hearing would be informed in due course. The notice for the Nasik bench states
that hearings scheduled for April 20, 2020 stand postponed. No further
information/notification could be located on the website.
Manipur: As per notification dated March 16, 2020, all proceedings regarding
appeals/complaints till March 31 were adjourned. Provision was made to look into matters
related to life or liberty as per the proviso to section 7(1). As per notification dated May 4, the
SIC will resume all hearings from May 18 through audio/video conferencing.
Odisha: As per the notices available on the SIC website, all matters posted for hearings till
May 16, 2020 were adjourned.
Punjab: As per information on the homepage of the SIC, while appeals/complaints pending in
the commission stand adjourned until the duration of the ongoing curfew/lockdown,
provision has been made to hear matters of utmost urgency pertaining to ‘Life and Liberty’
by a bench comprising the Chief and an information commissioner.
Rajasthan: As per notifications all matters posted for hearings between March 18 and May
3, 2020 were adjourned. Subsequently, an order dated May 4, 2020 stated that the SIC would
hear only extremely urgent matters. The order also states that if after filing an RTI application
under the life and liberty clause and the first appeal, information is not provided or the
applicant is dissatisfied, she/he can send the second appeal and all the relevant documents
to SIC on a designated mobile number. If the appeal is deemed to be urgent, the SIC will
proceed in the matter. No such mechanism for urgent matters was available prior to May 4,
2020.
Tamil Nadu: As per notice dated March 23, 2020 all cases posted for enquiry upto March 31,
2020 were adjourned. No further information could be located on the website.
Telangana: As per information on the homepage of the SIC, while all hearings posted till April
30 were postponed due to the lockdown, in case of urgency, the deputy secretary/secretary

19
(law) could be contacted on the numbers listed. Subsequently, the commission decided to
hear cases telephonically dispensing with personal appearance of parties.
Uttar Pradesh: As per orders on the website, all hearings scheduled between March 18, 2020
and May 17, 2020 stand adjourned.
Uttarakhand: As per notifications on the website, all hearings of second appeals and
complaints from March 19, 2020 onwards stand adjourned until further notice. Notification
dated May 4, 2020 states that while the SIC has re-opened, it will carry out only administrative
work and all hearings will remain adjourned until further notice.
West Bengal: Initially, as per the notice available on the website, the commission decided
that between March 16 and March 31, 2020 only urgent cases which have already been
scheduled for this period would be heard and all others would be rescheduled. However from
March 23 onwards, the commission decided that the office of the SIC would be closed and all
hearings would be rescheduled. The notification did not make any provision for urgent
matters or those related to life and liberty. The latest order states that in view of the extension
of nation-wide lockdown for 2 weeks beyond May 3, 2020, the office of the West Bengal
Information Commission will resume its functions after lifting of the restrictive orders, as
decided by the Full Bench of the Commission.

***

20