Home  /  Right to Information Act, 2005  /  Section 11

Section 11: Third party information

Right to Information Act, 2005 • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 2005
Section 10 All 31 Sections of Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 12

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 11

Section 11 establishes a mandatory quasi-judicial procedure for dealing with RTI requests seeking disclosure of information supplied by or relating to a third party that has been treated as confidential, providing strict timelines for notice, representation, and determination, balanced against an overriding public interest test.

  • Mandatory 5-Day Notice to Third Party: Under Section 11(1), if the PIO intends to disclose any information or record which relates to or has been supplied by a third party and has been treated as confidential by that third party, the PIO must give written notice to such third party within five days from the receipt of the request.
  • 10-Day Window for Third-Party Representation: The third party must be given ten days from the date of receipt of notice to make written or oral submissions stating whether the information should be disclosed and detailing any prejudice or competitive harm.
  • Strict 40-Day Adjudication and Statutory Appeal Suspension: Under Section 11(3), the PIO must make a decision within 40 days of receipt of the request. If the PIO decides to disclose the information, written notice must be given to the third party stating that they are entitled to prefer an appeal under Section 19; the PIO cannot release the information until the appeal period expires or the appeal is adjudicated.
  • Balancing Public Interest against Commercial Injury: Under the proviso to Section 11(1), trade or commercial secrets protected by law cannot be disclosed; for other confidential third-party records, disclosure is permissible only if the public interest in disclosure distinctly outweighs in importance any possible harm or injury to the interests of the third party.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Arvind Kejriwal v. Central Public Information Officer (2010 SCC OnLine Del 2318): The Delhi High Court held that the procedure prescribed under Section 11 is mandatory and not directory; failure to issue notice to the affected third party before disclosing confidential submissions or appraisal records vitiates the disclosure order as a violation of natural justice.
  • Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Gujarat State Information Commission (2007 SCC OnLine Guj 232): The Gujarat High Court held that third-party rights to confidentiality and trade secrets are substantive; an order directing disclosure of proprietary contracts without hearing the third party under Section 11 is null and void.
  • Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Chander Sekhar (2012 SCC OnLine Del 1774): The High Court ruled that Section 11 creates an adversarial procedure ensuring that commercial entities are protected against competitive espionage through RTI applications, mandating strict compliance with notice requirements.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In representing a third party whose commercial, technical, or financial bids are sought under RTI, immediately file a detailed written objection within 10 days of the Section 11(1) notice, invoking Section 8(1)(d) and detailing irreparable commercial injury. If the PIO nevertheless decides to order disclosure, file an immediate first appeal under Section 19(2) within 30 days and serve a copy on the PIO; by operation of Section 11(3), the PIO is statutorily precluded from releasing the records until the appeal is disposed of.

Section 10 All 31 Sections of Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 12