Section 2: Definitions

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

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 2005

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 2

Section 2 provides the foundational statutory dictionary of the RTI Act, defining vital operational concepts—including 'public authority', 'information', 'record', 'right to information', 'third party', and 'competent authority'—which define the jurisdictional scope and threshold eligibility of entities and records under the Act.

  • Expansive Scope of 'Information' and 'Record': Under Section 2(f), 'information' encompasses any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in electronic form, as well as information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; Section 2(i) expansively defines 'record' to include any document, manuscript, file, microfilm, microfiche, facsimile copy, reproduction of image, or computer-generated material.
  • Quadripartite Test of 'Public Authority' & 'Substantially Financed': Section 2(h) classifies 'public authority' into: (a) bodies established by or under the Constitution; (b) bodies established by Parliamentary enactment; (c) bodies established by State Legislature; and (d) bodies established by notification or order of the appropriate Government. Clause (d) extends to bodies owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the appropriate Government, and explicitly encompasses non-government organisations substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by government funds.
  • Dimensions of 'Right to Information' and Citizen Exclusivity: Section 2(j) defines the right to information as the right to inspect work, documents, and records; take notes, extracts, or certified copies of documents or records; take certified samples of material; and obtain information in electronic or printed form. Read with Section 3, this substantive right is vested exclusively in Indian citizens, precluding foreign corporate entities from direct statutory invocation.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Thalappalam Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2013) 16 SCC 82: The Supreme Court held that cooperative societies registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act are not 'public authorities' under Section 2(h) merely because they are regulated or supervised by statutory authorities; 'control' must be deep, pervasive, and management-level, and 'substantial financing' must be actual and material, not merely regulatory or advisory.
  • D.A.V. College Trust and Management Society v. Director of Public Instruction (2019) 9 SCC 738: The Supreme Court held that 'substantial financing' under Section 2(h) does not mean more than 50% or majority funding; it means real, substantial, or positive financial contribution that enables the institution to function, and includes indirect financing such as the allotment of prime public land at concessional, nominal, or heavily subsidized rates.
  • Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal (2020) 5 SCC 481: The Constitution Bench held that the office of the Chief Justice of India is a 'public authority' within the meaning of Section 2(h), as the Chief Justice is a constitutional authority created by the Constitution, rejecting the argument that the administrative office of the CJI is separate from the institution of the Supreme Court.
  • CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) 8 SCC 497: The Supreme Court held that an evaluated answer-book is 'information' under Section 2(f) and an examinee is entitled to inspect and obtain copies of evaluated answer-sheets under Section 2(j), rejecting the contention of the examination board that answer papers are held in fiduciary relationship towards students.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In defending private schools, trusts, or cooperative banks against RTI requisitions, immediately verify financial statements to establish that government assistance is either non-existent or purely incidental/nominal, thereby defeating the Section 2(h) threshold. Furthermore, emphasize that Section 2(f) requires a public authority to provide only pre-existing 'material' or 'records'; a PIO cannot be compelled to create new data, answer hypothetical questions, offer speculative legal opinions, or solve grievances under the guise of an RTI query.