Home  /  Right to Information Act, 2005  /  Section 23

Section 23: Bar of jurisdiction of Courts

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

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 2005
Section 22 All 31 Sections of Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 24

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 23

Section 23 enacts an express statutory bar precluding civil courts from entertaining any suit, application, or other proceeding in respect of any order made under the RTI Act, ensuring that challenges are channeled exclusively through the statutory appellate hierarchy and constitutional writ jurisdiction.

  • Total Exclusion of Civil Court Jurisdiction: Expressly dictates that 'no court shall entertain any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any order made under this Act and no such order shall be called in question otherwise than by way of an appeal under this Act'.
  • Self-Contained Appellate Hierarchy: Replaces civil court oversight with an exhaustive two-tier administrative appeal mechanism (First Appellate Authority under Section 19(1) and Central/State Information Commission under Section 19(3)), giving finality to Commission orders within the statutory scheme.
  • Preservation of Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 and 32: The statutory exclusion applies to ordinary civil courts and cannot curtail or abridge the constitutional supervisory and writ jurisdiction of High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 or the Supreme Court under Articles 32 and 136.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Dhulabhai v. State of M.P. (AIR 1969 SC 78): The Constitution Bench established the definitive principles governing the exclusion of civil court jurisdiction; where a special statute creates a liability not existing at common law, provides a complete code of remedies, and contains an express bar, civil court jurisdiction is completely ousted.
  • Union of India v. Namit Sharma (2013) 10 SCC 359: The Supreme Court affirmed that decisions of Information Commissions are quasi-judicial in character and are subject to judicial review only under Articles 226 and 227 before the High Court, and not through collateral civil suits.
  • Radha Raman v. State of UP (2011 SCC OnLine All 1342): The Allahabad High Court held that a civil suit filed by an employee or third party seeking an injunction to restrain a PIO from releasing records pursuant to an RTI order is barred under Section 23 and liable to be rejected at the threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

If a party files an ordinary civil suit for declaration or permanent injunction seeking to halt an RTI disclosure, immediately file an application under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC for rejection of the plaint, citing the absolute statutory bar of Section 23. Highlight that the plaintiff's sole statutory remedy is a first/second appeal under Section 19, or an extraordinary writ petition before the High Court under Article 226.

Section 22 All 31 Sections of Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 24