Section 27 RTI Act: Power to make rules by appropriate Government

Power to make rules by appropriate Government

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

(1) The appropriate Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:—

(a)the cost of the medium or print cost price of the materials to be disseminated under sub-section (4) of section 4;

(b)the fee payable under sub-section (1) of section 6;

(c)the fee payable under sub-sections (1) and (5) of section 7;

(d)the salaries and allowances payable to and the terms and conditions of service of the officers and other employees under sub-section (6) of section 13 and sub-section (6) of section 16;

(e)the procedure to be adopted by the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, in deciding the appeals under sub-section (10) of section 19; and

(f)any other matter which is required to be, or may be, prescribed.

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 27

Section 27 confers broad rule-making authority upon the appropriate Government (Central and State Governments) to prescribe procedures, application fees, inspection costs, and service conditions, bounded by the requirement that subordinate legislation cannot dilute substantive statutory rights.

Plenary Rule-Making Authority under Section 27(1): The appropriate Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of the Act across public authorities under its administrative control.
Enumerated Rule-Making Matters under Section 27(2): Rules may specifically prescribe: (a) cost of medium or printouts under Sec 4(4); (b) application fees under Sec 6(1); (c) reproduction fees under Sec 7(1) and (5); (d) terms of office, salaries, and allowances under Sec 13 and 16; (e) appellate procedure under Sec 19(10); and (f) any other prescribed administrative matter.
Subordinate Legislation Boundaries and Ultra Vires Doctrine: Rules framed under Section 27 cannot exceed the legislative boundaries of the parent Act; any rule that creates new grounds of exemption, imposes unreasonable financial burdens, or curtails statutory rights is ultra vires and unconstitutional.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Common Cause v. High Court of Allahabad (2018) 14 SCC 344: The Supreme Court struck down exorbitant RTI application fees and scanning charges prescribed under subordinate rules, holding that fees under Section 27 and Section 28 must be reasonable, cost-reflective, and non-prohibitive so as not to frustrate the fundamental right to know.
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Shaunak H. Satya (2011) 8 SCC 781: The Supreme Court ruled that delegated rule-making power under Section 27 cannot be exercised to expand the categories of exemption beyond Section 8 or restrict the statutory rights conferred by Parliament.
Namit Sharma v. Union of India (2013) 10 SCC 359: Reiterated that subordinate rules framed under Section 27 governing Commission procedure must preserve the quasi-judicial autonomy of the Commissions and ensure fair hearing.

Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In challenging excessive fees, mandatory identity verification rules, or restrictive application formats enacted by State Governments, file a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the rules as ultra vires Section 27. Rely on Common Cause v. High Court of Allahabad to establish that charging disproportionate fees (such as Rs. 100 or Rs. 500 per application) operates as an unconstitutional financial barrier defeating the socio-economic purpose of the parent Act.

Section 27: Power to make rules by appropriate Government

Power to make rules by appropriate Government

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 27