The Kerala High Court issued a detailed clarification on the scope of a Public Information Officer’s duties under the Right to Information Act, 2005, emphasizing that a PIO is responsible only for providing information that already exists in official records and has no authority or obligation to investigate or create new information in response to an RTI request.
A petitioner sought High Court intervention to confirm his appointment as college Principal after the university revoked its earlier approval and began disciplinary action. The university alleged that, while serving as the college’s PIO, he failed to authenticate a student’s degree certificates when responding to RTI requests. He argued that a PIO’s role is limited to supplying existing records—not investigating their validity.
The Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh has observed, “When the petitioner was the Public Information Officer and when he received RTI applications, he has acted as per the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005. There is no negligence or default on the part of the petitioner in processing and disposing of the RTI applications. The allegation is that when RTI applications were received, he should have investigated the issue raised by the RTI Applicant. As long as the petitioner is not the competent officer to deal with such complaint and as long as no specific complaint regarding any forged document is received, a Public Information Officer is not legally bound to start any investigation process. A Public Information Officer has no such power or obligation under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.”
The Court noted that even if the petitioner was negligent as PIO, a single instance of alleged negligence cannot justify denying his appointment as Principal, which followed a valid selection process. It also recorded that, following an interim court order, the University had already issued a provisional approval of his appointment on 03 June 2024.
Read Here: