Inside a busy city administration office, Joint Municipal Commissioner Keerthi, who also serves as the Public Information Officer (PIO), faces a challenging situation. Recently, an RTI application has been received, demanding details about public infrastructure projects initiated during her tenure. Upon reviewing the requested information, Keerthi discovers that certain decisions made regarding these projects were not entirely sound in hindsight. These decisions, although taken in good faith and after due diligence, failed to realize promised outcomes. There were other employees also who were party to this decision. The disclosure of this information could potentially lead to scrutiny and backlash against herself, the employees, and contractors involved. Known for her integrity and commitment to public service, Keerthi finds herself at a crossroads. The RTI Act has served as a critical check against administrative arbitrariness, ensuring transparency and accountability. However, she also observes a troubling trend. RTI applications are often used by vested interests and activists seeking personal gain rather than genuine public interest. Some activists even resort to threats or extortion tactics, undermining the integrity of the RTI process. She fears the requested RTI information could be similarly exploited. Moreover, the employees involved are requesting her to withhold the information. In navigating this situation, Keerthi weighs her options carefully. (a) Critically examine the options available to Keerthi in the above situation. (b) Which of the above would be the most appropriate for Keerthi and why?

Answered by 2 toppers · CSE 2025

Syllabus: Case Studies on above issues.