In a case raising questions over transparency, an RTI applicant has accused the President of a state education council of issuing a “threatening and indecent” reply.
Applicant Sabir Ahamed said he had sought yearly data on Higher Secondary Examination candidates by social group. He also asked for pass rates. He alleged the President avoided giving exact details. Instead, the reply included hostility and irrelevant explanations.
Ahamed claimed he never got the specific figures for the years he mentioned. He stressed the RTI Act does not require applicants to explain why they want the information. He accused the President of trying to intimidate him rather than follow the law.
The President’s official reply, dated August 2025, cited Memo no. SPIO/HQ/31/2025. It denied the allegations. The letter said the data for 2015–2024 had already been given earlier. It added that information from 2011–2014 was not available.
The reply accused Ahamed of “persisting and repeatedly badgering the Council” for the same data. It said meeting his request for 2011–2025 figures would be an “onerous” task. It would take away resources from the Council’s main duties.
The President also said Ahamed’s request failed the RTI Act’s “larger public interest” test. The letter claimed he had not stated the purpose of his request. It said the Council had “more than accommodated” his queries in the past.
Transparency advocates disagree. They point out that the RTI Act requires authorities to share information unless exempted under specific provisions. Applicants are not bound to explain how they will use the data. They say discourteous or evasive replies erode public trust.
Officials argue that repetitive, large RTI queries are burdensome. Activists insist the law is meant to ensure accountability, not to shield authorities from inconvenience.
It is unclear if Ahamed will appeal to higher authorities or the State Information Commission. The case highlights the friction between citizens seeking data and institutions that must provide it.
