A Public Information Officer has received an application under RTI Act. Having gathered the information, the PIO discovers that the information pertains to some of the decisions taken by him, which were found to be not altogether right. There were other employees also who were party to these decisions. Disclosure of the information is likely to lead to disciplinary action with possibility of punishment against him as well as some of his colleagues. Non-disclosure or part disclosure or camouflaged disclosure of information will result into lesser punishment or no punishment. The PIO is otherwise an honest and conscientious person but this particular decision, on which the RTI application has been filed, turned out to be wrong. He comes to you for advice. The following are some suggested options. Please evaluate the merits and demerits of each of the options: (i) The PIO could refer the matter to his superior officer and seek his advice and act strictly in accordance with the advice, even though he is not completely in agreement with the advice of the superior. (ii) The PIO could proceed on leave and leave the matter to be dealt by his successor in office or request for transfer of the application to another PIO. (iii) The PIO could weigh the consequences of disclosing the information truthfully, including the effect on his career, and reply in a manner that would not place him or his career in jeopardy, but at the same time a little compromise can be made on the contents of the information. (iv) The PIO could consult his other colleagues who are party to the decision and take action as per their advice. Also please indicate (without necessarily restricting to the above options) what you would like to advise, giving proper reasons.

Model answer

Paper viewText view

2 pages3 pagesDetailedPDF

Exam length · 273wShort · 186wFull · 558w

Ghissu Editorial · Verified 4 Oct 2026 · 273 words

Q1.

A Public Information Officer has received an application under RTI Act. Having gathered the information, the PIO discovers that the information pertains to some of the decisions taken by him, which were found to be not altogether right. There were other employees also who were party to these decisions. Disclosure of the information is likely to lead to disciplinary action with possibility of punishment against him as well as some of his colleagues. Non-disclosure or part disclosure or camouflaged disclosure of information will result into lesser punishment or no punishment. The PIO is otherwise an honest and conscientious person but this particular decision, on which the RTI application has been filed, turned out to be wrong. He comes to you for advice. The following are some suggested options. Please evaluate the merits and demerits of each of the options: (i) The PIO could refer the matter to his superior officer and seek his advice and act strictly in accordance with the advice, even though he is not completely in agreement with the advice of the superior. (ii) The PIO could proceed on leave and leave the matter to be dealt by his successor in office or request for transfer of the application to another PIO. (iii) The PIO could weigh the consequences of disclosing the information truthfully, including the effect on his career, and reply in a manner that would not place him or his career in jeopardy, but at the same time a little compromise can be made on the contents of the information. (iv) The PIO could consult his other colleagues who are party to the decision and take action as per their advice. Also please indicate (without necessarily restricting to the above options) what you would like to advise, giving proper reasons.20

Introduction

An honest officer is tested most when his own mistake comes to light. The core dilemma is between Transparency under the RTI Act, 2005 and Solidarity with Colleagues, sharpened by a Conflict of Interest.

Evaluating the Merits and Demerits of Each Option

•

(i) CAPITULATE [Compromised-Hybrid]

Obeying the superior shares responsibility but is Conscience Laundering through Hierarchy; the duty is the PIO's own.

•

(ii) EVADE [Procedural-Evasive]

Leave or transfer removes the conflict but is Moral Escapism, and Section 6(3) provides only for transfer to another public authority.

•

(iii) COMPROMISE [Compromised-Hybrid]

Diluted content saves his career but is Yudhishthira's Half-Truth, penalised under Section 20.

•

(iv) CAPITULATE [Empathetic-Humanitarian]

Following colleagues shows loyalty but is In-Group Bias and a collective cover-up.

•

(v) RECONCILE ✓ [Balanced]

Disclose fully, own the error and defend good faith (recommended).

What I Would Advise, With Reasons

Transparency vs Solidarity with Colleagues. Venn diagram: Transparency, Solidarity with Colleagues; overlap: Full disclosure, good faith on record

•

Disclose on time

Give complete information within 30 days, as no Section 8 exemption covers embarrassment; the 2nd ARC (2006) [committee/report] called openness the master key to good governance.

•

Own the error

Record the good-faith context, since J. Ahmed (1979) [case] held an error of judgment is not misconduct by itself.

•

Support colleagues fairly

Inform them in advance and help them prepare their explanations, so loyalty means a fair defence, not concealment.

Justification:

Kant's Categorical Imperative: concealment by every PIO would make the RTI Act a dead letter.

Conclusion

Disclosing fully and owning the mistake protects both the law and the PIO's long record of integrity.

This model answer is indicative and the model can make mistakes; please verify key facts independently.

Question from the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) Examination 2013 paper. Answer written by Ghissu's engine and checked against our editorial standards. Found an error? Tell us and we correct it within 48 hours.