Q1. Which of the following scenarios would MOST LIKELY require the Governor to refer the removal of a State Information Commissioner to the Supreme Court?
- The Commissioner accepts a paid consultancy during tenure
- The Commissioner is adjudged insolvent by a civil court
- The Commissioner is found unfit due to mental illness
- Allegations of misuse of office for political gains are proven by a state-level inquiry
Correct Option: 4. Allegations of misuse of office for political gains are proven by a state-level inquiry.
Explanation: Misuse of office falls under “proved misbehaviour or incapacity”, which requires Supreme Court enquiry and recommendation for removal. Other options (1, 2, 3) are conditions where the Governor can remove directly, without court reference.
Q2. In which of the following cases can the State Information Commission invoke its suo-motu power of inquiry?
- To assess performance of a Public Information Officer after training
- When a complaint about delayed information is brought before it
- When widespread non-compliance with RTI provisions is observed through media reports
- To evaluate the financial practices of a public authority
Correct Option: 3. When widespread non-compliance with RTI provisions is observed through media reports.
Explanation: Suo-motu power allows the Commission to initiate an inquiry without a formal complaint, based on reasonable grounds. A media report indicating large-scale RTI non-compliance is a valid trigger. Options 1 and 4 exceed its jurisdiction; 2 is based on a formal complaint, not suo-motu.
Q3. After the 2019 RTI Amendment, which constitutional principle was most debated in relation to changes in the service conditions of Information Commissioners?
- Separation of Powers
- Federalism
- Judicial Review
- Rule of Law
Correct Option: 2. Federalism.
Explanation: The 2019 amendment centralized control over the tenure and service conditions of both Central and State Information Commissioners, which critics argued violated federalism—a core constitutional principle where states have autonomy. This led to debates over undermining state independence.
Q4. Under what condition can a public authority lawfully withhold a document from the State Information Commission during an inquiry?
- If it involves national security
- If the document is confidential
- If the authority has marked it “Classified”
- Under no condition can it withhold such a record
Correct Option: 4. Under no condition can it withhold such a record.
Explanation: During an inquiry, Section 18(3) of the RTI Act clearly states that no public record may be withheld from the Commission on any ground. Even classified or security-related documents must be submitted for examination by the Commission.
Q5. Which of the following is NOT a consequence the State Information Commission can enforce on a defaulting public authority?
- Direct the appointment of a new Public Information Officer
- Mandate publication of specific information proactively
- Order imprisonment of a defaulting officer
- Recommend training improvements for officials
Correct Option: 3. Order imprisonment of a defaulting officer.
Explanation: The Commission can:
-Direct corrective steps (1, 2, 4),
-Impose monetary penalties, and
-Recommend reforms,
-but it does not have judicial power to order imprisonment. This can only be done by a competent court, not an administrative tribunal like the SIC.