Table of Contents
§4 disclosure continuity — SC directive line
Supreme Court of India · 2019-01-01 · Citation awaited
§4 disclosure must be kept current; stale §4(1)(b) pages do not satisfy the continuing-obligation standard.
Case details
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
|---|---|
| Decided | 2019-01-01 |
| Citation | Citation awaited |
| Petitioner | RTI activists collective |
| Respondent | Union/State governments |
| RTI Act sections | §4(1)(b), §4(2) |
| Outcome | Applicant allowed |
Outcome
Proactive disclosure under §4 must be kept current — stale 'last updated 2015' pages do not satisfy §4(2).
Ratio decidendi
§4(1)(b) mandates 17 categories of proactive disclosure; §4(2) creates a continuing obligation. A disclosure page last updated years earlier — showing old budgets, old officer lists — does not discharge the duty. Up-to-date publication is essential.
Keywords
§4 continuity, proactive disclosure, stale data
Similar cases in the corpus
These rulings have the closest editorial ratio to this case — computed by tf-idf cosine similarity over ratio, keywords and Act sections. Useful starting points if you are researching the same point of law.
- Village panchayat accounts — Rajasthan HC (HC-RAJ 2018)
- Environmental clearances & EIA — CIC (CIC 2020)
- DPDP 2025 effect on §8(1)(j) — Delhi HC guidance (HC-DEL 2025)
Related
Editorial summary, not a certified report. The ratio here is an editorial compression. Before citing this ruling in a PIO order, FAA speaking order, or any appellate filing, verify against the full reported decision. RTI Wiki is not a legal service.
Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.
Discussion