RTI in Reverse Gear: Punjab Information Commission Seeks Explanation from Applicant Instead of Public Body
LAHORE: In an unusual development, the Punjab Information Commission, while hearing a Right to Information (RTI) complaint filed by against the Assistant Commissioner Jaranwala, Faisalabad, has sought an explanation from the applicant over the scope of his information request, rather than seeking a response from the public body regarding the requested records.
In its order dated October 14, 2026, the Commission raised objections to the wide-ranging information sought by the complainant, observing that RTI applications must be specific and should not impose a disproportionate administrative burden on public bodies. The Commission directed the applicant to respond to these objections by the next hearing.
According to the order issued in complaint No. 9-10-2026-3, Waris Paracha had requested detailed records concerning government land, anti-encroachment operations, price-control inspections, revenue officials, pending cases and administrative actions taken by the Assistant Commissioner Jaranwala.
The application sought information regarding the existence and allotment of government land in the tehsil, details of anti-encroachment operations, areas covered, notices issued, reports prepared and actions taken against encroachments.
The complainant also requested records of price-control inspections, proceedings, challans and orders passed by Price Control Magistrates, along with details of cases filed with the respondent public body and their classification according to the duration of pendency.
Additionally, he sought records of postings and transfers of Patwaris, complaints received against revenue officials, final inquiry reports, departmental orders and inspections conducted by subordinate officers.
The requested information also covered official vehicles, actions against illegal constructions, housing schemes and unauthorised commercial activities, as well as details of official site visits and subsequent administrative orders.
However, the Commission observed that although the Punjab Transparency and Right to Information Act, 2013, was enacted to enable citizens to access public information and ensure accountability of government functions, such accountability must relate to a particular and clearly identified function.
The Commission maintained that seeking extensive records without clear specification could amount to conducting an audit of a public body rather than requesting information about an identifiable government function.
Referring to Section 10(3) of the RTI Act, 2013, the Commission stated that applicants are required to identify the information sought with certainty.
The order also cited judicial decisions, including PLD 2025 Sindh 1 and Islamabad High Court writ petition No. 3678/2025, observing that information commissions must apply the principles of proportionality, reasonableness and prevention of abuse of process when dealing with information requests.
According to the Commission, requests imposing a disproportionate administrative burden without a demonstrable connection to public interest and accountability should be discouraged.
The Commission further expressed concerns over certain information sought about private citizens, particularly their names and orders passed against them, observing that disclosure could affect their legitimate privacy interests under Section 13(1)(b) of the RTI Act, 2013.
Instead of deciding the complaint at this stage, the Commission directed Waris Paracha to submit his position regarding the objections by the next hearing. He was also allowed to appear before the Commission and present his arguments.
The hearing was adjourned until October 27, 2026.
The order was signed by Chief Information Commissioner Muhammad Malik Bhulla and Information Commissioner Bushra Saqib.
