Government Initiatives for Effective RTI Implementation: Harmonization and eIPO

When the Right to Information Act, 2005 came into force, it was hailed as a landmark law that gave ordinary citizens the power to question the government. But a law is only as strong as its implementation. Over the years, the Government of India has rolled out several practical initiatives to make the RTI machinery smoother, fairer, and more accessible, especially after the notification of the RTI Rules, 2012. Two of the most significant reforms on this front are the harmonization of fees across states and the launch of the Electronic Indian Postal Order, or eIPO. Together, they address two very different but equally important barriers: inconsistent fee structures within the country and the lack of access for Indians living abroad.

Why implementation of the RTI Rules, 2012 needed a push 🔗

The RTI Rules, 2012 were notified by the Central Government on 31st July 2012 under Section 27 of the RTI Act. They primarily deal with fees for filing an RTI petition and the procedure for appeals before the Central Information Commission. The Rules also aimed at reducing the flood of appeals and complaints reaching the CIC by tightening procedures.

However, notifying rules is just the starting point. The real test lies in whether a common citizen in a remote district, or an Indian professional working in another country, can actually file an application, pay the required fee, and get a timely response. Early observations after 2012 revealed two persistent gaps. First, the fee structure varied sharply from one state to another, creating confusion and sometimes acting as a disincentive. Second, there was simply no convenient way for Indian citizens abroad to pay the RTI fee since the traditional Indian Postal Order could only be purchased at a physical post office in India.

The government’s subsequent initiatives were designed to plug exactly these gaps.

Harmonization of fees across states 🔗

The RTI Act empowers the appropriate Governments and Competent Authorities (like High Courts, Legislatures, and Constitutional bodies) under Sections 27 and 28 to notify their own rules, including the fees payable under the Act. Because rule-making authority is decentralized, different states ended up prescribing very different application fees, copying charges, and inspection charges.

The problem of fee variance 🔗

Some states charged the standard Rs. 10 application fee in line with the Centre, while others demanded much higher amounts. Similarly, photocopying charges, fees for certified copies, and inspection charges differed widely. For a citizen who was already unsure about the process, an unexpectedly high fee could easily discourage the filing of a legitimate RTI application.

The 2nd Administrative Reforms Commission flagged this variance and recommended that States should frame application-fee rules in harmony with the Central Rules, explicitly noting that the fee must not become a disincentive for citizens exercising the right to information. The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) then wrote to all States and Competent Authorities asking them to review their fee rules and bring them in line with the Central Government’s prescribed fees.

What harmonization means in practice 🔗

Harmonization does not mean stripping states of their rule-making power. It means building a uniform expectation, that the fee structure must be reasonable, broadly similar across the country, and definitely not prohibitive. The Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005 at the Central level fixed an application fee of Rs. 10, photocopying at Rs. 2 per page, inspection free for the first hour and Rs. 5 per hour thereafter, and Rs. 50 per diskette or floppy. Many states gradually revised their own rules to mirror these figures.

Timely intimation of additional fees 🔗

Closely linked to harmonization is the idea of timely intimation of additional fees. Under the RTI framework, if a Public Information Officer (PIO) determines that further fees are payable (for example, for photocopying a large number of pages), the applicant must be informed promptly so that the 30-day clock is effectively paused only for the period between intimation and payment. Delays in communicating such additional fees were earlier being used, deliberately or otherwise, to push cases beyond the statutory time limit. Government circulars have repeatedly reminded PIOs to intimate additional fees without delay so that applicants are not disadvantaged by the stopwatch rules built into the Act.

The electronic Indian Postal Order (eIPO) 🔗

If harmonization tackled the problem of inconsistent fees within India, the eIPO tackled the problem of inaccessibility for Indians outside India. Before 2013, a non-resident Indian who wanted to file an RTI application with a Central Ministry faced an awkward hurdle: the prescribed modes of fee payment were cash, demand draft, banker’s cheque, or Indian Postal Order, none of which were practical from abroad.

Launch of eIPO in 2013 🔗

On the initiative of DoPT, the Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT, launched the Electronic Indian Postal Order with effect from 22nd March 2013 to enable Indian citizens abroad to pay the RTI fee online. The service allowed users to purchase an Indian Postal Order electronically by paying the fee through the e-Post Office Portal at epostoffice.gov.in or through the India Post website.

The design was deliberately simple. The RTI Rules, 2012 permit fees to be paid by electronic means where the public authority has a facility to receive them, so eIPO fit naturally into the existing legal framework without any need for a fresh amendment.

How the eIPO process works 🔗

The procedure is straightforward. A user registers on the e-Post Office or India Post website, selects the Ministry or Department from which information is desired, pays the fee using a Visa or Master credit/debit card, and generates an eIPO. A printout of the eIPO is then attached to the RTI application, or, if the application is being filed electronically, the eIPO is uploaded as an attachment.

A few conditions are attached to protect against misuse. An eIPO can be used only once with an RTI application, and CPIOs are required to maintain a record of eIPOs received from Indian citizens abroad to prevent multiple use of the same instrument. Crucially, the eIPO only replaces the mode of payment; all other provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, including eligibility, time limits, and exemptions, continue to apply.

Extension to Indian citizens within India 🔗

The facility was initially restricted to Indian citizens abroad. Then, on 13th February 2014, the Department of Posts extended the eIPO to Indian citizens living in India as well, making online RTI fee payment possible across 2,496 Central Government public authorities. For state public authorities, citizens can still pay through eIPO but typically need to attach a printout of the eIPO to their application, since not every state authority accepts purely digital payment yet.

Extending eIPO to Indian missions and posts abroad 🔗

The next logical step was to make the Indian diplomatic network itself a part of the eIPO ecosystem. Many RTI applications from citizens abroad are actually directed at Indian Missions and Posts under the Ministry of External Affairs, for example, questions about passport services, consular procedures, or visa policies.

To streamline this, the eIPO facility was further extended to 176 Indian Missions and Posts across the globe with effect from 7th October 2013. This meant an Indian citizen in, say, Riyadh, Toronto, or Singapore could file an RTI application with the local Indian Mission and pay the fee online, without having to rely on friends or relatives in India to purchase a physical postal order.

Why this matters for the diaspora 🔗

India has one of the largest diaspora populations in the world. Extending RTI access to them is not just a matter of administrative convenience; it is a statement about the reach of transparency. A citizen working overseas has as much a stake in how Indian public authorities function as someone living in Delhi or Chennai. By integrating eIPO with the 176 missions and posts, the government effectively globalized the RTI framework.

How these initiatives strengthen the RTI ecosystem 🔗

Taken together, harmonization of fees and the eIPO rollout address both the affordability and the accessibility dimensions of the right to information.

Harmonization ensures that a citizen in one state is not unfairly penalized by higher fees compared to a citizen in another. It also makes life easier for PIOs and activists who deal with multi-state RTI filings, since the paperwork and payment logistics become more predictable. Timely intimation of additional fees protects applicants from procedural delays that used to eat into the 30-day response window.

eIPO, on the other hand, uses technology to remove a friction point that earlier made the Act unusable for lakhs of overseas Indians. It also showcases how two departments, DoPT and the Department of Posts, can cooperate to convert a policy intent into a working service. The fact that the facility was later extended to domestic users and to Indian missions shows that citizen-driven feedback can successfully expand the scope of a reform.

Remaining challenges 🔗

These reforms are important but not complete solutions. Awareness of eIPO remains low, and a wider public-awareness push through media and civil society organizations is still needed for it to reach its full potential. State-level fee rules, despite harmonization appeals, are not perfectly aligned even today, and some states continue to charge fees that activists consider disproportionate. The journey from notified rules on paper to a frictionless citizen experience is always a continuing process.

Still, the direction of travel is clear. With over 4,800 RTI applications filed every day on average and more than 1.75 crore applications in the first decade of the Act, even modest improvements in fee rationalization and payment infrastructure translate into massive gains for transparency and accountability.

What do you think? Should the Government of India make online fee payment through eIPO or UPI mandatory for every public authority, including those at the state level, to create a truly uniform RTI experience? And do you believe harmonization of fees alone is enough, or should there also be a ceiling on the additional charges PIOs can levy for providing information?

References

1. https://rti.gov.in/
2. https://www.egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/77098/1/Unit-3.pdf
3. https://www.gconnect.in/orders-in-brief/harmonization-of-fee-payable-under-the-rti-act-2005.html
4. https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/payment-fee-1100
5. https://www.staffnews.in/2013/03/eipo-electronic-indian-postal-order-for.html
6. https://embassyofindiayangon.gov.in/pages/MTUw
7. https://cgijeddah.gov.in/content-page-MTEx.html
8. https://www.moneylife.in/article/now-pay-rti-fees-online-for-2496-central-govt-offices/36516/52166.html
9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Information_Act,_2005