Tripura Government Many Departments Face Questions over RTI Compliance, Outdated Websites Raise Transparency Concerns
By Our Correspondent
Agartala, October 27, 2026
Several government departments in Tripura are facing allegations of failing to comply with the mandatory proactive disclosure requirements of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. Concerns have been raised over outdated official websites, non-publication of revised service charges and taxes, and the alleged withholding of information relating to public services, welfare schemes and development projects.
The allegations have brought the implementation of Section 4 of the RTI Act under scrutiny, particularly its provisions requiring public authorities to proactively disclose specified categories of information, maintain records systematically and make essential information accessible to citizens without requiring them to file individual RTI applications.
The issue has assumed significance amid complaints that citizens are sometimes compelled to depend on outdated information while accessing government services, paying statutory charges or purchasing essential commodities through the public distribution system.
The statutory obligation of proactive disclosure
Section 4 of the RTI Act, 2005, lays down important obligations for public authorities regarding record management, publication of institutional information and suo motu disclosure.
Under Section 4(1)(b), public authorities are required to publish specified information concerning their organisation, functions and duties, the powers and responsibilities of officers, decision-making procedures, applicable rules and regulations, budget allocations, subsidies and other prescribed particulars.
Section 4(1)(c) requires public authorities to publish relevant facts while formulating important policies or announcing decisions affecting the public. Section 4(1)(d) provides for reasons to be given for administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons.
Section 4(2) further requires public authorities to make constant efforts to provide as much information as possible suo motu so that the public has to resort to the RTI mechanism as little as possible.
These provisions are intended to strengthen transparency, improve administrative accountability and reduce the need for citizens to submit repeated applications merely to obtain routine public information.
However, complaints in Tripura suggest that several departments may not be adequately fulfilling these responsibilities. Allegations include the non-publication or inadequate updating of citizens' charters, service fees, revised rates, departmental activities, budget estimates and details of development projects.
One of the latest complaints concerns the price of flour supplied through ration shops in Tripura.
According to the allegations, the Food Department's website continues to display the price of flour at Rs 13 per kilogram, whereas consumers are reportedly being charged Rs 15 per kilogram at ration shops.
If the revised rate has been officially implemented without the corresponding notification and timely updating of the publicly available price information, consumers could be left without a clear and accessible explanation of the applicable rate.
The alleged difference of Rs 2 per kilogram has raised questions about the transparency of the price revision, the availability of the relevant government order and the responsibility of the department to ensure that consumers receive accurate information.
The issue has also prompted criticism over the apparent contrast between publicity surrounding the distribution of free flour, sugar and mustard oil during the Puja season and the alleged lack of clear public information about the applicable prices of ration commodities.
Consumers have further raised concerns that the mandatory display of authorised commodity prices at fair-price shops is not consistently maintained. A clearly visible and updated price list would help beneficiaries verify the amount payable and question any unauthorised collection.
Similar concerns have been raised about alleged revisions in charges collected by several other government departments and public authorities.
The allegations cover the following areas:
Revenue Department: Land transfer and diversion charges, registration fees and related statutory payments.
Excise authorities: Duties and charges applicable to alcoholic beverages.
Municipal authorities: Building-plan approval fees, water charges and property taxes.
Power utilities: Electricity tariffs, billing rates and changes in subsidy arrangements.
Other departments: Service fees, administrative charges and revised rules governing public services.
According to complainants, the relevant websites in some cases continue to display old rates or do not provide sufficiently clear information about revised charges and the notifications under which they were introduced.
Several government websites are alleged to contain outdated information about departmental activities, scheme guidelines, rules and regulations. Citizens seeking to understand eligibility requirements, application procedures or the conditions attached to welfare schemes may consequently encounter conflicting or obsolete information.
The non-publication of citizens' charters and service standards can make it difficult for applicants to determine the documents required, the prescribed fee, the expected time for disposal of an application and the appropriate authority to approach in the event of delay.
Likewise, the absence of accessible budget estimates and project details can restrict public scrutiny of development expenditure.
Proactive disclosure is not merely a matter of uploading documents to a website. Information must also be accurate, sufficiently comprehensive, accessible and updated when relevant changes occur. Otherwise, a website may technically exist while failing to serve its intended purpose as a dependable source of public information.
The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), the nodal department for the implementation of the RTI Act at the Central level, has issued guidance and communications concerning proactive disclosure and compliance with the Act.
more news...