CIC Directs Export Inspection Council to Transfer RTI Request on Spice Importers, Seeks Explanation for Delay

June 12, 2026 : The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the Export Inspection Council of India (EIC) to transfer an RTI application seeking details of overseas importers of Indian spices to the appropriate public authority, observing that the request should not have been simply rejected on the ground that the information was unavailable. The Commission also sought a written explanation from the concerned public authority for failing to transfer the application within the time prescribed under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

The order was passed by Information Commissioner Khushwant Singh Sethi on June 11, 2026, while deciding a second appeal filed by appellant Jaysurya against the Export Inspection Council of India. The appeal arose from an RTI application submitted on August 16, 2025, seeking a list of overseas importers of turmeric fingers, red chilli and dry ginger exported from India during the previous three years. The applicant had requested details including company names, addresses, contact information and countries of operation, based on records allegedly available through export documentation, trade enquiries and Registration-Cum-Membership Certificates (RCMCs).

The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Export Inspection Council responded on the same day, stating that the information sought was not available with the department. Dissatisfied with the response, the applicant filed a first appeal, which was dismissed by the First Appellate Authority in September 2025, prompting the filing of a second appeal before the CIC.

During the hearing, the appellant remained absent, while the respondent authority was represented by Deputy Director Nitin Y. Meshram. The respondent reiterated that the requested information was not maintained by the Export Inspection Council and had therefore not been supplied. However, when questioned by the Commission regarding the likely custodian of such records, the respondent indicated that the information could be available with the Spices Board of India.

After examining the records and submissions, the Commission held that the public authority should have acted under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005. This provision requires a public authority to transfer an RTI application to another public authority when the requested information is more closely connected with that authority’s functions or records.

In its order, the Commission observed that the respondent authority “ought to have transferred the RTI Application to the public authority, which is more closely connected to the subject matter of the sought information.” It consequently directed the Export Inspection Council to transfer the RTI application to the concerned CPIO within 15 days and inform the Commission about compliance.

The Commission further found that the authority had failed to transfer the application within the statutory period prescribed under the RTI Act. Taking note of this lapse, it ordered the respondent to submit a detailed written explanation regarding the delay within 15 days from receipt of the order.

The ruling reinforces an important principle under the RTI framework that public authorities cannot merely deny information requests by claiming non-availability when another identifiable government body is likely to possess the records. Instead, the RTI Act places a responsibility on authorities to assist applicants by forwarding requests to the appropriate department wherever possible. The decision highlights the citizen-centric nature of the RTI regime and underscores that procedural obligations under Section 6(3) are intended to prevent applicants from being forced to navigate multiple government offices in search of information.

For exporters, traders, researchers and citizens seeking trade-related data, the order serves as a reminder that government agencies must facilitate access to information by ensuring that applications reach the correct record-holding authority. The Commission’s direction may also encourage public authorities to adopt a more proactive approach in handling RTI applications involving inter-departmental records.

Case Reference: Jaysurya v. CPIO, Export Inspection Council of India, File No. CIC/EICOI/A/2025/644349