Understanding the vital role of "Information Commissioners" is essential in comprehending the functionality of the Right to Information Act (RTI). These commissioners hold the responsibility of ensuring transparency, accountability, and the smooth operation of the RTI Act.

Key Points:

Role and Significance: Information Commissioners are appointed authorities who oversee the proper execution of the RTI Act. Their role is critical in upholding citizens' right to access information from government bodies.
Central and State Commissions: The RTI framework comprises both a Central Information Commission (CIC) at the national level and State Information Commissions (SICs) at the state level. This dual structure facilitates efficient handling of RTI-related matters.
Appointment Process: The President of India appoints the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and other Information Commissioners at the central level. Similarly, the Governors of respective states appoint the State Information Commissioners.
Independence and Autonomy: Information Commissioners are entrusted with the duty to operate independently and autonomously. This insulation from external pressures or influences safeguards the integrity of their decisions.
Term and Eligibility: The Chief Information Commissioner serves a fixed term of 5 years or until reaching the age of 65, whichever comes earlier. Other Information Commissioners have the same term conditions. They must possess expertise or experience in diverse fields such as law, science, public administration, and more
Functions and Powers: These commissioners act as the custodians of RTI implementation. They handle appeals and complaints arising when information requests aren't adequately addressed by public authorities. They possess the authority to order the release of information and impose penalties if organizations fail to comply.

Examples

Example - Central Information Commission: The Central Information Commission deals with matters concerning Central Government departments, ministries, public sector undertakings, and other national entities.
Example - State Information Commissions: State-level counterparts oversee matters related to state government departments, local governing bodies, and institutions under the jurisdiction of the state.

Case Law: Chief Information Commissioner vs. State of Manipur (2012)

In this case, the Supreme Court highlighted the crucial need for autonomy and independence of Information Commissions within the RTI framework.

Key Points:

Autonomy Emphasized: The Supreme Court stressed the paramount importance of maintaining the autonomy of Information Commissions.
Impartiality and Independence: The ruling underscored that Information Commissions must function independently, devoid of external influences, to ensure impartial decision-making.
Transparent and Unbiased Decisions: The Court's emphasis on autonomy aims to guarantee that Information Commissions make transparent and unbiased decisions.
Preserving Integrity: Autonomy is vital to uphold the operational integrity of Information Commissions, preventing undue manipulation.
Guidance for Functioning: The verdict provides guidance, reinforcing the significance of Information Commissions operating without external pressures.