RTI Act freezed in Kerala Secretariat as Chief Secretary Fears ‘Loss of Face’ in Transfer Case

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: A dramatic escalation in a high-profile legal battle over a senior IAS officer’s transfer has come to light, suggesting the Kerala Chief Secretary is actively seeking to conceal potentially embarrassing or illegal actions recorded in official files.

​The controversy was brought into the public domain by fellow IAS officer Prasanth IAS through a detailed social media post, who questioned if the Appellate authority’s refusal to share the documents indicates a fear of public ‘shame.’

​The Case and the Appeal

​The dispute centers on the transfer of Dr. B. Ashok, a senior IAS officer, who has challenged the decision in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and the High Court. To aid his defense, Dr. Ashok filed a Right to Information (RTI) application requesting a copy of the file related to his transfer, specifically G.O.(R.T) 3802/2025/G.A.D. ​After an initial denial, Dr. Ashok filed a formal appeal, citing relevant provisions of the RTI Act.

​Appellate Authority’s Controversial Order

​In a surprising order issued by the Appellate Authority—Additional Secretary in the General Administration Department (GAD), Mr. Rajesh G. R.—the appeal was rejected. The reason cited has sparked a fresh debate on the state of transparency in the state administration.

​Mr. Rajesh G. R. ruled that the entire file related to the G.O. is “highly confidential.” Crucially, the order explicitly stated that disclosing this information would “prejudice the stand of the State Government” in the pending CAT and High Court cases.

​The authority invoked Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act to justify the denial—a clause that permits withholding information if its disclosure would impede the process of investigation or prosecution of offenders.

​Prasanth IAS sharply criticized this move, stating, “This means that the Chief Secretary will lose the case if the contents of the file become public! It implies that illegal action which should not be known to the court has taken place within that file.”

​Contradiction with Government’s Own FAQ

​Prasanth IAS highlighted a stark contradiction between the GAD’s rejection and the Kerala government’s official RTI website. ​The official FAQ section on the government’s RTI portal clearly states that information can be denied in a pending court case only if:

• ​Disclosure constitutes Contempt of Court.
• ​The court has explicitly ordered the information not to be published.

Since neither of these conditions applies in Dr. Ashok’s case, critics argue that the Appellate Authority’s decision is legally unsound and a blatant misuse of the exemption clause.

​Prasanth IAS warned that the Appellate Authority, who is an Additional Secretary, is showing “the audacity to act unlawfully” against a senior officer of the Principal Secretary rank. The Chief Secretary Dr. Jayathilak, embroiled in several allegations is now accused of forcing subordinates to follow suit.

​This denial is reportedly the latest in a series of over 15 RTI applications rejected by Mr. Rajesh G. R. and his colleagues, allegedly under the “unlawful direction” of Dr. Jayathilak. The incident is now expected to lead to the entire file being summoned by the court, potentially exposing the actions the GAD tried to hide.