A one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters
..
A one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters


The denial of information under Section 8(1)(j) being completely inappropriate, CIC directed the PIO to provide specific and available information as sought in the RTI Application     Right to Information Act 2005    Appellant sought the total marks scored and a comparative chart for finalizing the promotional list - CIC: An officer is entitled to copy of his Performance Appraisal Report and information regarding the procedure followed for writing of the PARs     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: Respondent is warned to ensure in future that RTI Applications are not transferred blindly - CIC took strong exception to the intemperate language & disparaging phrases used by the Appellant in the contents of Second Appeal as well as RTI Application     Right to Information Act 2005    The names and details of the criminal cases registered against the IRS officers of Customs and Excise & Income Tax etc. was sought - CIC: Disclose the number of cases where disciplinary / criminal proceedings were underway in respect of the IRS officers     Right to Information Act 2005    Information regarding the National Spot Exchange Limited (NSEL) - CIC instructed the Addl. Secretary, Department of Economic Affairs to examine the matter carefully and answer the queries giving precise information to the Appellant within 15 days     Right to Information Act 2005    Copy of certain recovery orders was sought - CIC: Complainant could perhaps be a fictitious person as both the CPIO reply as well as Commission’s notice of hearing has come back undelivered with remarks the addressee is not available - Complaint dismissed     Right to Information Act 2005    Vijai Sharma and K V Chowdary appointed as CIC and CVC respectively     Right to Information Act 2005    Is the Mysore Police Commissioner’s office coming up without plan approval?     Right to Information Act 2005    No action taken against the illegal massage parlours or spas in Goa     Right to Information Act 2005    Are there norms about the fee a school should charge and the facilities it offers?     Right to Information Act 2005    There is only 1 primary health centre per 28 villages of UP     Right to Information Act 2005    Services of all OSDs / Consultants terminated by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai     Right to Information Act 2005    Is the recent appointment of Government Officials as Information Commissioners null and void?     Right to Information Act 2005    There can be no dispute that the human rights would include life and liberty     Right to Information Act 2005    What are the criteria for selecting the Information Commissioners?     Right to Information Act 2005   
FAQ

How should the term 'substantial' be interpreted in substantial financing?

The term ‘substantial’ has not been defined in the Act. The Act does not talk of absolute or majority control, but only of substantial stake. As per the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary the term ‘substantial’ means “large in amount or value; considerable”. What amounts to “substantial” financing cannot be straight-jacketed into rigid formulae, of universal application and each case would have to be examined on its own facts. It only means that it should not be trivial. Whether the percentage of funding is “majority” financing or not, or that the body is an impermanent one, are not material. Equally, that the institution or organization is not controlled, and is autonomous is irrelevant. The tem “substantial” is akin to “material” or “important” or “of considerable value”. In other words, the extent of funding by the appropriate Government should be such that in its absence, the functioning of the entity is rendered difficult. The definition of ‘Substantial financing’ as per other Acts may be relevant, depending upon the circumstances of the case.