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


Due to the unpreparedness exhibited at hearing, the CIC was compelled to postpone the hearing - CIC: Chief Commissioner of Customs, Delhi Zone is instructed to revisit the provisions of the RTI Act in his jurisdiction & issue directives to the concerned     Right to Information Act 2005    The proceedings under the RTI Act cannot be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information furnished - CIC: This matter pertains to redressal of grievance that needs to be resolved at an appropriate forum     Right to Information Act 2005    Information pertaining to the selection of applicants for empanelment to take up mineral investigation works allotted by NMET - CIC: The reply by the PIO was an error of judgment with no malafide intention; PIO counselled to be careful in future     Right to Information Act 2005    Detail of municipal laws enacted on the basis of international treaties & conventions ratified by GoI were sought - PIO: Such details are not held exclusively by any public authority and the statutory enactments are in public domain - CIC: Order upheld     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: The RTI application was transferred after 16 days delay excluding the five days mandate as specified under the Act - CIC: The information was provided by PIO after 67 days from the date of receiving the RTI application; Penalty of Rs. 16,750 imposed     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: Even if PIO’s claim of APS, Ramgarh not being a public authority is conceded with, fact remains that the RTI Application is being responded by a public authority and not by APS, Ramgarh; Explaination for non-appearance during the hearing called     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    Internet Banking OTP should be part of Mandatory SMS and should not be chargeable     Right to Information Act 2005    A critique of the Supreme Court judgment regarding the fee to be charged under the RTI Act     Right to Information Act 2005    Analysis of the Supreme Court Judgment regarding disclosure of Civil Service results by UPSC     Right to Information Act 2005   
FAQ

Is the PIO expected to provide answers to all the questions in an application?

A PIO is expected to provide ‘information’ as defined under section 2(f) of the RTI Act and not answer the questions of the applicant.

An information-seeker can’t demand from a public authority its opinion or seek its advice in a matter of the petitioner’s interest. A PIO is not expected to provide intangible such as interpretations, opinions, advices, explanations, reasons as they cannot be said to be included in the definition of information in Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. The reasons available on record should be provided and the PIO is not expected to post–facto create reasons.

The Act does not permit raising imaginary question and expecting the PIO to find answers for them. The PIO is not expected to confirm or deny some perception of the appellant, which he has about a particular set of information.

Information, which is not compiled and maintained by a public authority, nor is expected to be maintained during the routine course of business, cannot be furnished.

The RTI Act does not require a PIO to generate information, in the form of documents or in electronic form, for satisfying an applicant. The information has to be provided as is available with the public authority.

In many cases, it may be open to debate whether an information sought amounts to opinion/ interpretation / explanation / compilation etc. or not. Therefore, a PIO should exercise due caution while drafting a reply to avoid any lapse. A regular reading of issues relating to RTI like those appearing on this site would come handy in taking a reasoned view.