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


Although the CIC had accepted that there was a delay in providing the necessary information to the petitioner, it had not imposed the penalty as required u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 - HC: It is well settled that imposing of the penalty is discretionary     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: The details of the meetings / annual reports of Indian Gulf Association & other State Associations are not exempt u/s 8 (1) (d) & (f); Disclosure of the names of the Southern Zonal Committee members having voting rights may danger to their security     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: The RTI application & the first appeal were addressed to ‘NCTE, New Delhi’ which is not the complete address of the respondent authority; Hence, there is a doubt whether they were actually received - CIC: Provide an appropriate reply as per the Act     Right to Information Act 2005    PIO: There was a slight difference in the spelling of college name (the alphabet ‘h’ was missing in the records of AICTE) - CIC: PIO could mention in the reply that the college approved with the AICTE was ‘Vaageswari College’ & not ‘Vaageshwari College’     Right to Information Act 2005    Copies of requisition letter seeking anti-doping from NADA moved by National Rifle Association of India were sought - CIC directed the PIO, NADA & PIO, Min of Sports Affairs to facilitate inspection of the corresponding files & provide certified copies     Right to Information Act 2005    The appellant sought copies of complaint on the basis of which he was suspended - PIO expressed regret for the mistake committed; Assured that the inspection of the documents will be enlarged to the appellant - CIC: Provide copies of selected documents     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    Should “corruption” be factored into studies on the ‘ease of doing business’?     Right to Information Act 2005    Indian Bank Association is a public authority under the RTI Act, 2005     Right to Information Act 2005    Is Electoral Bond a retrograde step for transparency in political funding?     Right to Information Act 2005   
FAQ

How should an appellant file the second appeal before the Information Commission?

In respect of Central Information Commission, the procedure to be adopted has been prescribed under the CIC (Appeal Procedure) Rules, 2005. Similarly, the procedure followed by State Information Commissions is governed by the Rules notified by the respective State Governments in this regard.

An appeal to the CIC should contain the following information:-

(i)  Name and address of the appellant;

(ii) Name and address of the CPIO against the decision of whom the appeal is preferred;

(iii) Particulars of the order including number, if any, against which the appeal is preferred;

(iv) Brief facts leading to the appeal

(v) If the appeal is preferred against deemed refusal, the particulars of the application, including number and date and name and address of the CPIO to whom the application was made;

(vi) Prayer or relief sought;

(vii) Grounds for the prayer or relief;

(viii) Verification by the appellant; and

(ix) Any other information which the Commission may deem necessary for deciding the appeal.

 

An appellant should enclose the following documents with the appeal:-

(i) self-attested copies of the Orders or documents against which the appeal is being preferred;

(ii) copies of documents relied upon by the appellant and referred to in the appeal; and

(iii) an index of the documents referred to in the appeal.