A one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters
..
 
 
A one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters
Menu
Web-Site Launch Photographs
RTI Act, 2005
Hindi
English
Other language
Rules
Central rules
State rules
Guide book
DOPT circulars
Important judgments
Supreme court
High court
Tracking the appeal at CIC
Link to Information Commission
Link to other Organisations
For an Applicant
FAQ
For a PIO
FAQ
Feedback
Books on RTI
Join us


CIC: Information sought is in the form of expressing conjecture and interrogating the PIO against the action/inaction on the PG portal complaint filed; Outstretching the interpretation of Section 2(f) to include deductions and inferences is unwarranted     Right to Information Act 2005    Documents regarding goods exported were denied u/s 8(1)(d) to a partner of the firm which subsequently converted into a Pvt. Ltd. company wherein applicant is one of the Directors - CIC: Provide information free of cost after verifying Partnership Deed     Right to Information Act 2005    Appellant sought for steps taken by Banking Ombudsman regarding his complaint number and details of Conversation made with bank - CIC found no infirmity in the reply and upheld the order of PIO as a sequel to further clarifications tendered during hearing     Right to Information Act 2005    Information about IBC proceedings of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation - CIC: PIO is only a communicator of information based on the records held in the office and cannot be expected to do research work to deduce anything from the material therein     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: Appellant sought for humungous information based on conjecture and interrogative queries, all of which has been duly replied to in a point-wise manner by the PIO; Appellant has not made any substantial ground of appeal against it; Appeal rejected     Right to Information Act 2005    Information regarding land records based on which petrol pump was allotted was denied u/s 8(1)(j) & 8(1) (d) - CIC: Appellant shall submit necessary document establishing his ownership of the land; Respondent to offer inspection of documents if convinced     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    Service particulars of colleagues to be furnished for dispute arises relating to confirmation, seniority, promotion     Right to Information Act 2005    Can Section 8(2) of the RTI Act overcome the Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act?     Right to Information Act 2005    Would the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Bill weaken the RTI Act, 2005?     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.