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


Appellant: I have submitted my personal application to PMO and without hearing of witness or awaiting outcome representation, I was fired from Air Force - CIC: PIO has provided the information which is available on record; No further intervention needed     Right to Information Act 2005    Personnel allegedly gave wrong information to FM in the reply to parliamentary question - Respondent: A speculative request - CIC: Desist from filing repetitive RTI Applications as Appeal(s) emanating from the same are liable to be summarily dismissed     Right to Information Act 2005    Central Empowered Committee: Documents pertaining to particular application filed by Sheth Anandji Kalyanji Trust and sought by the Applicant are not available in records - CIC: Appropriate response has been provided; Explain the absence during hearing     Right to Information Act 2005    Refusal by Financial Services Institutions Bureau (FSIB) to provide information related to the appointment of Mr. Pankaj Dwivedi, accused of heinous crimes against women, as Executive Director in Public Sector Banks - CIC: Denail u/s 8(1)(j) is justified     Right to Information Act 2005    What does the term “Relevant Trades” in eligibility criteria mean? - CIC: Requisite information should have been disclosed upfront or through FAQs; Advisory issued u/s 25(5) to disclose the meaning of “Relevant Trade” & to create a FAQ section on website     Right to Information Act 2005    Respondent: Complaint has been forwarded to the Special Commissioner (Vig.) Delhi Police for necessary action; Delhi Police works under MHA, GoI which is a separate Government - CIC: PIO is only a communicator of information based on the records held     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    RTI portal – Supreme Court issues contempt notice to the States and UTs     Right to Information Act 2005    Reasons for seeking certified copies is not inconsistent with the provisions of RTI Act     Right to Information Act 2005    Regulation 21 of Consumer Protection Regulation does not prohibit grant of records to RTI Applicants     Right to Information Act 2005   
2nd edition of "PIOs Guide on RTI" published - Based on study of over one lakh orders of CIC and judgments of Courts - Book carries subject wise case laws, latest legal updates, Practical tips for PIOs and FAAs - Needs of all stakeholders covered
FAQ

How should a PIO deal with applicants who repeatedly file applications?Certain applicants file applications repeatedly for whom the term Chronic Information Seeker, or a Serial Applicant has been coined.

(a)    A PIO should never feel irritated by such applications which may sometimes comprise of frivolous queries. A PIO should not be biased or guided by the hearsay impression of the applicant.

(b)    Such applicants usually do a complete homework and have a very good understanding of the Act. The only remedy available for the PIO is to know the Act thoroughly.

(c)    Each application should be examined taking a neutral view and a legally sustainable decision should be taken which can be defended before a higher forum.

(d)    The application tracking system must be geared to keep track of the each and every application filed to avoid missing an application which may give an excuse to the applicant to file a complaint/appeal for imposition of penalty.

(e)    Multiple applications tend to be filed which may appear to be similar, if not identical. A complete and thorough reading of the application must be done to avoid missing any question which may later be claimed as a ground for imposing penalty.