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


Appellant sought specific information related to his deceased son, but the Respondent chosen to give vague reply to the Appellant; It shows the clear malafide intent of the PIO in obstructing basic information - CIC: Re-examine and give point-wise reply     Right to Information Act 2005    Relevant hyperlink has been furnished to the Appellant - CIC: When an information or record is already in the public domain, the same cannot be said to be held or under the control of public authority and it is deemed to be given to the public at large     Right to Information Act 2005    Respondent: Information involved procedure followed by the University on the basis of marks of multiple candidates - CIC: Relevant exemption clauses u/s 8 (1) of the RTI Act were not cited by the erstwhile CPIO; Re-visit point no. (v) of RTI application     Right to Information Act 2005    Respondent: Medical bill submitted by the complainant was processed repeatedly to PCDA (CC) Lucknow; Hospital has verified that bills are genuine and has given CTC of the same; Bills will be forwarded to the PCDA office - CIC: Complaint dismissed     Right to Information Act 2005    Information regarding Dependent Identity Card issued by Indian Army - Respondent: It is issued by the CO; Issued to avail travelling, medical facility as well as CSD canteen facility besides being proof of identity - CIC: No further action required     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: RTI queries are worded in a manner that conveys sheer anguish being harbored by the Appellant; Under the garb of seeking for information, he appears to be channelizing his grievance by raising speculative and interrogative queries; Provide status     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    We will know, we will live - RTI     Right to Information Act 2005    Disclosure of third party agreements entered into by UIDAI for handling grievance redressal     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   
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.