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


Information regarding complaint - CIC: It is a Complaint under the RTI Act where no further direction for disclosure of information can be given: Only required to be ascertained if it has been denied with a malafide intention or an unreasonable cause     Right to Information Act 2005    PIO: The RTI application and first appeal were not received; On receipt of second appeal, it was transferred u/s 6(3) to State GST to whom the matter pertains - CIC: File an affidavit deposing categorically that the application & appeal were not received     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: Provide certified legible copy of the explantion submitted by PIO to the Commission regarding the SCN - CIC: Appellant has right to file a non-compliance complaint in the Commission as per the practice rather than filing fresh RTI Application     Right to Information Act 2005    CIC: Appropriate reply has not been furnished by the PIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act; PIO directed to seek clarification from the appellant and furnish information - CIC: Look into the grievance of the Appellant in accordance with the guidelines     Right to Information Act 2005    An ex-employee sought information regarding alleged fake and inaccurate entries in the CTS/CMS at Banking Ombudsman Office - CIC: Appellant is raising speculative statements and expressing conjecture to channelise his service-related grievance     Right to Information Act 2005    Tax details and GST returns were denied claiming it is confidential Third Party information - CIC: Appellant has stretched her apprehensions and is merely expressing conjecture against the tax liability of the averred entities; No larger public interest     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    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    Can Section 8(2) of the RTI Act overcome the Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act?     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.