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


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

Can an applicant request the Information Commission to review its own order?

The Act does not specifically confer a power to the Commission for review of its own decision. The CIC has held that in cases of procedural infirmities which may have led to or may be believed to have led to miscarriage of justice or where there is an error apparent on the face of it, silence of law in regard to review does not prohibit it from undertaking review in specific given circumstances. The CIC relied on the Supreme Court decision in the case of Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal (AIR 1981 SC 606) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that when a review is sought due to a procedural defect, the inadvertent error committed by the Tribunal must be corrected ex debito justitiae to prevent the abuse of its power and such power inherent in every court or tribunal.

 

A review may be taken up if:

       there is a technical error in the decision or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of record;

       there was an omission to consider certain material facts relevant for the decision or on discovery of new and important matter of evidence;

       appellant was not given opportunity of being heard;

       PIO has not enclosed relevant supporting documents in his comments furnished to CIC.