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: Document on the basis of which the Competition Commission arrived at a conclusion was not provided - PIO: Inspection of records was offered - CIC: Appellant is at liberty to avail inspection of records as earlier offered on a convenient date     Right to Information Act 2005    Information about Grievance Petition submitted to PMO and steps taken by DARPG to address the issue as per CPGRAMS norms - PIO: Grievance has been closed by AICTE; Name, designation of concerned person is available on portal - CIC: No further intervention     Right to Information Act 2005    Appellant: Copy of passport renewal application of my wife is not exempt u/s 8 (1) (j) as marriage is presently valid; Apprehension that false information regarding marital status has been indicated - CIC: Personal information of a third party is exempt     Right to Information Act 2005    Information about a dormant Bank account - CIC: The second appeal filed by the appellant was time-barred & in absence of any application for condonation of delay in filing the second appeal, after a lapse of almost two years, the same is not maintainable     Right to Information Act 2005    Copies of orders regarding establishment and jurisdiction of all special courts/ CBI courts at Jaipur for trial of PC Act cases were not available with them - CIC: RTI application was not replied in a comprehensive manner; Provide a revised reply     Right to Information Act 2005    PIO: (Extra) Rs. 10/- has been sent back to the applicant as there is no provision to accept additional fee in advance - CIC: Although the information provided by the PIO is appropriate, the delay caused in providing the same is viewed adversely     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    Are the state-funded ‘public trust institutions’ obligated to provide ‘information’ under the RTI Act?     Right to Information Act 2005    Takeaways from the Supreme Court verdict on the Electoral Bond Scheme     Right to Information Act 2005    We will know, we will live - RTI     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.