Blog Archives

Getting Water in the upper stories by RTI

Water_Delhi_Jal_Board_RTIIn this classic case a common but long standing problem was solved by a Right to Information. A simple RTI solved the big problem of water supply of the Sainik Enclave, Mohan Garden at New Delhi. Because of the low level of pipes which are bringing water to the colony, some houses which are at a height, were not getting the water. Therefore RTI applicant made an RTI application to Delhi Jal Board by asking whether during carpeting/repairing of roads, height of roads should be increased or kept at the same old level/height,etc. The Official of DJB did not reply to the RTI query.

The RTI Applicant complaint to the CIC for non reply of information. DJB official during hearing at CIC agreed to do the needful and requested the appellant to collect some more signatures of the residents of the area, so that they will take action as desired by the appellant. Read more ›




Can First Appellate Authority bring in fresh provisions of RTI Act to deny information?

First Appellate AuthorityWhile Public Information Officer denied the information on a question asked regarding steps taken for implementation of the DOPT guidelines regarding proactive disclosure of tours of officials of the rank of Joint Secretaries and above to implement and copies of all tour orders issued and details of TA/DA paid for each of Joint Secretaries of Central Vigilance Commission by quoting Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, however, on the other hand First Appellate Authority (FAA) has brought in a totally new provision by denying information u/s 8(1)(g) by quoting a CIC decision. FAA denied the information without giving a hearing to the RTI Applicant. What are your views? Use the comments in the article to post. You can discuss it at our forum too.

The Appellant had argued in front of the CIC that the FAA by doing this, has brought in a totally new provision for denial of information which is not tenable as he was not allowed an opportunity to question this and he was not given a hearing. He further submitted that the CPIO vide letter dt 2.8.13 has already provided information relating to foreign and domestic travel of officers of the rank of JS and above. When such information has already been provided, he would be satisfied if similar information is provided in respect of the remaining staff also. Read more ›




CPIO is not under obligation to transfer RTIs to multiple organizations

transfer RTIs to multiple organizationsThe Commission finds no merit in the complaint filed by Shri Sudhir Goyal on CPIO contention that there are over 75 ministries/departments and as per the decision of a three-member Bench of the Commission in the case of Shri Ketan Kantilal Modi Vs CBEC, dt 22.9.2009, CPIO is not under obligation to transfer RTIs to multiple organisations. (If you want to file RTI Online visit our guide here)

Vide RTI, addressed to the PMO, Complainant had sought information on 7 points relating to details of various programmes started by the Central government on completion of four years of UPA government , decisions taken by the government in relation to the programmes, amount spent on these programmes, budget allocated for the same and related issues. The CPIO told to the applicant that the information pertains to various Ministries and the Complainant was advised to file separate RTI applications to each ministry with regard to the remaining information. Read more ›




Obtaining evaluated answer sheet of Civil Service Exams from UPSC under RTI

evaluated answer sheet of Civil Service ExamsCentral Information Commission has directed UPSC to allow inspection of evaluated answer sheet of Civil Service Exams. CIC has also allowed obtaining the certified photocopies of evaluated answer sheet of Civil Service Exams to the candidates.

The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Bandopadyay v/s CBSE is very clear and a candidate has a right to inspect/obtain a photocopy of his evaluated answer sheet. However, UPSC contended that it is the stand of the public authority i.e. UPSC that the information is denied u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, notwithstanding the orders of the Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Bandopadhyay. It was submitted by UPSC that the orders of the Supreme Court are applicable to CBSE and not to the UPSC.

However, CIC in it’s decision observed that the stand taken by the UPSC is in clear violation of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Commission did not concur the decision of the CPIO/Appellate Authority of UPSC to not provide the information to the candidate and in terms of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, instead the Commission directed CPIO, UPSC to provide certified photocopies of answer sheets of Civil Services 2012 Mains Examination, sought by the applicant in his RTI, within two weeks from date of receipt of the order.

Read more ›




SGTB Khalsa College Public Information Officer replied on behalf of Appellate Authority

sgtb Khalsa college

Public Information Officer of Sri GURU TEGH BAHADUR KHALSA COLLEGE acted both as PIO and First Appellate Authority. Applicant had sought information as to action taken on his letter relating to irregularities in selection of students for admission under the Sports quota and not satisfied with the response of Public Information Officer, Sri GURU TEGH BAHADUR KHALSA COLLEGE, the applicant filed the first appeal. However, instead of a reply by First Appellate Authority, PIO again replied to the applicant. A response to the appeal should have been responded to by the AA and not the PIO himself as per the RTI Act. Read more ›




Meet RTI Activist