Can one make RTI as a hobby? Especially when there is no public interest? In the hearing at Central Information Commission, an RTI applicant stated that ‘Filing RTI is my hobby, and there is no public interest in those RTI”.
CIC came heavily on to the applicant and stated that such hobby of filing RTI without any public interest causes loss of both time and energy of the Government and it causes disproportionate diversion of the resources of the public authority. (Clause 7 (9) of the RTI Act 2005)
CIC warned the applicant not to waste time and resources of the public authority, or else Central Information Commission shall not take cognisance of such appeal or complaint. Read more ›
After filing 30 applications on the same subject with different names but with the same handwriting, Central Information Commission came heavily by warning to desist from misusing the provisions of the RTI Act for settling his personal scores with the respondent. CIC further stated that “In case the appellant continues to prefer RTI applications which are vexatious and frivolous in nature with a view to disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority, then the PIO will be free to deny information under the provisions of section 7 (9) of the Act.”
It is certain that this variety of the vexatious and frivolous petitions is not going to serve the interest of the Right to Information ⎯ the self-serving, pious protestations of serial petitioners such as this one notwithstanding.
NDMC, the Respondent informed that appellant who has filed at least 30 RTI applications in different names with similar queries, having the same handwriting regarding pending payment of M/s Gyan Const Co. against work done by the agency. Read more ›
If you file at least 20 RTI applications on the same subject the Central Information Commission might advise you not to resort to repetition of RTI questions which does not reflect a balanced state of mind and also causes enormous wastage of public time supposed to be used for public interest by the Public Authorities. If there is no public interest and the questions are harassing in nature, the same are liable to be rejected. If you want to file RTI Online, read our guide here!
Mr. Manish Aggarwal has filed at least 20 RTI applications on the same subject, mostly relating to the same school from different angles. Complete information was given to the present RTI application which was also recorded by the First Appellate Authority. (If you have any query regarding RTI, please post at our forum here!) Read more ›
Continuing their earlier decision of ‘No Right to Repeat‘, now Central Information commission has gone a step ahead and directed to seek a probe by an appropriate authority into the motive behind the RTI applicant repeated RTI questions in such a reckless manner. This probe is intended for Public Authority to know whether repeated questions are guided by public interest or private interest! If you want to file RTI Online, please read our guide on filing RTI online here. You can download our sample RTI forms here!
The Commission considered this case as the case of repetitive use of RTI assuming the proportion of harassment to the Public Authority and reckless abuse of RTI. Read more ›
Continuing its similar decision, this time CIC has gone a step ahead and stated that when not taken to High Court for judicial review in stipulated period, the matter decided in second appeal assumes finality and cannot be sought for again from the public authority. It means that information once denied or decided by CIC cannot be sought again from PIO. (If you want to discuss this news, please go to our forum here)
Secondly CIC decided that when an applicant uses an opportunity of obtaining information on a particular subject as per law, he is expected to seek all the related information in that first ever opportunity itself. He cannot file another application for a bit or piece which he forgot to ask, or not advised by his lawyer, or for any other reason. He should ask all possible aspects of information about that subject matter, in the first ever available opportunity. Even if he does not, it is presumed by law that he asked for that and was refused after due trial.
Thirdly, CIC decided that cases of disclosure of information to the repetitive applicants for their private purpose which promotes their private interest but not the public interest would cause substantial harm to the legitimate aim of the Right to Information Act. Do you think this shall substantially change the directions of RTI Act in India? Does it have any impact on your RTI? Read more ›