Jump to content
  • 0

Payment by court fee stamps





In this forum and in other forum, I have read that an additional time of 5 days has to be given if queries are sent by mail. Which rule of RTI specifies this?


Second, I have also read here that Court Fee Stamps are accepted as fees only for queries to State Governments and not Central Governments. Is this really true? Why this difference?



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 answer to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Dear Akansha


1. RTI application to any PA has to be as per the RTI Rules,fee & format applicable.

If PA under Central Govt. then it has to be as per the Central Govt. RTI Rules,fee & format. If PA under State Govt. then it has to be as per the State (concerned State) Govt. RTI Rules,fee & format.These details (RTI Rules and Fees for various States, Centre and High Courts.)are available in the Guide segment of the portal: RTI Guide


2. For PA s under Central Govt. RTI fee can be paid by D.D./B.C./IPO.


3. Additional time of 5 days (its not mentioned in rules) is included while counting 30 days is for postal delays (If application sent by post/PIO has replied by post/any/both).Date of RTI application and registration date of application in PA would not be same as postal department takes it time to deliver the same so in order to compensate that delay its added.


3. It has happened many times (with our members) that applicant file the First Appeal and very next day got the reply of PIO. In this case if not satisfied with reply, the applicant will need to file rejoinder/addendum and if satisfied FAA will have to inform the applicant that you have been replied by PIO by letter xxxx. Total wastage of time & money.


4. Better add 10 days for postal delays (both sides).



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      State commission cracks down on information officers who delay providing information to citizens
      The state information commissioner recently levied a fine of Rs9,750, to be recovered from the salary of SP Sangane, divisional joint registrar, co-operative housing societies, for delaying information sought under the RTI.
      Tarun Ghia, a Mumbai resident, had demanded copies of the orders of appointment of chartered accountants and certified auditors to audit co-operative housing societies, on January 23, 2006. Ghia was provided the required information on April 20 — 84 days after the application. Under the Act, only 30 days to provide information is permissible and another 15 days to intimate the applicant about photocopying charges. But even after counting those days, there was still a delay of 39 days.
      Ghia then filed a complaint and, in the hearing before the state information commissioner, Sangane cited administrative reasons such as the ongoing assembly session, large number of appeals, urgent notices and the chief officer going on sick leave as causes of delay. State Information Commissioner Suresh Joshi, however, said the reasons did not justify a 39-day delay.
      In another case, Gaurang Vora sought information regarding MMRDA projects that required trees to be chopped or replanted, through the RTI Act. The information was delayed by 29 days. SR Nandargikar, superintendent engineer and engineering and information officer, MMRDA was fined Rs7,250 (Rs 250 per day of delay). “I’m quite satisfied with the action that the commissioner has taken but the need of the hour is 10 chief information commissioners in the state,” Vora said.
      Suresh Joshi, chief information commissioner, Maharashtra, said: “We look at the gravity of the case and then impose a fine or order departmental proceedings. If it’s a tehsildar in Gadchiroli, who has very little administrative exposure, then we are lenient and may issue a warning but if it’s a corporator in Pune or Mumbai, who is well aware of administrative responsibilities, we take stricter action.”
    • hariharan_hn
      By hariharan_hn
      I live in an area where the road widening project is approved. but it is not taking shape for the reasons best known only to the local administrators. whom should i ask under RTI.


  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy