Jump to content

Imperative Facts of RTI


Recommended Posts


Imperative Facts of RTI:

In the case of, Pradeep S. Ahluwalia v. Delhi Tourism & Transportation Development Corporation[vi], learned council held the following:-


If the Public Information Officers, First Appellate Authorities and the Commissions allow reiterated RTI applications, at that point, there will be no termination to the ‘information litigation’ and the public powers that will be at the in receipt of end for no liability of theirs.

Public dogma concerns that: ‘it is in the importance of the Public that there should be a culmination to litigation’ and ‘no man should be overtaxed over for the same reason’

It is embedded from the order and the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 that every single citizen has a right to attain information from a concerned public power, but then, only once and not perpetually.

Constant filing of RTI applications, by prolonged information-inquirers, has the influence of blockage the public offices by barricading the open flow of information to the eligible and honest RTI applicants, above and beyond precluding the officers of the concerned public authority from carrying out the responsibilities attached to their office.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Yes.  That is right.

Now let us consider why an applicant should file so many RTI Applications ?

There must be some thing, as filing RTI only on that information which was already provided may not be true and not supported by documents.

I know a case where three ..single point/Single sentence  information is still pending for last ten years.  The three single points and single information reply for ten years even after ten CIC decisions for and against was the following.


1.Inform the name of the lessor of the property as on 1-5-08

2.Please inform the reasons for payment of lease rent to Y.

3.Please provide any record that states that Mr.X paid you on behalf  of Mr.Z as you have been stating as such for ten years (Out of 100+ documents single document as repayment was stated in monthly installments of Rs.1,200/)


(IC refused to conduct enquiry.  Refused to get that three point information on affidavit.  But brings in CBSE Vs.AdityaBandopadhya umpteen times, even after confirming that this a fraud, where public authorities fabricated , false information to defraud Rs.40 cr of property leased to them.  For personal hearing four officials from Chennai, Mumbai, Hyderabad and Vijayawada came by flight, stayed in 5 star hotel..There is only one PIO in that team.  The appellant representative has to rush on unreserved category standing in absence of advance reservation)


So to say before making harsh comments, one should apply his mind, give opportunity to hear their point of view.

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.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

  • Tell a friend

    Love RTI INDIA- Online RTI? Tell a friend!
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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