FAA appellate review — 12-point checklist (§19(6) speaking order)

RTI Act §19(1)–(8); §19(6) timeline; §19(8)(a) cost / penalty recommendation power; §10 severability application by FAA; §20(1) penalty referral.

• FAA acts as a quasi-judicial body — must hear both sides under natural justice.
• Specific Section 8/9/11/24 grounds invoked by PIO must be tested individually.
• Public-interest override is the FAA's strongest tool — apply where applicant has shown overriding interest.
• Severability under §10 is a constant duty — FAA must direct partial release where PIO refused fully.
• Time-bar (30/45 days) is mandatory — silence by FAA = applicant can move IC directly.
• Cost-imposition under §19(8)(a) is meaningful deterrent against frivolous PIO refusals.

1. Verify the 30-day window — Appeal received within 30 days of PIO order? If not, condonation request needs reasoning.
2. Check natural justice — both parties heard — PIO and applicant must have opportunity to argue. Hearings may be in person, telephonic, or written.
3. Identify the precise §8/§9/§11/§24 ground — PIO must have invoked specific clauses. Generic “exempt under §8” = automatically reversed.
4. Apply public-interest override (where applicable) — For §8(1)(d), (e), (j) and §9 — does the larger public interest in disclosure outweigh harm?
5. Apply §10 severability — Even if part is exempt, what portion is non-exempt? Order partial release.
6. Test claimed harm against record — Does the PIO's claimed harm (e.g., security, fiduciary) actually arise from this specific record?
7. Evaluate §11 third-party procedure (if invoked) — Did PIO actually issue notice + consider objection? If procedural, set aside.
8. Check whether PIO did §6(3) transfer correctly — If wrong PA, did PIO transfer within 5 days?
9. Assess fee charged — Was fee within state schedule? Any over-charge is reason for direction.
10. Consider §19(8)(a) cost imposition — For unjustified delay/denial, can impose costs on PIO personally or on PA.
11. Refer for §20 penalty if pattern — Serial delays warrant referral to Information Commission for §20 action.
12. Issue speaking order in writing — Cite specific reasons + record-references + sections + decisions. Sign + date + dispatch.

In the matter of First Appeal under §19(1) of the RTI Act, 2005

Appellant: [Name + Address]
Respondent PIO: [Name + Designation + Office]

Date of impugned PIO order: [date]
Date of First Appeal: [date] (within statutory 30-day window)
Date of hearing: [date]

PIO's position:
[Summarise the impugned order's grounds — specific section(s) invoked, reasoning advanced]

Applicant's contentions:
[Summarise grounds of appeal]

ANALYSIS:

1. The impugned order rejects the request citing §[X]. As held in [case], generic citation of a section without record-specific analysis is unsustainable.

2. On the public-interest override under §8(2), the appellant has shown / has not shown a larger public interest in disclosure that outweighs the harm.

3. Severability under §10: portions [A, B] are non-exempt and must be released even if portion [C] is held exempt.

4. The PIO's [other ground] is set aside / upheld for the following reasons: [...]

ORDER:

The first appeal is allowed in part / fully allowed / dismissed. The respondent PIO is directed to:
(a) Provide the information specified in queries [1, 3, 5] within 15 days of receipt of this order, in [form];
(b) Apply §10 to release the non-exempt portion of [record name];
(c) Refund any excess fee charged;
(d) [Where pattern of delay] This office shall refer the matter to the Information Commission under §20(1) for considering penalty action.

If aggrieved, the parties may approach the Information Commission under §19(3) within 90 days.

[FAA Name + Designation + Office Stamp + Date]

Set aside; direct §10 severability — release work-record portions.

Partial denial: FAA can order partial transfer + remainder reply.

FAA can uphold §7(9) compliance if alternative was reasonable.

Direct refund of excess + cost order under §19(8)(a).

Direct disclosure within 15 days + consider penalty referral.

• CIC v Manohar Parikkar Foundation (CIC 2018) — FAA cannot act as rubber-stamp; must apply mind to each ground.
• Aditya Bandopadhyay v CBSE (SC 2011) — Public-interest override is the standard FAA tool against blanket §8 refusals.
• Bhagat Singh v CIC (Delhi HC 2007) — Speaking orders mandatory at FAA stage too.
• R.K. Jain v UoI (SC 2013) — Post-decision file notings disclosable; FAA must direct release.

• Treating appeal as routine paperwork — passing brief order without analysis.
• Confirming PIO without addressing applicant's grounds.
• Missing the 30/45-day deadline — exposes you + applicant moves to IC directly.
• Failing to apply §10 severability where PIO refused fully.
• Ignoring §19(8)(a) cost-imposition power — PIOs not deterred from frivolous refusals.
• Not referring serial offenders for §20 penalty.

• Hold a hearing where both sides argue — even if 15 minutes telephonic. Improves order quality.
• Maintain a per-PIO compliance log — flag patterns at department review.
• Use a standard template: facts → contentions → analysis → directions → appeal info.
• Cite the specific case-law / CIC ruling — pre-empts second appeal reversal.
• For complex fee disputes, consult finance department before deciding.
• Where PA bears institutional cost (e.g., refund of excess fee), document via PA's own compliance order.

No — beyond 45 days, applicant can directly approach IC under §19(3). Your jurisdiction lapses.

No — you can only direct release of what was originally sought (within the queries framed).

Yes — under §19(8)(a) you can impose costs. They are recoverable from PIO personally if PIO acted in bad faith.

Test it — is it binding precedent (SC) or persuasive (CIC)? You have authority to depart with reasons.

Record withdrawal + dispose. But §20 penalty referral can still be made for the original delay.

• pio faa knowledge base
• faa section 19 8 powers
• faa privacy public interest balancing
• pio speaking replies
• act/section-19

RTI Act §19; CIC orders 2007-2024; Aditya Bandopadhyay v CBSE (SC 2011); FAA practitioner handbooks.

Last reviewed: 25 April 2026.