FAA Speaking Order Format for RTI First Appeals 2026

A one-line “PIO reply is upheld” does not show that the First Appellate Authority independently examined the request. Reasoned decision-making is a basic administrative-law safeguard, and the Department of Personnel and Training’s official FAA guidance expects the appellate authority to decide the matter and ensure its order is implemented. The FAA speaking order format on this page is a practical template, not a statutory form and not a substitute for reading the record.

Appellants can use the same format as a checklist and, if grounds or the second-appeal note are missing, move to second appeal with that defect on record.

• Section 19(1): an applicant may appeal to an officer senior in rank to the PIO within the statutory period.
• Section 19(5): in appeal proceedings, the burden of proving that denial was justified is on the PIO who denied the request.
• Section 19(6): the first appeal should be disposed of within 30 days; an extension up to 45 days requires reasons recorded in writing.
• Section 7(8): a rejection must communicate reasons, the appeal period and particulars of the appellate authority.
• Section 7(6): where the public authority misses the section 7(1) time limit, information is to be provided free of charge.
• Sections 8, 9, 10 and 11: exemptions, copyright refusal, severability and third-party procedure must be applied to the actual record—not invoked as slogans.

The original page’s claim that section 19(6) itself mandates a speaking order was too broad. Its direct text concerns time. The need for reasons follows from fair decision-making, the statutory structure and the duty to determine whether the PIO’s action was justified. A non-speaking one-liner is still a poor order; it is not, by that fact alone, a numbered CIC set-aside formula.

Whether you allow or reject, write the reasons. The format does not change because the outcome is “dismissed”.

Every first-appeal order should contain these elements, in a readable sequence:

Avoid copying Aadhaar numbers, full addresses or unrelated personal data into a publicly uploaded order. Record only what is needed to decide the appeal.

1. Pull the file, not the PIO’s summary. Keep the original RTI, proof of delivery, PIO reply (or proof of no reply), first appeal, any third-party notice and representation, and the actual record sought. Do not decide from a covering note.
2. Make an item list. Number every information point as the applicant numbered it. Drop nothing because it looks “small”.
3. For each item, write three sentences: what was asked; what the PIO did; what the record actually is. Then apply the RTI clause. If the PIO denied, section 19(5) requires the PIO to justify that denial.
4. Apply exemptions to the page, not to the file. If only a paragraph is protected, use section 10. “Third-party information” is a procedure under section 11, not an exemption.
5. Set a compliance date that this office can meet. The Act does not fix a universal 10-, 15- or 20-day disclosure deadline for every FAA order. Write a date that is realistic for the record in this appeal, then ensure it is carried out.
6. If you are past 30 days, record the reasons for using the period up to 45 days in the order, not only in a file note.
7. Sign, dispatch, implement. Send the order to the appellant and the PIO together. DoPT’s FAA guide says the FAA should ensure implementation rather than issue an unenforced sentence. Place a compliance report on the same file.
8. Do not impose section 20 penalty. That power is with the Commission. You may record facts relevant to delay or obstruction for the file and for any later second appeal.

If you are the appellant, use the same list backwards: did the order name each ground, cite a clause, set a doable direction, and mention second appeal? If not, that is your second-appeal pleading, not a reason to wait for a “better” one-liner. See how to file a first appeal and the first-appeal walkthrough.

Use this skeleton for every first appeal. The five outcome modules below only replace sections 4 and 5.

[NAME OF PUBLIC AUTHORITY]
Order of the First Appellate Authority under section 19(1), RTI Act, 2005

Appeal no.:                     Date of order:
Appellant:
PIO and office:
RTI application dated:
PIO reply dated / no reply:
First appeal received on:

1. Background
The appellant sought the following records/information: [item-wise summary].
The PIO [replied / did not reply] as follows: [item-wise summary].

2. Grounds of appeal
(i) [ground one]
(ii) [ground two]

3. Material considered
RTI application, delivery proof, PIO reply, first appeal, relevant record,
and written/oral submissions dated [dates]. No hearing was held / A hearing
was held on [date] with [participants].

4. Issues and findings
Item 1: [finding]. [If denied, identify the exact clause and explain how the
record satisfies it. Consider section 10 severance and section 8(2).]
Item 2: [finding].
[Continue for every disputed item. Apply section 19(5) burden.]

5. Order
(a) The appeal is [allowed / partly allowed / dismissed] for the reasons above.
(b) The PIO shall [provide identified records / inspect / issue a revised
item-wise decision] by [date] through [mode].
(c) Charges: [free under section 7(6) / lawful fee decision with calculation].
(d) The PIO shall send compliance to the appellant and place it on this file.

[If this order is made after 30 days: reasons for use of the period up to
45 days are ...]

An aggrieved person may file a second appeal under section 19(3) before
[CIC/SIC and current address or portal] within 90 days from the date on
which this decision should have been made or was actually received.

Name, designation and signature of FAA

A copy of the same structure, for officers who want a filled-in specimen, is also at the FAA speaking-order template. Powers and limits of the office are at what an FAA can and cannot do.

Use one module or combine them item by item. Do not select an outcome before reading the record. These are samples of reasoning, not CIC case results and not a promise that a Commission will set aside or uphold any particular order.

State why the PIO’s denial or incomplete response fails and identify the exact pages or records to be supplied. DoPT’s FAA guide says the FAA may direct the PIO to provide information or provide it with the order; the guide describes direct furnishing with the order as the better course. Ensure that a disclosure direction is actually carried out.

5. Findings.
   (a) The information sought at point 1 is information as defined in
       section 2(f) and is held by this public authority.
   (b) The PIO has not pleaded any exemption under section 8(1) or
       section 9, or has pleaded a clause that does not fit this record.
   (c) A claim that the request is "voluminous" or "not relevant" is not,
       by itself, a ground for refusal.
   (d) Section 19(5): the PIO has not discharged the burden of justifying
       denial.

6. Order.
   (a) The appeal is allowed.
   (b) The PIO shall supply the records at points [list] in full to the
       appellant by [date], through [mode], [free under section 7(6) /
       on the fee already paid].
   (c) The PIO shall place a compliance note on this file by [date].

Adesh Kumar v. Union of India, Delhi High Court (2014), is the freeze-sourced citation on “voluminous” as a refusal slogan. Read the judgment for its facts; it is not a CIC outcome.

Identify the protected portions, the exact exemption and why it applies. Then apply section 10 to disclose the reasonably severable remainder. Mark redactions consistently and communicate the exemption and appeal particulars.

5. Findings.
   (a) The note-sheet at pages [x to y] of file [name] contains personal
       information of a third party. On these facts the PIO has shown
       why section 8(1)(j) applies, and why section 8(2) does not require
       disclosure of those identifiers. (The Supreme Court’s analysis of
       personal information in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central
       Information Commissioner (2013) 1 SCC 212 is the freeze-sourced
       citation for this clause; apply it to this record, not as a blanket
       bar on every file.)
   (b) The remaining portions contain administrative correspondence that
       is not shown to be exempt.
   (c) Section 10(1) requires the PIO to sever the exempt portion and
       supply the rest. That was not done.

6. Order.
   (a) The appeal is partly allowed.
   (b) Pages [x to y] are withheld under section 8(1)(j) read with
       section 10. The remainder of file [name] shall be supplied by
       [date], redacting only the identifiers listed in the annexure.
   (c) Reasons for each redaction shall be communicated under section 10(2).

Use the section 8 appeal checklist before upholding any clause. “Third-party information” is not itself an exemption.

Analyse each withheld item against the exact clause of section 8(1) or section 9. Record the harm or statutory condition; consider section 8(2) public-interest override where applicable; and explain why severance cannot provide more. Do not merely repeat the clause.

5. Findings.
   (a) The records at point [x] consist of [describe the nature of the
       record without revealing exempt content].
   (b) They attract section 8(1)([clause]) because [how this record
       satisfies the clause].
   (c) Section 8(2) / the applicable public-interest test has been
       examined. On these facts the larger public interest does not
       outweigh the harm, because [reasons].
   (d) Severance under section 10 cannot disclose more without disclosing
       the exempt content, because [reasons].
   (e) Points [list] are not exempt and were already supplied on [date].

6. Order.
   (a) The appeal is dismissed as regards point [x] for the reasons above.
   (b) No further direction is necessary on that point.

Record the filing and delivery dates, find whether deemed refusal arose under section 7(2), and direct an item-wise decision or disclosure. Apply section 7(6) where the statutory response time was missed. The FAA should ensure implementation rather than issue an unenforced “dispose immediately” sentence. See the deemed-refusal checklist.

1. RTI dated [date], reference [XXX], delivered on [date].
2. The PIO did not reply within the section 7(1) period. The request is
   treated as refused under section 7(2).
3. First appeal received on [date]. Hearing: [none / date and who attended].

5. Findings.
   (a) Delivery and the nil reply are on file.
   (b) The PIO’s explanation does not undo the statutory consequence of
       delay. Penalty under section 20 is for the Commission, not the FAA.
   (c) Section 7(6) applies: information is to be provided free of charge.

6. Order.
   (a) The appeal is allowed.
   (b) The PIO shall supply the information sought in the original RTI,
       item-wise, free of further fee, by [date] through [mode].
   (c) A compliance report shall be placed on this file by [date].

Determine first whether an exemption is actually claimed and whether section 11 procedure applies. Record the third party’s representation, the PIO’s reasoning, severability and public-interest analysis. Section 11 is a consultation procedure, not an automatic veto. See third-party appeals.

ORDER UNDER SECTION 19 READ WITH SECTION 11 OF THE RTI ACT, 2005

1. Appellant: [name and capacity — applicant / third party].
2. Records sought: [records that pertain to a third party].
3. PIO issued a section 11(1) notice on [date]. Representation received
   on [date] / no representation received within time.
4. Hearing: [none / date; who was heard].

5. Findings.
   (a) The information involves [describe the third-party interest
       without copying protected content].
   (b) Section 11 requires the authority to take the representation into
       account. It does not transfer the decision to the third party.
   (c) On these facts, [an exemption is / is not] made out. Section 10
       [can / cannot] disclose a severable remainder. Public interest:
       [reasons].

6. Order.
   (a) [Disclosure with listed redactions / disclosure refused / full
       disclosure] by [date].
   (b) A person aggrieved may use the appeal route under section 19
       within the statutory period.

1. introduce a new exemption without explaining its application to the record;
2. demand that the appellant prove why information is needed;
3. treat a hearing as mandatory in every first appeal;
4. uphold a response merely because the PIO reports to the FAA;
5. cut-and-paste the PIO’s reply as the FAA’s reasoning;
6. direct a section 20 monetary penalty as if the FAA were the Commission;
7. invent a universal 10-, 15- or 20-day disclosure deadline not found in the Act;
8. say “record not available” without examining the record-holder’s evidence and applicable retention practice;
9. issue the order only in a language the appellant cannot read, when a translation is requested; or
10. omit the second-appellate authority and limitation information.

An FAA can set a practical compliance date in the particular order. That case-management direction should not be presented as a fixed statutory period that applies to every appeal. If the office is already beyond 45 days, see FAA delay beyond 45 days rather than back-dating.

Read the operative part without the background. Can the PIO tell exactly what to disclose, by what mode and to whom? Then read only the findings. Does each disputed item have a reason, statutory basis and severance analysis? Finally, check dates: if the order took more than 30 days, have reasons been recorded and is it still within the maximum 45-day period?

If you are the appellant and the answer to those questions is no, do not wait for a second “speaking” version. File second appeal under section 19(3) with the order attached. A Commission may remand for a reasoned order; this page does not invent a CIC case number or a guaranteed 15-day re-write.

DoPT guidance says the FAA should ensure implementation and, where higher intervention is needed, bring non-compliance to the competent officer. The appellant should preserve the order, the dispatch proof and the nil-compliance proof.

Practical sequence:

1. Write once to the PIO and FAA quoting the operative paragraph and the compliance date.
2. If still ignored, use RTI for the compliance report on that file (sample below).
3. Take the same papers into second appeal / a section 18 complaint as the facts support. Penalty remains a Commission question. See the section 20 complaint template and the second-appeal template.

Use this only where the public authority is covered by the RTI Act. Ask for existing records, not a new inquiry.

To: The Public Information Officer
[Public authority]

Subject: Application under section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 —
compliance with FAA order [number / date]

Please provide:
1. Copy of FAA order no. [ ] dated [ ] in first appeal of [name / RTI ref].
2. Date and mode of dispatch of that order to the appellant and to the PIO.
3. Compliance report / noting placed on the same file after the order,
   including the date information was actually sent.
4. If compliance is pending, the current file location, the officer holding
   it, and any extension or stay recorded.
5. Item-wise list of records directed to be disclosed and the records
   actually disclosed.

[Name, address, contact]
Application fee as applicable.

Draft the request in the AI RTI Drafter if you want a clean item list. If the PIO’s reply ducks the file, run it through the PIO Reply Checker and go to first appeal on that RTI.

No. It sets the 30-day disposal period and permits up to 45 days for recorded reasons. A reasoned order remains the sound way to show lawful, independent decision-making. The label is practice.

The RTI Act does not impose a universal hearing requirement for every first appeal. If a hearing is held, record notice, participants and submissions accurately. If the appellant asked for a hearing and none was offered, say so in the order or, as appellant, in the second appeal.

Section 19(5) places the burden of proving that denial was justified on the PIO who denied the request.

No. Section 20 penalty powers are exercised by the Central or State Information Commission under the statutory conditions. The FAA can direct disclosure and record facts; it cannot write a Commission fine.

Section 7(6) already provides free information where the public authority fails to comply with the section 7(1) time limit. The order should apply that rule when the facts establish delay.

No. Section 11 provides a representation procedure in its field of operation. The authority must still decide the exemption, public interest and severability questions under the Act.

Preserve the order and non-compliance proof. Ask the FAA to ensure implementation. Use the sample RTI above for the compliance file, then second appeal. Do not invent a CIC decision number as your “standing instruction”.

Section 19(3) provides 90 days from when the decision should have been made or was actually received, with power to admit a later appeal for sufficient cause.

• Legislative Department — Right to Information Act, 2005
• DoPT — official RTI guide, including guidance for First Appellate Authorities
• DoPT — RTI publications and handbooks
• Central Information Commission — published FAA orders
• Supreme Court of India — reasons in administrative and quasi-judicial decisions
• RTI Act section 19 on this wiki

• What an FAA can and cannot do
• Section 8 appeal checklist
• Deemed-refusal checklist
• Third-party appeals
• FAA delay beyond 45 days
• Template: FAA speaking order
• Citizen guide to first appeal
• Second appeal under section 19(3)
• First appeal — practical walkthrough
• RTI second appeal, CIC and SIC
• File an RTI online
• Second-appeal template
• The RTI Playbook