Guidelines for First Appellate Authority (FAA) under RTI 2026

This guide is for serving First Appellate Authorities, departmental heads who supervise RTI work, and PIOs who want to write replies that survive appeal. It cross-links to deeper legal frameworks for PIOs and citizens, and reflects the position after the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025.

• Section 19(1): any person aggrieved by the PIO's decision, or by deemed refusal under Section 7(2), may appeal to “such officer who is senior in rank to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, in each public authority”.
• The FAA is therefore an internal departmental review by the same public authority through a senior officer.
• The FAA does not decide as a court. Procedure is administrative and quasi-judicial, but written reasons and natural-justice principles apply.
• Statutory deadline: 30 days from receipt of appeal, extendable to 45 days for reasons recorded in writing under Section 19(6).

• Filed within 30 days of the PIO's decision or within 30 days of the deemed-refusal date.
• No prescribed format. The FAA may admit a delayed appeal if sufficient cause is shown.
• Appellant identity stays the same as the original RTI applicant.

• Where the appeal involves information relating to a third party, the FAA must give the third party a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
• Especially relevant where Section 11 procedure was triggered at the PIO stage, or should have been.

• The burden of justifying the denial rests with the PIO, not the appellant.
• If the PIO has not justified the denial in writing, the FAA must allow the appeal in whole, in part, or by remand for reconsideration.

It is important to be precise here. The wide appellate powers under Section 19(8) of the RTI Act: directing access in a particular form, directing publication, directing penalty proceedings, awarding compensation, requiring system changes: are vested in the Central or State Information Commission at second appeal, not in the First Appellate Authority.

The FAA's powers, exercised within the public authority, are:

1. to confirm, modify or set aside the PIO's decision item by item,
2. to direct the PIO or the public authority to reconsider and disclose information that is not exempt,
3. to direct the PIO to cure procedural defects, including issuing a missed Section 11 third-party notice or supplying severable parts of a record under Section 10,
4. to record findings on PIO conduct and recommend penalty proceedings to the Information Commission,
5. to dismiss the appeal with reasons.

A FAA order that purports to “impose penalty under Section 20” is without jurisdiction; only the Information Commission can do that. The FAA may, however, record adverse findings on which the Commission may act.

1. Step 1 acknowledge. Issue acknowledgment within five days of receipt; assign a case number; open a file.
2. Step 2 examine the PIO's reply. Read the original RTI, the PIO's file noting and the PIO's letter side by side.
3. Step 3 hear the parties. Documentary disposal is the norm. Grant oral hearing where facts are contested.
4. Step 4 apply Section 8(2) balancing. Where the PIO has refused under any clause of Section 8(1), record the public-interest analysis in writing.
5. Step 5 apply Section 10 severability. Where the PIO refused entirely, ask whether partial disclosure is possible.
6. Step 6 issue Section 19(4) third-party notice if not done. Procedural fatality if missed at the PIO stage and not cured at appeal.
7. Step 7 decide. Affirm, modify, set aside, remand or dismiss. Record reasons.
8. Step 8 communicate Second Appeal rights. Section 19(3): within 90 days to the CIC or SIC, with the address.

A reasoned appellate order should, at a minimum, contain the following before signature:

1. Case heading with appellant name, public authority, RTI date, PIO order date, appeal date, FAA case number.
2. Brief facts in a single paragraph.
3. Items in dispute, reproduced verbatim from the RTI application.
4. PIO reasoning as recorded in the file noting and the reply, summarised faithfully.
5. Statutory framework invoked (Sections 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 as applicable) with the specific clause.
6. Section 8(2) balancing where any Section 8(1) clause is in play, recorded in writing.
7. Section 10 severability analysis where partial disclosure is possible.
8. Section 19(4) third-party hearing record, where applicable.
9. Findings item by item, in numbered paragraphs.
10. Operative directions to the PIO with a fresh deadline, plus the Second Appeal route under Section 19(3) and the address of the relevant Information Commission.

• Disclosure is the rule; exemption the exception. Section 3 of the Act establishes the citizen's right; exemptions cannot shadow the right itself.
• Speaking order required. Each contention should be addressed in writing.
• Public-interest balance. Section 8(2) operates across all Section 8(1) clauses, including (j) after the DPDP Rules, 2025.
• Severability mandatory. Section 10 uses “shall”; the FAA must direct partial disclosure where reasonably possible.
• No fee for First Appeal. Free of cost; no prescribed format.
• Time matters. Section 19(6) sets the 30 or 45-day deadline; deemed refusal at the PIO stage is itself a finding the FAA must record.

For the full anatomy of a speaking order, the appellate review checklist and copy-ready order templates (affirm, modify, set aside, remand, deemed refusal), see the dedicated companion article:

FAA Speaking-Order Guide: anatomy and templates

For the underlying PIO framework that the FAA reviews:

PIO RTI Reply Guide: duties, timelines and 9 templates

For a deep dive on the most-litigated exemption:

Section 8(1)(j) framework after DPDP 2025

• Recruitment and exams. Apply CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011), where the Supreme Court held that a candidate's own answer sheet is disclosable. See PIO recruitment exam RTI playbook.
• Service records. Apply Girish Ramchandra Deshpande (2013) carefully. Balance under Section 8(2) read with the post-DPDP position.
• Banking and regulatory. Apply RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry (2016). Fiduciary protection is narrowly construed.
• Investigation and police. Apply Bhagat Singh v. CIC (Delhi HC, 2008). Section 8(1)(h) requires specific impedance, not generic concerns.
• Policy and file noting. Apply R.K. Jain v. UoI (2013). Post-decisional notings are generally disclosable.
• Cabinet papers. Apply Section 8(1)(i) temporal test (decisions, reasons and material released after the matter is complete).
• Fiduciary records. See Section 8(1)(e) fiduciary framework.
• Third-party data. See Section 11 third-party procedural guide.

• Rubber-stamp orders that simply say “appeal dismissed” or “PIO reply upheld”.
• Failing to apply Section 8(2) when the PIO has not.
• Skipping Section 10 severability analysis.
• Not issuing Section 19(4) notice to a third party where applicable.
• Missing the 30 or 45-day deadline under Section 19(6).
• Forgetting Second Appeal rights in the operative part of the order.
• Purporting to impose penalty. Section 20 lies only with the Information Commission. The FAA may recommend, not impose.

• Section 8(1)(j) amended. Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 amended Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The amendment was activated when the DPDP Rules, 2025 were notified on 14 November 2025.
• Higher baseline privacy protection for third-party personal data.
• The FAA's role in balancing has therefore become more central. Section 8(2) is the gateway for any larger public interest in personal information.
• For full practitioner detail: DPDP Rules 2025 amendment note and PIO reply post-DPDP.

Yes. There is no bar in the Act. Most appeals are decided on record; oral hearings are granted when facts are contested.

No. Penalty lies only with the Information Commission. The FAA may record findings that invite the Commission's penalty consideration on second appeal or complaint.

The appellant's Second Appeal right under Section 19(3) accrues on expiry of the deadline. Internal accountability for the delay rests with the public authority and may itself attract adverse comment by the Commission.

Yes. Under Section 19(1) proviso, the FAA may condone delay if sufficient cause is shown. Record the cause in writing.

Section 19(4) requires reasonable opportunity of hearing where the appeal involves third-party information. It is procedurally fatal to skip.

A reasoned order that records the appellant's grounds, records the PIO's defence, examines each ground against the statutory framework, records findings with reasons, issues clear operative directions and communicates Second Appeal rights.

Yes. The FAA can issue notice to the third party under Section 19(4) and consider the representation before disposal. This is the correct cure rather than dismissing the appeal on a procedural ground.

No fee is payable for a first appeal under the Central RTI Rules, 2012. Some State Rules prescribe a nominal fee; check the rules of the public authority. Fee, where prescribed, cannot be a barrier to a citizen's right of appeal.

The First Appellate Authority is the first quasi-judicial check on PIO decisions. A reasoned, timely, statute-grounded order, even one that affirms the PIO, strengthens the legitimacy of the institution and the citizen's right. Use this page as the entry point. Use the linked companion guides for templates, case law and section-specific frameworks.

• FAA speaking-order guide: anatomy and templates
• PIO RTI reply guide
• Public authority compliance guide
• RTI Cell setup SOP
• PIO and FAA knowledge base
• Landmark CIC decisions
• First Appeal: citizen view
• Second Appeal: citizen view
• RTI Act Section 19: Appeals
• RTI Act Section 8: Exemptions

• Right to Information Act, 2005 (as amended)
• Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, Section 44(3)
• Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, notified 14 November 2025
• CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497
• Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC, (2013) 1 SCC 212
• RBI v. Jayantilal N. Mistry, (2016) 3 SCC 525
• R.K. Jain v. UoI, (2013) 14 SCC 1
• Bhagat Singh v. CIC, Delhi HC 2008
• Department of Personnel and Training, Master Circular on RTI
• Central Information Commission orders at https://cic.gov.in

Last reviewed: 9 May 2026. Sources verified: statutory references and case-law citations cross-checked on 9 May 2026.

Many RTIs are filed because a government scheme or document is delayed. Before filing, check the status directly:

• PMAY beneficiary status
• NREGA / MGNREGA job card and payment status
• Ration card status
• PM-KISAN Rs 6,000 status
• e-Shram card status

If a status is stuck beyond the official timeline, use the AI RTI Drafter to file in minutes.