TL;DR. AI Drafter is faster (60 sec) and produces context-tailored 5-question RTIs. Templates are still useful when you need a known-good shape for a niche scenario the AI hasn't seen. Most users default to AI now.
| Aspect | AI RTI Drafter | Static template |
| Time to draft | 60 sec | 10-20 min |
| Personalisation | ✅ Tailored to your problem | ❌ Generic |
| 5 specific questions | ✅ AI generates | ❌ You write |
| Section citation | ✅ Auto | ⚠️ You confirm |
| Cost | Rs 0 | Rs 0 |
| Audit trail | ✅ Saved in My Learnings | ❌ Local file |
| Verified shape | ⚠️ Spot-check | ✅ Known-good |
Your problem is specific (e.g., “my pension stopped 3 months ago, I worked at CPWD as a Junior Engineer for 35 years”). The AI infers the right questions, the right office, the right §6 framing.
You're filing for a rare niche (e.g., RTI to a deemed university about a specific UGC inspection). You want the absolute known-good shape, no surprises.
Use AI to draft, then check against the canonical template on the matching `/rti-for-X` page. Best of both worlds.
Both options are tools — pick based on what you're trying to achieve:
A citizen with a stuck pension claim filed:
The CPGRAMS got the pension paid. The RTI gave the paper trail. The Lokayukta complaint led to disciplinary action against the responsible officer. Three tools, one outcome.
Last reviewed: 25 April 2026.
More comparisons: browse every RTI-vs-alternative side-by-side in RTI vs Alternatives: the full comparison hub <!– rti-wiki-comparisons-hub-2026-vs-start –>