Right to Information Wiki Blog
Latest RTI decision notes
- Right to Be Forgotten: erase old court cases from Google after Delhi HC's 2026 ruling - what the Laksh Vir Singh Yadav judgment (2026:DHC:4891) means, the three remedies (de-indexing, delinking, masking), who is eligible vs barred, and how to apply.
- Gold Rate Today in India: 24K, 22K, 18K Price and Buyer Checklist — SEO-focused gold price guide with current-rate snapshot, city buying checklist, jewellery bill calculation, hallmark checks and a light RTI route for complaint records.
- PAN Aadhaar name mismatch? Fix KYC rejections without running office to office — high-search digital identity repair map covering PAN-Aadhaar, DigiLocker, mutual fund KYC, passport holds, bank onboarding and when RTI can actually help.
- Monday Morning RTI Checklist: Fix Pending Government Work This Week — Monday action plan for pending passport, pension, ration card, FIR, PMAY, electricity, scholarship, mutation and public-service files.
- PMAY status stuck or subsidy delayed? Use RTI after this checklist — high-interest PMAY 2026 guide covering stuck beneficiary status, missing names, delayed instalments, subsidy confusion, grievance steps and record-based RTI drafting.
- BCCI outside RTI: CIC decision in Geeta Rani case explained — legal analysis of CIC/MOYAS/A/2018/123236 after the Madras High Court remand, including Section 2(h), government control, substantial financing, tax concessions and practical RTI routes.
Mere Pendency of a Final Decision Is Not a Valid Reason to Deny RTI
Direct Answer. The Central Information Commission has held that mere pendency of a decision, inquiry, or examination is not a valid ground to deny RTI disclosure. Unless the Public Information Officer specifically cites a Section 8 sub-clause AND shows how disclosure would prejudice the pending matter, the information must be released. Ratio: X v. Medical Council of India (CIC/YA/A/2016/001453, 9 January 2017), applied widely since.
Section 20 PIO penalty — when Rs 250/day applies
Practice this in 30 seconds. Use our free RTI Assistant — AI-driven drafting, First Appeal, Second Appeal in one place.
Section 20(1) of the RTI Act 2005 empowers the Central / State Information Commission to impose a penalty of Rs 250 per day of delay, subject to a cap of Rs 25,000, on a Public Information Officer who (a) refuses to receive an RTI application, (b) fails to respond within Section 7(1), © malafidely denies information, (d) provides incorrect / incomplete / misleading information, or (e) destroys information. The penalty is recovered from the PIO's personal salary. Section 20(2) additionally empowers the Commission to recommend disciplinary action. Hearing opportunity under the proviso is mandatory; due-diligence is a defence.
RTI against a government officer — can they retaliate?
Practice this in 30 seconds. Use our free RTI Assistant — AI-driven drafting, First Appeal, Second Appeal in one place.
Legally, no. A public servant cannot retaliate against an RTI applicant — Section 6(2) of the RTI Act bars the PIO from even asking the applicant's motive, let alone taking adverse action based on it. Multiple protective layers exist: Section 20 PIO penalty for obstruction, Whistleblowers Protection Act 2014 for corruption disclosures, Section 8(1)(g) identity protection where disclosure endangers safety, and High Court writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Practical retaliation is rare; this post explains both the law and the signals that tell you whether to worry.
Reader signal
Was this article useful?
Tap once if it helped you. These counters show other citizens which pages are worth reading.