PIO unavailable — Head-of-Institution vicarious liability

When a designated PIO is unavailable [leave/vacancy], the Head of Institution becomes liable under §20. PIO vacancy/leave doesn't pause §7 duty; Head of. PIO vacancy/leave doesn't pause §7 duty; Head of Institution carries vicarious §20 liability. ===== Case details ===== ^ Court | Central Information Commission | ^ Decided | 2020-01-01 | ^ Citation | Citation awaited | ^ Petitioner | RTI applicant | ^ Respondent | Public authority | ^ RTI Act sections | §5, §20 | ^ Outcome | Applicant allowed | ===== Outcome ===== When a designated PIO is unavailable (leave/vacancy), the Head of Institution becomes liable under §20. ===== Ratio decidendi ===== Vacancy or long leave of a designated PIO does not pause the public authority's §7 obligation. The Head of Institution is statutorily obliged to ensure a substitute PIO is notified or to discharge the duty personally; default attracts vicarious §20 liability. ===== Keywords ===== PIO vacancy, §5, §20, vicarious liability, CIC ===== Similar cases in the corpus ===== These rulings have the closest editorial ratio to this case — computed by tf-idf cosine similarity over ratio, keywords and Act sections. Useful starting points if you are researching the same point of law. * PIO designation and accountability — Delhi HC (HC-DEL 2016) * PIO transfer during pendency — Calcutta HC (HC-CAL 2019) * Lost RTI application — PIO liability — CIC (CIC 2020) * §6(3) transfer — 5-day rule strict construction — SC (SC 2022) * Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO (HC-DEL 2010) ===== Related ===== * All Central Information Commission rulings in the corpus * All RTI cases turning on §5 * All RTI cases turning on §20 * Full case-law search * Case-Law Database — overview * PIO RTI Reply Guide * The RTI Act, 2005 — annotated