Right to Information Wiki
Condonation of delay in §19(3) Second Appeal

Delay in filing §19[3] Second Appeal may be condoned for sufficient cause; Commission has equitable discretion. §19(3) 90-day limit is condonable for sufficient.

no way to compare when less than two revisions

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.


—cases:sc-delay-condonation-second-appeal-2022 [2026/05/03 08:32] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 1: Line 1:
 +{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(Condonation of delay in §19(3) Second Appeal,Supreme Court of India / CIC authorities RTI,RTI §19,§19(3),condonation of delay,limitation,Second Appeal)&metatag-description=(Delay in filing §19[3] Second Appeal may be condoned for sufficient cause; Commission has equitable discretion. §19(3) 90-day limit is condonable for sufficient.)}}
 +
 +====== Condonation of delay in §19(3) Second Appeal ======
 +
 +<WRAP center round info 95%>
 +**Supreme Court of India / CIC authorities** · 2022-01-01 · Citation awaited
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +
 +
 +**Delay in filing §19[3] Second Appeal may be condoned for sufficient cause; Commission has equitable discretion. §19(3) 90-day limit is condonable for sufficient.**
 +
 +//§19(3) 90-day limit is condonable for sufficient cause; Commission exercises equitable discretion.//
 +
 +===== Case details =====
 +
 +^ Court | Supreme Court of India / CIC authorities |
 +^ Decided | 2022-01-01 |
 +^ Citation | Citation awaited |
 +^ Petitioner | various |
 +^ Respondent | various |
 +^ RTI Act sections | §19(3) |
 +^ Outcome | Partly allowed |
 +
 +===== Outcome =====
 +
 +Delay in filing §19(3) Second Appeal may be condoned for sufficient cause; Commission has equitable discretion.
 +
 +===== Ratio decidendi =====
 +
 +While §19(3) prescribes a 90-day limitation for Second Appeal, the Commission has equitable discretion to condone delay for sufficient cause. Common grounds: illness, change of address, loss of PIO's original order.
 +
 +===== Keywords =====
 +
 +§19(3), condonation of delay, limitation, Second Appeal
 +
 +===== 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.//
 +
 +  * [[/cases/chief-information-commissioner-v-state-of-manipur-2011-sc|Chief Information Commissioner v. State of Manipur]] (SC 2011)
 +  * [[/cases/cic-rti-complaint-before-second-appeal-2014|§18 complaint vs §19 appeal — jurisdictional divide]] (CIC 2014)
 +  * [[/cases/bombay-hc-pio-deemed-refusal-2014|PIO silence as deemed refusal — Bombay HC]] (HC-BOM 2014)
 +  * [[/cases/cic-rti-partial-information-earlier-2020|Partial information provided — fresh RTI for balance — CIC]] (CIC 2020)
 +  * [[/cases/sc-rti-section-6-3-transfer-rule-2022|§6(3) transfer — 5-day rule strict construction — SC]] (SC 2022)
 +
 +===== Related =====
 +
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?court=SC|All Supreme Court of India / CIC authorities rulings in the corpus]]
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?section=19|All RTI cases turning on §19]]
 +  * [[:cases:search|Full case-law search]]
 +  * [[:cases|Case-Law Database — overview]]
 +  * [[:pio-rti-reply-guide|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
 +  * [[:act|The RTI Act, 2005 — annotated]]
 +
 +<WRAP center round alert 95%>
 +**Editorial summary, not a certified report.** The ratio here is an editorial compression. Before citing this ruling in a PIO order, FAA speaking order, or any appellate filing, **verify against the full reported decision**. RTI Wiki is not a legal service.
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +
 +
 +//Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.//
 +
 +{{tag>case-law court-sc section-19}}