Right to Information Wiki
Repeat-information rejection — CIC guidance line

Information already disclosed under §4 or in public domain can be pointed to, not re-compiled. Where §4 disclosure exists, PIO may direct applicant to the source.

no way to compare when less than two revisions

Differences

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


—cases:suo-motu-disclosure-rejection-of-rti-cic [2026/05/03 08:32] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 1: Line 1:
 +{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(Repeat-information rejection — CIC guidance line,Central Information Commission RTI,RTI §4,RTI §7,§4 disclosure,repeat requests,public domain,CIC)&metatag-description=(Information already disclosed under §4 or in public domain can be pointed to, not re-compiled. Where §4 disclosure exists, PIO may direct applicant to the source.)}}
 +
 +====== Repeat-information rejection — CIC guidance line ======
 +
 +<WRAP center round info 95%>
 +**Central Information Commission** · 2012-01-01 · multiple CIC orders
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +
 +
 +**Information already disclosed under §4 or in public domain can be pointed to, not re-compiled. Where §4 disclosure exists, PIO may direct applicant to the source.**
 +
 +//Where §4 disclosure exists, PIO may direct applicant to the source rather than re-compile.//
 +
 +===== Case details =====
 +
 +^ Court | Central Information Commission |
 +^ Decided | 2012-01-01 |
 +^ Citation | multiple CIC orders |
 +^ Petitioner | various |
 +^ Respondent | various |
 +^ RTI Act sections | §4, §7 |
 +^ Outcome | Guidance / other |
 +
 +===== Outcome =====
 +
 +Information already disclosed under §4 or in public domain can be pointed to, not re-compiled.
 +
 +===== Ratio decidendi =====
 +
 +Where information is already suo motu disclosed under §4(1)(b) or is in the public domain, PIO may direct the applicant to the source. The applicant may not demand the same information in a specific form repeatedly.
 +
 +===== Keywords =====
 +
 +§4 disclosure, repeat requests, public domain, 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.//
 +
 +  * [[/cases/sc-rti-whistleblower-protection-2014|RTI whistleblower protection — §8(1)(g)]] (SC 2014)
 +  * [[/important-decisions/court/irrelevant-information|Irrelevant Information — CIC directive line]] (CIC 2010)
 +  * [[/cases/cic-rti-duplicate-application-2018|Duplicate RTI applications — CIC]] (CIC 2018)
 +  * [[/cases/cic-rti-partial-information-earlier-2020|Partial information provided — fresh RTI for balance — CIC]] (CIC 2020)
 +  * [[/important-decisions/court/girish-ramchandra-deshpande|Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC]] (SC 2012)
 +
 +===== Related =====
 +
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?court=CIC|All Central Information Commission rulings in the corpus]]
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?section=4|All RTI cases turning on §4]]
 +  * [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/search?section=7|All RTI cases turning on §7]]
 +  * [[: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-cic section-4 section-7}}