Right to Information Wiki
Sushil Kumar v. RPO Bhopal — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026

Compensation Rs. 5,000 awarded under §198b for passport delay. Case: Sushil Kumar v. RPO Bhopal — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026. RTI Wiki — citizen-first reference.

Sushil Kumar v. RPO Bhopal — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026

Sushil Kumar v. RPO Bhopal (Central Information Commission, 2018-04-19) CIC/MEA/A/2018/000123 is a ruling on the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section 19(8)(b). Compensation Rs. 5,000 awarded under §19(8)(b) for passport delay. Where passport dispatch was delayed without reasonable cause beyond the Citizen Charter timeline, compensation under §19(8)(b) of the RTI Act of Rs.

Holding

Compensation Rs. 5,000 awarded under §19(8)(b) for passport delay.

Ratio

Where passport dispatch was delayed without reasonable cause beyond the Citizen Charter timeline, compensation under §19(8)(b) of the RTI Act of Rs. 5,000 was awarded to the applicant. Compensation must be specifically prayed in the appeal.

Section(s) applied

  • Section 19(8)(b)

Practitioner takeaway

Compensation under §19(8)(b) is real remedy; quantify loss in appeal.

Citation

  • Citation: CIC/MEA/A/2018/000123
  • Court: Central Information Commission
  • Date: 2018-04-19
  • Outcome: allowed
  • Reporter / Cause-list: CIC/MEA/A/2018/000123

Why this case matters for citizens

This ruling is part of the 300+ case-law corpus at RTI Wiki Case-law Database. Every named case sets a precedent that you can cite in your own §19(1) First Appeal or §19(3) Second Appeal. Information Commissions and FAAs are bound to consider properly cited authority.

Citizen action steps if your own RTI is being refused on similar grounds

  1. Day 30 — silence by PIO = deemed refusal under §7(2). File §19(1) First Appeal in 30 days using First Appeal Builder.
  2. Day 60-90 — if FAA also refuses, file §19(3) Second Appeal to the State Information Commission (or CIC for central authorities).
  3. Beyond 18 months pending — writ petition under Article 226 to the High Court.
  4. Parallel CPGRAMS complaint at pgportal.gov.in for service-delivery push.

Citing this ruling in your appeal

Use our Citation Formatter to format the citation correctly. Pair with Bhagat Singh v. CIC (2007) (procedural objections) and Adesh Kumar v. UoI (2014) (irrelevance is not a ground) — these two Delhi HC rulings cover most everyday refusal scenarios.