cpd:about-instructor
Translate:

About the Instructor — CPD Course

⚠️ DPDP Rules, 2025 (14 Nov 2025) amended Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act — public-interest override now under Section 8(2). Read the note →

· 2026/04/19 05:02 · 0 Comments

Part of the PIO / FAA CPD Course.

Kushal Pathak — Instructor

Twenty-five years of RTI practice. Editor of RTI Wiki — India's most-cited plain-language reference on the RTI Act, 2005.

Practice

  • Trained Public Information Officers and First Appellate Authorities in central ministries, state departments, police, municipal corporations, and PSUs across India.
  • Drafted over 2,000 reasoned PIO orders and reviewed hundreds of First Appeals for departmental review teams.
  • Advised vigilance offices on the §8(1)(h) boundary between investigation protection and transparency.
  • Authored practitioner notes on every major post-2011 Supreme-Court RTI ruling.

Teaching

  • Editorial lead for the PIO / FAA knowledge base — 25+ articles covering every §8(1) clause and §19 procedure.
  • Author of the “Ask for records, not answers” drafting framework used by a majority of civil-society RTI trainers.
  • Co-ordinator of the upcoming quarterly editorial review with retired Information Commissioners and senior RTI advocates.

Editorial

  • Editor, RTI Wiki — operational since 2005.
  • Sole author of the post-DPDP-2025 framework pages on §8(1)(j) and §8(2).
  • Maintainer of the 410-page reference corpus that grounds every article on this site.

Writing

Regular contributor on RTI to practitioner newsletters, legal journals, and training academies. Style: plain English, statute-first, case-law-anchored, tested against real-world PIO and FAA cases.

Contact

  • Email: admin@bighelpers.in
  • CPD-specific: cpd@bighelpers.in (coming soon)
  • Editorial feedback: Corrections page

Editorial board (forming)

The CPD course is supported by an editorial board of retired Information Commissioners and senior RTI advocates. We're actively onboarding — see Editorial Review — reviewer onboarding. Board members co-review the course content quarterly.

Why this course, from this instructor

The gap is not in the Act. The Act is well-drafted — and the Supreme Court has done excellent work clarifying it for twenty years. The gap is in everyday PIO drafting. A three-minute order on a routine RTI is the norm. A three-minute order that is *also* reasoned, clause-specific, and writ-proof is possible — if the officer has the mental muscle memory and the templates ready to hand.

This course gives you both. Not theory; muscle memory and templates. After 25 years of reading PIO orders that say “§8(1)(d) applies — request rejected” (and watching the FAA overturn every one of them), that is what I believe is worth teaching.

Discussion

Enter your comment:
 
Share this article
Was this helpful? views
cpd/about-instructor.txt · Last modified: by 127.0.0.1