faa-first-appeal-timelines
no way to compare when less than two revisions
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| — | faa-first-appeal-timelines [2026/04/25 18:53] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{htmlmetatags> | ||
| + | metatag-keywords=(faa timelines rti, section 19 6 rti, first appeal 30 days, faa extension 45 days) | ||
| + | metatag-description=(Complete timeline framework for First Appellate Authorities — the 30-day filing window, 30/45-day disposal timeline, fee-clock interaction with §7(3), and the consequences of breach.) | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | ====== FAA timelines — §19(1), §19(6), §7(3) interaction (2026) ====== | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{ : | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{page> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP info> | ||
| + | The First Appellate Authority operates within tight statutory timelines under §19. The applicant has 30 days from receipt of PIO order (or expiry of §7(1) timeline) to file. The FAA has 30 days to decide, extendable to 45 with written reasons under §19(6). Breach of these timelines has direct consequences — the applicant can move the Information Commission directly under §19(3). | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Statutory framework ===== | ||
| + | RTI Act §7(1) [PIO 30 days]; §7(3) [fee deposit additional 30 days]; §7(8) [PIO speaking order]; §19(1) [filing 30 days]; §19(6) [FAA decision 30/45 days]; §19(3) [second appeal 90 days]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Key principles ===== | ||
| + | * §19(1) filing window — 30 days from PIO order receipt OR expiry of §7(1) timeline. | ||
| + | * §19(6) decision window — 30 days standard, 45 with written reasons. | ||
| + | * Both windows are mandatory; condonation (filing) requires reasoning; extension (decision) requires written justification. | ||
| + | * §7(3) fee-clock interaction — additional 30 days when PIO demands additional fee + applicant deposits. | ||
| + | * Beyond 45-day FAA timeline — applicant can directly approach IC. | ||
| + | * FAA silence is actionable — IC has consistently held silence is equivalent to denial. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Decision framework ===== | ||
| + | - **Receipt date** — Date stamp on appeal at FAA office. Triggers 30-day clock. | ||
| + | - **Acknowledge applicant within 7 days** — Improves trust; reduces parallel grievances. | ||
| + | - **Schedule hearing within 15 days** — Enables natural-justice compliance. | ||
| + | - **Conduct hearing + draft order** — Within 25 days. Use checklist for completeness. | ||
| + | - **Sign + dispatch order before day 30** — Speed Post / portal upload. Get receipt. | ||
| + | - **Where extension to 45 needed** — Issue written extension order before day 30, citing reasons. | ||
| + | - **Maintain timeline log** — For each appeal, log filing → hearing → decision dates. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Template ===== | ||
| + | < | ||
| + | Timeline tracking sheet for FAA office: | ||
| + | |||
| + | | Appeal No. | Applicant | Filed | Acknow. | Hearing | Order Drafted | Order Dispatched | Days | | ||
| + | |------------|-----------|-------|---------|---------|---------------|------------------|------| | ||
| + | | FA/2026/01 | Mr X | 1 Apr | 5 Apr | 12 Apr | 22 Apr | 28 Apr | 27 | | ||
| + | | FA/2026/02 | Mrs Y | 5 Apr | 8 Apr | 18 Apr | 30 Apr [ext] | - | - | | ||
| + | |||
| + | For appeal exceeding 30 days, issue extension order: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ORDER under §19(6) — Extension of Disposal Timeline | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the matter of First Appeal No. [____] filed by [name] on [date]: | ||
| + | |||
| + | The undersigned First Appellate Authority hereby exercises the power under §19(6) of the RTI Act, 2005 to extend the disposal timeline beyond the standard 30 days for the following written reasons: | ||
| + | |||
| + | (i) The appeal raises a substantial question on §[X] application requiring detailed examination; | ||
| + | (ii) Inspection of the record was scheduled for [date] and is essential before a reasoned order can be passed; | ||
| + | (iii) The PIO has filed a detailed written response on [date] requiring consideration. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The extended disposal date is hereby fixed at [original date + 15 days]. Both parties are informed accordingly. | ||
| + | |||
| + | [FAA Name, Designation, | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Illustrations ===== | ||
| + | ==== Standard appeal — 30-day disposal ==== | ||
| + | Hearing within 15 days, order drafted by day 22, dispatched by day 28. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Complex appeal needing extension ==== | ||
| + | Day 25 extension order issued; final order by day 45. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Multiple parallel appeals on same issue ==== | ||
| + | Common hearing + consolidated order; counts toward each appeal' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Appeal where additional fee deposited mid-process ==== | ||
| + | §7(3) clock pauses for fee deposit time but FAA timeline runs separately. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== FAA on leave ==== | ||
| + | Designate alternate FAA in advance; cannot use absence as defense. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Case law anchors ===== | ||
| + | * **CIC, Re: Mahant Sukhdev v %%UoI%% (CIC 2007)** — FAA silence beyond 30 days = applicant can move IC directly. | ||
| + | * **CIC, Re: Anant Tripathi (CIC 2010)** — Extension under §19(6) requires written reasons; oral extension invalid. | ||
| + | * **Bhagat Singh v CIC (Delhi HC 2007)** — Both PIO and FAA timelines are mandatory; non-compliance attracts §20 penalty. | ||
| + | * **CIC stricture series 2018-2024** — Hundreds of cases where FAA timeline breach was treated as institutional failure. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Common mistakes ===== | ||
| + | * Treating timelines as guidelines — they are mandatory. | ||
| + | * Verbal extension or " | ||
| + | * Not designating alternate FAA — leave used as defense (rejected by IC). | ||
| + | * Counting from FAA receipt instead of office receipt — clock starts at office. | ||
| + | * Combining multiple appeals without preserving individual timelines. | ||
| + | * Failing to issue acknowledgement — applicant claims FAA never received. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Pro tips ===== | ||
| + | * Use a tickler system — calendar reminder for day 25. | ||
| + | * Maintain a hearing calendar — schedule batches efficiently. | ||
| + | * For complex appeals, issue extension within first 15 days — gives 30 more days, cleaner record. | ||
| + | * Train your office to date-stamp + log every appeal at receipt. | ||
| + | * For repeated extensions on similar issues, consider general direction to PA — faster for everyone. | ||
| + | * Develop standard templates for routine reply scenarios — saves drafting time. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== FAQs ===== | ||
| + | ==== Can applicant insist on hearing within X days? ==== | ||
| + | No — but FAA must dispose of the appeal within 30/45 days. Hearing can be telephonic or written. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What if PIO doesn' | ||
| + | FAA can decide ex-parte under principles of natural justice. Document the absence. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Can FAA refuse to admit appeal as time-barred? | ||
| + | Yes — but condonation request must be considered with reasoning. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Does §7(3) fee deposit reset the FAA clock? ==== | ||
| + | No — §7(3) is for PIO timeline. FAA timeline is independent of fee. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What if FAA leaves the post mid-appeal? ==== | ||
| + | Successor must dispose within original timeline; PA must designate continuity. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Related reading ===== | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Sources ===== | ||
| + | RTI Act §19(1), §19(6); CIC database; Bhagat Singh v CIC (Delhi HC 2007); ICRPC handbook. | ||
| + | |||
| + | //Last reviewed: 25 April 2026.// | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{tag> | ||
Was this helpful?
— views
Thanks for the signal.
faa-first-appeal-timelines.txt · Last modified: by 127.0.0.1
