Right to Information Wiki

Section 8 Classifier — which exemption applies?

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 03 May 2026 08:28:36 +0000

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 8 rti classifier,which section 8 1 applies,rti exemption classifier,pio exemption finder,section 8 1 j section 8 1 h personal information tool)&metatag-description=(Free Section 8 classifier — paste your RTI query or PIO reply draft, get a ranked list of which Section 8(1) sub-clauses a PIO is most likely to invoke.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 8 Classifier — which exemption applies? ======
	+
	+	Paste the information your RTI asks for (or the information a PIO is considering withholding), and this free classifier returns a ranked list of which §8(1) sub-clause is most likely to attach. Covers all ten §8(1) sub-clauses plus §9 (copyright), §11 (third-party procedure), and §24 (exempt organisations). Pure heuristic — no login, no data leaves your browser.
	+
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html 100%x900px noborder\|Section 8 Classifier}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Not loading? Open the tool directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html\|/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Who this is for =====
	+
	+	* PIOs drafting a reasoned §7(8)(i) rejection — use as a first-pass check on which sub-clause to cite
	+	* RTI applicants anticipating a rejection and preparing an appeal
	+	* FAAs auditing a PIO's sub-clause citation during First Appeal
	+	* Law students and researchers building intuition for which exemption governs which fact pattern
	+
	+	===== Limitations =====
	+
	+	* Heuristic only — keyword-matching, not legal analysis. A real RTI always turns on specific facts and public-authority records.
	+	* Top result ≠ valid refusal — the classifier indicates the clause a PIO might invoke, not whether it is defensible on appeal.
	+	* Post-DPDP 2025 — §8(1)(j) detection assumes the amended framework effective 14 November 2025.
	+	* Not exhaustive — some niche sub-clauses and procedural provisions (§8(2), §8(3), §10) are context-dependent and not directly classified.
	+
	+	===== How to use the result =====
	+
	+	- Top-ranked clause — treat as the most likely PIO response. Build your case-law citation around this clause before filing or replying.
	+	- Next 1-2 clauses — note these as fallback grounds the PIO may cite. Your appeal should pre-empt these too.
	+	- No hit — strong signal the RTI is routinely disclosable. If the PIO rejects anyway, treat it as a reasoned-order violation under §7(8)(i).
	+
	+	===== Related tools =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:timeline-calculator\|RTI Timeline Calculator]]
	+	* [[:tools:rti-generator-app\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	* [[:tools:first-appeal-app\|First Appeal Builder]]
	+	* [[:tools:pio-reply-checker-app\|PIO Reply Checker]]
	+	* [[:tools:chat\|RTI Wiki AI — free chat]]
	+
	+	===== Related reading =====
	+
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI Rejection — decision tree]]
	+	* [[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework\|§8(1)(j) framework — post-DPDP 2025]]
	+	* [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+	* [[:cases:search\|Case-law search — 210+ rulings]]
	+
	+	~~NOCACHE~~
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 22 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool classifier section-8 exemptions}}

First Appeal Builder — Section 19(1)

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(first appeal builder,rti first appeal tool,rti section 19 1,first appeal rti 2026,rti appeal drafting tool,free rti appeal generator,rti appeal template,pio reply challenge)&metatag-description=(Free First Appeal Builder. Paste the PIO reply, the tool flags invalid grounds with case law, and drafts your Section 19(1) appeal. Client-side, privacy-safe.)}}
	+
	+	====== First Appeal Builder — Section 19(1) ======
	+
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/first-appeal-app.html 100%x1500px noborder\|First Appeal Builder}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Tool not loading? Open it directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/first-appeal-app.html\|/tools/first-appeal-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== How the builder works =====
	+
	+	- Step 1 — The original RTI. Date, PIO office, reference number, and the questions you asked.
	+	- Step 2 — What the PIO did. Paste the reply text (if any). Or flag a deemed refusal if no reply arrived.
	+	- Step 3 — Grounds of appeal. The builder scans the reply for 13 common invalid-ground patterns — each linked to statute and case law. You can tick, un-tick, and add your own grounds.
	+	- Step 4 — Your details. Name, address, FAA contact (optional). The builder generates a complete Section 19(1) appeal letter with facts, grounds, relief sought, and enclosures list — ready to copy, download, or print.
	+
	+	===== What the builder checks for =====
	+
	+	* Deemed refusal (§7(2)) — when the PIO missed the 30-day window or did not reply at all.
	+	* §7(9) blanket refusal — "voluminous" / "disproportionate" without offering inspection.
	+	* "Confidential" stamp cited under §8(1)(a) without a harm test.
	+	* Sub-judice as a ground under §8(1)(b) without an express court order.
	+	* §8(1)(d) invoked without third-party competitive-harm analysis.
	+	* §8(1)(e) fiduciary applied to non-fiduciary records — //Aditya Bandopadhyay//, //Jayantilal Mistry//.
	+	* §8(1)(h) investigation invoked where the inquiry is closed.
	+	* §8(1)(i) cabinet invoked for a decided matter — //R.K. Jain//.
	+	* §8(1)(j) personal without §8(2) balancing — post-DPDP-2025 framework.
	+	* "Not information" dismissal without §5(3) reasonable assistance.
	+	* Motive / reason asked — bar under §6(2).
	+	* Blanket refusal without §10 severability.
	+	* Third-party grounds without §11 procedure.
	+	* Unreasoned refusal — violation of §7(8)(i).
	+
	+	Each detected ground comes with its specific statutory citation and relevant Supreme Court / High Court authority. You review the list and edit what you want to keep.
	+
	+	===== What the First Appeal gets you =====
	+
	+	* No filing fee. The First Appeal is free.
	+	* Same public authority, senior officer. The FAA is typically one rank above the PIO, within the same office.
	+	* 30 days to decide (extendable by 15 days with reasons) under §19(6).
	+	* Higher remedies. The FAA can direct disclosure (§19(8)(a)), award compensation (§19(8)(b)), impose costs (§19(8)(c)), and recommend penalty on the PIO to the Information Commission.
	+
	+	===== Timing =====
	+
	+	* File within 30 days of receiving the PIO's reply (or of the expiry of the PIO's 30-day window, for deemed refusals).
	+	* Condonation of delay is permitted under §19(1) proviso only where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause — plead this explicitly if you are late.
	+
	+	Full procedural detail: [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]] and [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]].
	+
	+	===== Want to understand the grounds first? =====
	+
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection — all 10 valid refusals]] — what a PIO can and cannot refuse.
	+	* [[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework\|§8(1)(j) after DPDP]] — post-14-November-2025 analysis.
	+	* [[:pio-section-7-9-alternative-form\|§7(9) alternative form — not a ground]] — the PIO cannot refuse on volume alone.
	+	* [[:faa-privacy-public-interest-balancing\|Privacy vs public interest balancing]] — §8(2) override.
	+
	+	===== If the FAA denies too =====
	+
	+	* File a Second Appeal under §19(3) within 90 days, to the State or Central Information Commission. Still free.
	+	* Section 20 penalty — the Commission can impose up to Rs. 25,000 on the PIO personally.
	+
	+	===== Feedback & corrections =====
	+
	+	Found a detection rule that missed your case? Spotted a typo in the generated letter? Please report it at [[:corrections\|our corrections page]] — we fix most feedback within 48 hours.
	+
	+	===== Related reading =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	* [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]]
	+	* [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]]
	+	* [[:faa-section-19-8-powers\|§19(8) FAA powers]]
	+	* [[:faa-privacy-public-interest-balancing\|Privacy vs public interest]]
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]]
	+	* [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+	* [[:guide:applicant:first-appeal\|First Appeal Guide]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:act:section-20\|Section 20 — Penalties]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	* Right to Information Act, 2005 — §§ 6(2), 7(1), 7(2), 7(8)(i), 7(9), 8(1), 8(2), 10, 11, 19, 20
	+	* Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2012 — Central
	+	* Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — §44(3) amending RTI §8(1)(j)
	+	* //CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497
	+	* //RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry//, (2016) 5 SCC 136
	+	* //R.K. Jain v. UoI//, (2013) 14 SCC 794
	+	* //Namit Sharma v. UoI//, (2013) 1 SCC 745
	+	* //Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. UoI//, (2017) 10 SCC 1
	+	* //S. Venkatesan v. CIC// (Madras HC, 2016)
	+	* //C. Muniyappan v. State of TN// (Madras HC, 2013)
	+	* //Treesa Irish v. CPIO// (Kerala HC, 2010)
	+	* //Shailesh Gandhi v. CIC// (Bombay HC, 2013)
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool first-appeal builder tools section-19 drafting}}

PIO Reply Checker — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 03 May 2026 08:37:01 +0000

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(pio reply checker,rti reply analysis,rti appeal grounds finder,rti reply checker tool,pio refusal valid,rti reply scrutiny,rti tool free)&metatag-description=(Paste a PIO reply. The tool flags invalid grounds, deemed refusal, missing §10 severability, §11 procedure skips, fee over-demands — each with case-law authority.)}}
	+
	+	====== PIO Reply Checker — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 ======
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/pio-reply-checker-app.html 100%x1500px noborder\|PIO Reply Checker}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Tool not loading? Open it directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/pio-reply-checker-app.html\|/tools/pio-reply-checker-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+
	+
	+	Paste a PIO reply. The tool flags invalid grounds, deemed refusal, missing §10 severability, §11 procedure skips, fee over-demands — each with case-law authority.
	+
	+	===== What this tool does =====
	+
	+	Paste the PIO's reply into the text box. In seconds the tool returns:
	+
	+	* A verdict — strong grounds for appeal, likely appealable, or legally sound.
	+	* A findings list — each invalid-ground pattern identified, categorised by severity.
	+	* Statutory + case-law authority for every finding.
	+	* A concrete next-step action per finding — what to add to your appeal.
	+	* Timeline block — when your RTI was filed, when the 30-day window expired, when your First Appeal is due.
	+	* Direct CTA to the First Appeal Builder (Tool 2) when appeal is warranted.
	+
	+	All analysis runs in your browser. Nothing is sent to any server.
	+
	+	===== What the tool checks =====
	+
	+	==== Invalid refusals (high severity) ====
	+
	+	* §7(2) deemed refusal — date comparison between your RTI and the reply.
	+	* §7(9) blanket refusal — "voluminous" / "disproportionate" without offering inspection.
	+	* §8(1)(a) "Confidential" stamp cited without a harm-test.
	+	* §8(1)(b) sub-judice cited without an express court order.
	+	* §6(2) motive inquiry — PIO asking why you want the information.
	+	* §7(8)(i) unreasoned refusal — boilerplate or bald order.
	+
	+	==== Questionable grounds (medium severity) ====
	+
	+	* §8(1)(d) commercial without identified third-party and harm.
	+	* §8(1)(e) fiduciary applied to non-fiduciary records.
	+	* §8(1)(h) investigation where the inquiry may be closed.
	+	* §8(1)(i) cabinet for a decided matter.
	+	* §8(1)(j) personal without §8(2) balancing (post-DPDP 2025).
	+	* "Not information" dismissal without §5(3) assistance.
	+	* §11 third-party procedure skipped.
	+	* §10 severability missing (blanket refusal).
	+	* Fee demand beyond statutory rates (Rs. 10 + Rs. 2/page).
	+
	+	==== Positive signals ====
	+
	+	* Inspection offered (correct under §7(9)).
	+	* Specific harm-test cited.
	+	* §10 severability applied.
	+	* First Appellate Authority named.
	+
	+	===== How the verdict is computed =====
	+
	+	* High-severity finding present → "Strong grounds for appeal".
	+	* Two or more medium findings → "Grounds for appeal likely".
	+	* One medium finding → "One questionable refusal".
	+	* Only positive signals → "Reply appears legally sound".
	+	* Nothing matched → "No automatic triggers" — manual review required.
	+
	+	The verdict is a heuristic — a well-reasoned PIO order can pass all 18 checks and still be factually wrong. Conversely, the tool may flag a reply that is actually valid. Always read the findings and use your judgement.
	+
	+	===== Three-tool workflow =====
	+
	+	- [[:tools:question-builder\|RTI Question Builder]] → map your problem to records.
	+	- [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]] → produce the RTI letter.
	+	- PIO reply arrives → paste it into this tool.
	+	- [[:tools:first-appeal\|First Appeal Builder]] → draft the §19(1) appeal.
	+
	+	All four tools are client-side and privacy-safe.
	+
	+	===== Optional deep analysis with open-source AI — free =====
	+
	+	Below the static findings, the tool offers an opt-in AI deep analysis — free to use as of now, no sign-up, no API key. It runs entirely in your browser via [[https://github.com/mlc-ai/web-llm\|WebLLM]] — nothing is sent to any server.
	+
	+	==== Choose a model size ====
	+
	+	The tool now lets you pick one of three open-source Large Language Models:
	+
	+	* Qwen 2.5 0.5B — ~330 MB first-time download. Fastest. Basic quality; good for a quick second opinion.
	+	* Llama 3.2 1B (default) — ~720 MB. Balanced speed and quality. The recommended starting point.
	+	* Llama 3.2 3B — ~1.8 GB. Slower first download but produces the most detailed analysis.
	+
	+	After the one-time download, the browser caches the model. Subsequent runs are instant.
	+
	+	==== What the AI does ====
	+
	+	Reads the PIO reply, identifies §8(1) clauses invoked, assesses validity of each, drafts specific appeal grounds with statutory and case-law authorities, and recommends the next step.
	+
	+	==== Requirements and caveats ====
	+
	+	* WebGPU — Chrome 113+, Edge, or a WebGPU-capable browser. Available on most computers made after 2017. Safari / Firefox support is experimental.
	+	* Not legal advice. A small LLM can miss subtleties or hallucinate. Treat the output as a second opinion and cross-check against [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]] and the static findings above.
	+	* Privacy. The pasted reply stays on your device. The model's weights come from a public CDN; your text never leaves the browser.
	+	* "Free as of now" means exactly that — the model is free open source, the inference is on your GPU so it costs us nothing, and we reserve the right to revisit if this changes.
	+
	+	==== Attribution ====
	+
	+	* Qwen 2.5 — by [[https://qwenlm.github.io/\|Alibaba Qwen]].
	+	* Llama 3.2 — by [[https://www.llama.com/\|Meta]] under the Llama community licence.
	+	* Quantization — by the [[https://mlc.ai\|MLC AI]] team.
	+	* Runtime — [[https://github.com/mlc-ai/web-llm\|WebLLM]] (Apache-2.0).
	+
	+	===== Caveats =====
	+
	+	* The static checks run on pattern matching, not full legal reasoning. A well-drafted PIO order may defeat a weak regex; a sloppy order may contain valid grounds the tool misses.
	+	* The AI deep analysis is a convenience, not a substitute for legal expertise. A small LLM can hallucinate or miss subtle points.
	+	* The tool does not carry over state to the First Appeal Builder — you'll paste the reply again there (a future upgrade will wire them up).
	+	* For sophisticated cases (complex §8(2) balancing, multi-party §11 scenarios, Schedule-II §24 agencies), consult a qualified RTI advocate. See our [[:pio-faa-knowledge-base\|PIO / FAA knowledge base]] for the underlying framework.
	+
	+	===== Related reading =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:first-appeal\|First Appeal Builder]]
	+	* [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	* [[:tools:question-builder\|RTI Question Builder]]
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]]
	+	* [[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework\|PIO Framework — §8(1)(j) after DPDP]]
	+	* [[:pio-section-7-9-alternative-form\|§7(9) alternative form — not a ground]]
	+	* [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]]
	+	* [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]]
	+	* [[:faa-privacy-public-interest-balancing\|Privacy vs public-interest balancing]]
	+	* [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	* Right to Information Act, 2005 — §§ 6(2), 7(1), 7(2), 7(8)(i), 7(9), 8(1), 8(2), 10, 11, 19, 20
	+	* RTI (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2012
	+	* Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — §44(3) amending RTI §8(1)(j)
	+	* Supreme Court: //S.P. Gupta// (1982), //Aditya Bandopadhyay// (2011), //ICAI v. Shaunak Satya// (2011), //R.K. Jain// (2013), //Namit Sharma// (2013), //RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry// (2016), //Puttaswamy// (2017)
	+	* High Courts: //Carbon Resources// (Kerala), //Muniyappan// (Madras), //S. Venkatesan// (Madras), //S. Mukherjee// (Calcutta), //Treesa Irish// (Kerala), //Shailesh Gandhi// (Bombay), //GMC Thiruvananthapuram// (Kerala), //C.V. Srinivasa// (Karnataka)
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool pio-reply-checker tools analysis drafting}}

Case Citation Formatter — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 03 May 2026 08:37:01 +0000

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(case citation formatter,rti citation format,scc air citation,indian case citation format,legal citation tool)&metatag-description=(Free tool — enter parties + citation + court + date, get properly formatted case citations for RTI First Appeal, Second Appeal, writ filings.)}}
	+
	+	====== Case Citation Formatter — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 ======
	+	Free tool — enter the petitioner, respondent, citation, court and date, and get the case citation in four correctly-formatted variants: full, short, italic, parenthetical. With Indian Kanoon URL support.
	+
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/citation-formatter-app.html 100%x900px noborder\|Case Citation Formatter}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Not loading? Open at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/citation-formatter-app.html\|/tools/citation-formatter-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Output formats =====
	+
	+	Input: ''CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497, SC, 9 August 2011''.
	+
	+	^ Variant ^ Output ^ Use in ^
	+	\| Full \| CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors., (2011) 8 SCC 497 (India SC, 9 August 2011) \| Formal appeal / writ \|
	+	\| Short \| CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors., (2011) 8 SCC 497 \| In-text citation \|
	+	\| Italic \| //CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors.//, (2011) 8 SCC 497 \| DokuWiki / Markdown \|
	+	\| Parenthetical \| (CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors., (2011) 8 SCC 497) \| In-quote citation \|
	+
	+	===== Related tools =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:timeline-calculator\|RTI Timeline Calculator]]
	+	* [[:tools:section-8-classifier\|§8 Classifier]]
	+	* [[:tools:rti-fee-calculator\|RTI Fee Calculator]]
	+	* [[:tools:rti-generator-app\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+
	+	~~NOCACHE~~
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 22 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool citation-formatter case-law}}

RTI Application Generator — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 03 May 2026 09:02:02 +0000

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(rti application generator,rti draft tool,rti maker,rti application builder,free rti generator)
	+	metatag-description=(RTI Application Generator — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 - verified citizen guide on RTI Wiki, India's independent Right to Information reference. Updated 2026 with.)}}
	+
	+	====== RTI Application Generator — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 ======
	+	Compose a rejection-proof Right to Information application in under five minutes. Choose your subject, department and desired records — the tool drafts the application with correct Section 6 boilerplate, Rs 10 fee line, and First Appeal Authority address block.
	+
	+	{{ :social:auto:tools-rti-generator-app.png?direct&1200 \|RTI Generator — RTI Wiki}}
	+
	+	<WRAP round important>
	+	Status — in final development. The full interactive tool is in QA; a preview opens below. Meanwhile, use the canonical [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]] and the [[:file-rti-online-india\|12-step filing guide]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Use the generator =====
	+
	+	//Embedded generator will appear here when released. Expected: 2026-Q2.//
	+
	+	===== What the generator does =====
	+
	+	* Picks the correct addressee (CPIO vs SPIO vs municipal PIO) based on your department.
	+	* Inserts the Section 6(1) invocation.
	+	* Adds Rs 10 fee / BPL exemption line.
	+	* Generates 3-6 numbered queries from your topic.
	+	* Appends correct First Appeal Authority reference.
	+	* Exports as printable PDF or UTF-8 plain text.
	+
	+	===== What Should You Do Next? =====
	+
	+	* Use the template directly: [[:templates:first-rti\|First RTI template]].
	+	* 12-step filing guide: [[:file-rti-online-india\|File RTI online in India]].
	+	* 20 RTI ideas: [[:top-20-rti-questions\|Top 20 RTI questions citizens can ask]].
	+	* Other tools: [[:tools:rti-fee-calculator\|Fee calculator]] · [[:tools:timeline-calculator\|Timeline calculator]] · [[:tools:section-8-classifier\|§8 classifier]] · [[:tools:citation-formatter\|Citation formatter]].
	+
	+	{{tag>tool rti-generator rti-draft}}

RTI Fee Calculator — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 03 May 2026 08:37:01 +0000

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(rti fee calculator,rti fee state wise,rti copy fee,rti inspection fee,bpl rti fee exemption,rti fee india)&metatag-description=(Free RTI Fee Calculator — select your State and authority, enter page count and inspection hours, see the exact fee. BPL exemption handled.)}}
	+
	+	====== RTI Fee Calculator — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 ======
	+	Free RTI Fee Calculator — select your authority (Central / State / local body), pick the State, enter pages and inspection hours, and see the exact fee payable. Handles BPL full-exemption. Covers all 28 States + 8 Union Territories with current rates. No login, no tracking.
	+
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/rti-fee-calculator-app.html 100%x800px noborder\|RTI Fee Calculator}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Not loading? Open the tool directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/rti-fee-calculator-app.html\|/tools/rti-fee-calculator-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== At-a-glance State fees =====
	+
	+	^ State / UT ^ Application fee ^ Copy (per A4 page) ^ Inspection (per 15 min after first hour) ^
	+	\| Central Government \| Rs 10 \| Rs 2 \| Rs 5 \|
	+	\| Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Goa, Himachal, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, MP, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Telangana, Tripura, UP, Uttarakhand, WB \| Rs 10 \| Rs 2 \| Rs 5 \|
	+	\| Gujarat \| Rs 20 \| Rs 2 \| Rs 5 \|
	+	\| Haryana \| Rs 50 \| Rs 2 \| Rs 5 \|
	+	\| Maharashtra \| Rs 20 \| Rs 2 \| Rs 5 \|
	+	\| Manipur, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu \| Free \| Rs 2 \| Rs 5 \|
	+	\| BPL applicants (any State) \| Free \| Free \| Free \|
	+
	+	===== What this covers =====
	+
	+	* Application fee for a single RTI request
	+	* Copy fees when you request copies of documents
	+	* Inspection fees when you go in person to inspect records under §2(j)
	+	* Full BPL exemption across all three categories
	+
	+	===== What this does NOT cover =====
	+
	+	* Appeal fees — most States have no statutory fee for First Appeal (§19(1)); a few charge Rs 20-50. Check your State Rules.
	+	* Writ / court fees — not RTI-specific; governed by court rules.
	+	* Priced publications — some departments sell priced reports; those fees are outside the RTI Act scheme.
	+
	+	===== Related tools =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:timeline-calculator\|RTI Timeline Calculator]]
	+	* [[:tools:section-8-classifier\|Section 8 Classifier]]
	+	* [[:tools:rti-generator-app\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	* [[:tools:first-appeal-app\|First Appeal Builder]]
	+
	+	===== Related reading =====
	+
	+	* [[:rti-fees-by-state\|RTI fees by State — complete reference]]
	+	* [[:file-rti-online-india\|File RTI online — pan-India guide]]
	+
	+	~~NOCACHE~~
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 22 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool fee-calculator rti-fees state-wise bpl}}

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(section 8 rti classifier,which section 8 1 applies,rti exemption classifier,pio exemption finder,section 8 1 j section 8 1 h personal information tool)&metatag-description=(Free Section 8 classifier — paste your RTI query or PIO reply draft, get a ranked list of which Section 8(1) sub-clauses a PIO is most likely to invoke.)}}
	+
	+	====== Section 8 Classifier — which exemption applies? ======
	+
	+	Paste the information your RTI asks for (or the information a PIO is considering withholding), and this free classifier returns a ranked list of which §8(1) sub-clause is most likely to attach. Covers all ten §8(1) sub-clauses plus §9 (copyright), §11 (third-party procedure), and §24 (exempt organisations). Pure heuristic — no login, no data leaves your browser.
	+
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html 100%x900px noborder\|Section 8 Classifier}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Not loading? Open the tool directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html\|/tools/section-8-classifier-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Who this is for =====
	+
	+	* PIOs drafting a reasoned §7(8)(i) rejection — use as a first-pass check on which sub-clause to cite
	+	* RTI applicants anticipating a rejection and preparing an appeal
	+	* FAAs auditing a PIO's sub-clause citation during First Appeal
	+	* Law students and researchers building intuition for which exemption governs which fact pattern
	+
	+	===== Limitations =====
	+
	+	* Heuristic only — keyword-matching, not legal analysis. A real RTI always turns on specific facts and public-authority records.
	+	* Top result ≠ valid refusal — the classifier indicates the clause a PIO might invoke, not whether it is defensible on appeal.
	+	* Post-DPDP 2025 — §8(1)(j) detection assumes the amended framework effective 14 November 2025.
	+	* Not exhaustive — some niche sub-clauses and procedural provisions (§8(2), §8(3), §10) are context-dependent and not directly classified.
	+
	+	===== How to use the result =====
	+
	+	- Top-ranked clause — treat as the most likely PIO response. Build your case-law citation around this clause before filing or replying.
	+	- Next 1-2 clauses — note these as fallback grounds the PIO may cite. Your appeal should pre-empt these too.
	+	- No hit — strong signal the RTI is routinely disclosable. If the PIO rejects anyway, treat it as a reasoned-order violation under §7(8)(i).
	+
	+	===== Related tools =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:timeline-calculator\|RTI Timeline Calculator]]
	+	* [[:tools:rti-generator-app\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	* [[:tools:first-appeal-app\|First Appeal Builder]]
	+	* [[:tools:pio-reply-checker-app\|PIO Reply Checker]]
	+	* [[:tools:chat\|RTI Wiki AI — free chat]]
	+
	+	===== Related reading =====
	+
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI Rejection — decision tree]]
	+	* [[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework\|§8(1)(j) framework — post-DPDP 2025]]
	+	* [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+	* [[:cases:search\|Case-law search — 210+ rulings]]
	+
	+	~~NOCACHE~~
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 22 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool classifier section-8 exemptions}}

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(first appeal builder,rti first appeal tool,rti section 19 1,first appeal rti 2026,rti appeal drafting tool,free rti appeal generator,rti appeal template,pio reply challenge)&metatag-description=(Free First Appeal Builder. Paste the PIO reply, the tool flags invalid grounds with case law, and drafts your Section 19(1) appeal. Client-side, privacy-safe.)}}
	+
	+	====== First Appeal Builder — Section 19(1) ======
	+
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/first-appeal-app.html 100%x1500px noborder\|First Appeal Builder}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Tool not loading? Open it directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/first-appeal-app.html\|/tools/first-appeal-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== How the builder works =====
	+
	+	- Step 1 — The original RTI. Date, PIO office, reference number, and the questions you asked.
	+	- Step 2 — What the PIO did. Paste the reply text (if any). Or flag a deemed refusal if no reply arrived.
	+	- Step 3 — Grounds of appeal. The builder scans the reply for 13 common invalid-ground patterns — each linked to statute and case law. You can tick, un-tick, and add your own grounds.
	+	- Step 4 — Your details. Name, address, FAA contact (optional). The builder generates a complete Section 19(1) appeal letter with facts, grounds, relief sought, and enclosures list — ready to copy, download, or print.
	+
	+	===== What the builder checks for =====
	+
	+	* Deemed refusal (§7(2)) — when the PIO missed the 30-day window or did not reply at all.
	+	* §7(9) blanket refusal — "voluminous" / "disproportionate" without offering inspection.
	+	* "Confidential" stamp cited under §8(1)(a) without a harm test.
	+	* Sub-judice as a ground under §8(1)(b) without an express court order.
	+	* §8(1)(d) invoked without third-party competitive-harm analysis.
	+	* §8(1)(e) fiduciary applied to non-fiduciary records — //Aditya Bandopadhyay//, //Jayantilal Mistry//.
	+	* §8(1)(h) investigation invoked where the inquiry is closed.
	+	* §8(1)(i) cabinet invoked for a decided matter — //R.K. Jain//.
	+	* §8(1)(j) personal without §8(2) balancing — post-DPDP-2025 framework.
	+	* "Not information" dismissal without §5(3) reasonable assistance.
	+	* Motive / reason asked — bar under §6(2).
	+	* Blanket refusal without §10 severability.
	+	* Third-party grounds without §11 procedure.
	+	* Unreasoned refusal — violation of §7(8)(i).
	+
	+	Each detected ground comes with its specific statutory citation and relevant Supreme Court / High Court authority. You review the list and edit what you want to keep.
	+
	+	===== What the First Appeal gets you =====
	+
	+	* No filing fee. The First Appeal is free.
	+	* Same public authority, senior officer. The FAA is typically one rank above the PIO, within the same office.
	+	* 30 days to decide (extendable by 15 days with reasons) under §19(6).
	+	* Higher remedies. The FAA can direct disclosure (§19(8)(a)), award compensation (§19(8)(b)), impose costs (§19(8)(c)), and recommend penalty on the PIO to the Information Commission.
	+
	+	===== Timing =====
	+
	+	* File within 30 days of receiving the PIO's reply (or of the expiry of the PIO's 30-day window, for deemed refusals).
	+	* Condonation of delay is permitted under §19(1) proviso only where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause — plead this explicitly if you are late.
	+
	+	Full procedural detail: [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]] and [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]].
	+
	+	===== Want to understand the grounds first? =====
	+
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection — all 10 valid refusals]] — what a PIO can and cannot refuse.
	+	* [[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework\|§8(1)(j) after DPDP]] — post-14-November-2025 analysis.
	+	* [[:pio-section-7-9-alternative-form\|§7(9) alternative form — not a ground]] — the PIO cannot refuse on volume alone.
	+	* [[:faa-privacy-public-interest-balancing\|Privacy vs public interest balancing]] — §8(2) override.
	+
	+	===== If the FAA denies too =====
	+
	+	* File a Second Appeal under §19(3) within 90 days, to the State or Central Information Commission. Still free.
	+	* Section 20 penalty — the Commission can impose up to Rs. 25,000 on the PIO personally.
	+
	+	===== Feedback & corrections =====
	+
	+	Found a detection rule that missed your case? Spotted a typo in the generated letter? Please report it at [[:corrections\|our corrections page]] — we fix most feedback within 48 hours.
	+
	+	===== Related reading =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	* [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]]
	+	* [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]]
	+	* [[:faa-section-19-8-powers\|§19(8) FAA powers]]
	+	* [[:faa-privacy-public-interest-balancing\|Privacy vs public interest]]
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]]
	+	* [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+	* [[:guide:applicant:first-appeal\|First Appeal Guide]]
	+	* [[:act:section-19\|Section 19 — Appeals]]
	+	* [[:act:section-20\|Section 20 — Penalties]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	* Right to Information Act, 2005 — §§ 6(2), 7(1), 7(2), 7(8)(i), 7(9), 8(1), 8(2), 10, 11, 19, 20
	+	* Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2012 — Central
	+	* Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — §44(3) amending RTI §8(1)(j)
	+	* //CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay//, (2011) 8 SCC 497
	+	* //RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry//, (2016) 5 SCC 136
	+	* //R.K. Jain v. UoI//, (2013) 14 SCC 794
	+	* //Namit Sharma v. UoI//, (2013) 1 SCC 745
	+	* //Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. UoI//, (2017) 10 SCC 1
	+	* //S. Venkatesan v. CIC// (Madras HC, 2016)
	+	* //C. Muniyappan v. State of TN// (Madras HC, 2013)
	+	* //Treesa Irish v. CPIO// (Kerala HC, 2010)
	+	* //Shailesh Gandhi v. CIC// (Bombay HC, 2013)
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool first-appeal builder tools section-19 drafting}}

2026/05/03 11:56	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(pio reply checker,rti reply analysis,rti appeal grounds finder,rti reply checker tool,pio refusal valid,rti reply scrutiny,rti tool free)&metatag-description=(Paste a PIO reply. The tool flags invalid grounds, deemed refusal, missing §10 severability, §11 procedure skips, fee over-demands — each with case-law authority.)}}
	+
	+	====== PIO Reply Checker — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 ======
	+	{{url>https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/pio-reply-checker-app.html 100%x1500px noborder\|PIO Reply Checker}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round help 95%>
	+	Tool not loading? Open it directly at [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/pio-reply-checker-app.html\|/tools/pio-reply-checker-app.html]].
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+
	+
	+	Paste a PIO reply. The tool flags invalid grounds, deemed refusal, missing §10 severability, §11 procedure skips, fee over-demands — each with case-law authority.
	+
	+	===== What this tool does =====
	+
	+	Paste the PIO's reply into the text box. In seconds the tool returns:
	+
	+	* A verdict — strong grounds for appeal, likely appealable, or legally sound.
	+	* A findings list — each invalid-ground pattern identified, categorised by severity.
	+	* Statutory + case-law authority for every finding.
	+	* A concrete next-step action per finding — what to add to your appeal.
	+	* Timeline block — when your RTI was filed, when the 30-day window expired, when your First Appeal is due.
	+	* Direct CTA to the First Appeal Builder (Tool 2) when appeal is warranted.
	+
	+	All analysis runs in your browser. Nothing is sent to any server.
	+
	+	===== What the tool checks =====
	+
	+	==== Invalid refusals (high severity) ====
	+
	+	* §7(2) deemed refusal — date comparison between your RTI and the reply.
	+	* §7(9) blanket refusal — "voluminous" / "disproportionate" without offering inspection.
	+	* §8(1)(a) "Confidential" stamp cited without a harm-test.
	+	* §8(1)(b) sub-judice cited without an express court order.
	+	* §6(2) motive inquiry — PIO asking why you want the information.
	+	* §7(8)(i) unreasoned refusal — boilerplate or bald order.
	+
	+	==== Questionable grounds (medium severity) ====
	+
	+	* §8(1)(d) commercial without identified third-party and harm.
	+	* §8(1)(e) fiduciary applied to non-fiduciary records.
	+	* §8(1)(h) investigation where the inquiry may be closed.
	+	* §8(1)(i) cabinet for a decided matter.
	+	* §8(1)(j) personal without §8(2) balancing (post-DPDP 2025).
	+	* "Not information" dismissal without §5(3) assistance.
	+	* §11 third-party procedure skipped.
	+	* §10 severability missing (blanket refusal).
	+	* Fee demand beyond statutory rates (Rs. 10 + Rs. 2/page).
	+
	+	==== Positive signals ====
	+
	+	* Inspection offered (correct under §7(9)).
	+	* Specific harm-test cited.
	+	* §10 severability applied.
	+	* First Appellate Authority named.
	+
	+	===== How the verdict is computed =====
	+
	+	* High-severity finding present → "Strong grounds for appeal".
	+	* Two or more medium findings → "Grounds for appeal likely".
	+	* One medium finding → "One questionable refusal".
	+	* Only positive signals → "Reply appears legally sound".
	+	* Nothing matched → "No automatic triggers" — manual review required.
	+
	+	The verdict is a heuristic — a well-reasoned PIO order can pass all 18 checks and still be factually wrong. Conversely, the tool may flag a reply that is actually valid. Always read the findings and use your judgement.
	+
	+	===== Three-tool workflow =====
	+
	+	- [[:tools:question-builder\|RTI Question Builder]] → map your problem to records.
	+	- [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]] → produce the RTI letter.
	+	- PIO reply arrives → paste it into this tool.
	+	- [[:tools:first-appeal\|First Appeal Builder]] → draft the §19(1) appeal.
	+
	+	All four tools are client-side and privacy-safe.
	+
	+	===== Optional deep analysis with open-source AI — free =====
	+
	+	Below the static findings, the tool offers an opt-in AI deep analysis — free to use as of now, no sign-up, no API key. It runs entirely in your browser via [[https://github.com/mlc-ai/web-llm\|WebLLM]] — nothing is sent to any server.
	+
	+	==== Choose a model size ====
	+
	+	The tool now lets you pick one of three open-source Large Language Models:
	+
	+	* Qwen 2.5 0.5B — ~330 MB first-time download. Fastest. Basic quality; good for a quick second opinion.
	+	* Llama 3.2 1B (default) — ~720 MB. Balanced speed and quality. The recommended starting point.
	+	* Llama 3.2 3B — ~1.8 GB. Slower first download but produces the most detailed analysis.
	+
	+	After the one-time download, the browser caches the model. Subsequent runs are instant.
	+
	+	==== What the AI does ====
	+
	+	Reads the PIO reply, identifies §8(1) clauses invoked, assesses validity of each, drafts specific appeal grounds with statutory and case-law authorities, and recommends the next step.
	+
	+	==== Requirements and caveats ====
	+
	+	* WebGPU — Chrome 113+, Edge, or a WebGPU-capable browser. Available on most computers made after 2017. Safari / Firefox support is experimental.
	+	* Not legal advice. A small LLM can miss subtleties or hallucinate. Treat the output as a second opinion and cross-check against [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]] and the static findings above.
	+	* Privacy. The pasted reply stays on your device. The model's weights come from a public CDN; your text never leaves the browser.
	+	* "Free as of now" means exactly that — the model is free open source, the inference is on your GPU so it costs us nothing, and we reserve the right to revisit if this changes.
	+
	+	==== Attribution ====
	+
	+	* Qwen 2.5 — by [[https://qwenlm.github.io/\|Alibaba Qwen]].
	+	* Llama 3.2 — by [[https://www.llama.com/\|Meta]] under the Llama community licence.
	+	* Quantization — by the [[https://mlc.ai\|MLC AI]] team.
	+	* Runtime — [[https://github.com/mlc-ai/web-llm\|WebLLM]] (Apache-2.0).
	+
	+	===== Caveats =====
	+
	+	* The static checks run on pattern matching, not full legal reasoning. A well-drafted PIO order may defeat a weak regex; a sloppy order may contain valid grounds the tool misses.
	+	* The AI deep analysis is a convenience, not a substitute for legal expertise. A small LLM can hallucinate or miss subtle points.
	+	* The tool does not carry over state to the First Appeal Builder — you'll paste the reply again there (a future upgrade will wire them up).
	+	* For sophisticated cases (complex §8(2) balancing, multi-party §11 scenarios, Schedule-II §24 agencies), consult a qualified RTI advocate. See our [[:pio-faa-knowledge-base\|PIO / FAA knowledge base]] for the underlying framework.
	+
	+	===== Related reading =====
	+
	+	* [[:tools:first-appeal\|First Appeal Builder]]
	+	* [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	* [[:tools:question-builder\|RTI Question Builder]]
	+	* [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]]
	+	* [[:pio-section-8-1-j-framework\|PIO Framework — §8(1)(j) after DPDP]]
	+	* [[:pio-section-7-9-alternative-form\|§7(9) alternative form — not a ground]]
	+	* [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]]
	+	* [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]]
	+	* [[:faa-privacy-public-interest-balancing\|Privacy vs public-interest balancing]]
	+	* [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+
	+	===== Sources =====
	+
	+	* Right to Information Act, 2005 — §§ 6(2), 7(1), 7(2), 7(8)(i), 7(9), 8(1), 8(2), 10, 11, 19, 20
	+	* RTI (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2012
	+	* Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — §44(3) amending RTI §8(1)(j)
	+	* Supreme Court: //S.P. Gupta// (1982), //Aditya Bandopadhyay// (2011), //ICAI v. Shaunak Satya// (2011), //R.K. Jain// (2013), //Namit Sharma// (2013), //RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry// (2016), //Puttaswamy// (2017)
	+	* High Courts: //Carbon Resources// (Kerala), //Muniyappan// (Madras), //S. Venkatesan// (Madras), //S. Mukherjee// (Calcutta), //Treesa Irish// (Kerala), //Shailesh Gandhi// (Bombay), //GMC Thiruvananthapuram// (Kerala), //C.V. Srinivasa// (Karnataka)
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>tool pio-reply-checker tools analysis drafting}}