Differences

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

--- guide:guidelines-for-first-appellate-authority [2015/07/16 09:14] – Shrawan
+++ guide:guidelines-for-first-appellate-authority [2016/04/20 14:15] – [Time Limit for Disposal of Appeal] Shrawan
@@ Line 91: / Line 91: @@
 The Central Public Information Officers of the intelligence and security organizations specified in the Second Schedule of the Act may receive applications seeking information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human right violations. Information in respect of allegation of violation of human right, which is provided only after the approval of the Central Information Commission, should be provided within forty-five days from the data of the receipt of request. Time limit prescribed for supplying information in regard to allegation of corruption is the same as in other cases.
-Where the application is asked to pay additional fee, the period intervening between the dispatch of the intimation about payment of fee and the payment of fee by the applicant shall be excluded for the purpose of calculation the period of reply. The [[guide:frequently-asked-questions:time-limit-under-rti|following table]] shows the maximum time which may be taken to dispose off the application in different situation
+Where the application is asked to pay additional fee, the period intervening between the dispatch of the intimation about payment of fee and the payment of fee by the applicant shall be excluded for the purpose of calculation the period of reply. The [[guide:applicant:time-limit-under-rti|following table]] shows the maximum time which may be taken to dispose off the application in different situation
 ===== First Appeal =====
@@ Line 116: / Line 116: @@
-Deciding appeals under the RTI Act is a quasi-judicial function. It is, therefore, necessary that the appellate authority should see to it that the justice is not only done but it should also appear to have been done. In order to do so, the order passed by the appellate authority should be a speaking order giving justification for the decision arrived at.
+Deciding appeals under the RTI Act is a quasi-judicial function. It is, therefore, necessary that the appellate authority should see to it that the justice is not only done but it should also appear to have been done. In order to do so, the order passed by the appellate authority should be a speaking order giving justification for the decision arrived at(({{:guide:disposal-first-appeal.pdf|DoPT OM No 10/23/2007-IR dated 9th July 2007}} : **Disposal of first appeal under RTI Act 2005**)).
 ===== Time Limit for Disposal of Appeal =====
@@ Line 125: / Line 125: @@
 If an appellate authority comes to a conclusion that the appellant should be supplied information in addition to what has been supplied to him by the CPIO, he may either (i) pass an order directing the CPIO to give such information to the appellant; or (ii) he himself may give information to the appellant while disposing off the appeal. In the first case the appellate authority should ensure that the information ordered by him to be supplied is supplied to the appellant immediately. It would, however, be better if the appellant authority chooses the second course of action and he himself furnishes the information along with the order passed by him in the matter.
-If, in any case, the CPIO does not implement the order passed by the appellant authority and the appellate authority feels that intervention of higher authority is required to get his order implemented, he should bring the matter or the notice of the officer in the public authority competent to take action against the CPIO. Such competent officer shall take necessary action so as to ensure implementation of the provisions of the RTI Act. ((© 2009 NIC. All rights reserved.))
+If, in any case, the CPIO does not implement the order passed by the appellant authority and the appellate authority feels that intervention of higher authority is required to get his order implemented, he should bring the matter or the notice of the officer in the public authority competent to take action against the CPIO. Such competent officer shall take necessary action so as to ensure implementation of the provisions of the RTI Act.