Differences

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

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+====== Power of Review by CIC — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 ======
+{{ :social:auto:important-decisions-cic-case-laws-shri-nihar-ranjan-banerjee-cvo-and-shri-bidya-nand-mishra-dgm-vig-coal-india-ltd-vs-shri-mn-ghosh.png?direct&1200 |important-decisions / cic-case-laws / shri-nihar-ranjan-banerjee-cvo-and-shri-bidya-nand-mishra-dgm-vig-coal-india-ltd-vs-shri-mn-ghosh — RTI Wiki}}
+<WRAP center round info 95%>
+**Quick Reply:** The net upshot of these two decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court is that while in substantive matters there may arguably be no review.
+</WRAP>
+{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(important decisions cic case laws shri nihar ranjan banerjee cvo and shri bidya nand mishra dgm vig coal india ltd vs shri mn ghosh rti right to information india)
+metatag-description=(The net upshot of these two decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court is that while in substantive matters there may arguably be no review.)}}
+<WRAP center round info 95%>
+**In one line.** The Central Information Commission has an inherent power to review its own orders in limited circumstances — where there is a procedural infirmity that may have led to a miscarriage of justice, or an error apparent on the face of the record — notwithstanding the silence of the Right to Information Act, 2005 on review.
+**What that means in practice.**
+  * Review is not a substitute for appeal. It lies only for procedural error or error apparent on the record, not for a fresh hearing on the merits.
+  * A party aggrieved by an order of the Commission may file a review petition before the same Commission. The Commission may, in the alternative, take up the matter suo motu.
+  * The Commission's reasoning follows the Supreme Court in //Patel Narshi Thakershi v. Pradyumanshighji Arjunsinghji// (AIR 1970 SC 1273) and //Rajendra Singh v. Governor, A&N Islands// (AIR 2006 SC 75) on statutory silence and inherent review powers.
+</WRAP>
+**The net upshot of these two decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court is that while in substantive matters there may arguably be no review.**
+//Last reviewed on: 20 April 2026//
+{{tag>review cic power}}
+{{ :important-decisions:cic-case-laws:commission-review.jpg?600x262 |Power of Review by CIC — RTI Wiki Citizen Guide 2026 — RTI Wiki}}
+The net upshot of these two decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court is that while in substantive matters there may arguably be no review.  In cases of procedural infirmities which may have led to or may be believed to have led to miscarriage of justice or where there is an error apparent on the face of it, the absence of a provision for review shall not be a bar on a given statutory authority assuming that power.  In other words, silence of law in regard to review does not prohibit a statutory authority from undertaking review in specific given circumstances.
+  - Rajnish Singh Chaudhary Vs. Union Public Service Commission((Appeal No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00622 Rajnish Singh Chaudhary Vs. Union Public Service Commission))
+  - Apex Court in Patel Narshi Thakershi & Ors. Vs. Pradyumanshighji Arjunsinghji((Apex Court in Patel Narshi Thakershi & Ors. Vs. Pradyumanshighji Arjunsinghji ⎯ (AIR 1970 SC 1273)))and
+  - Rajendra Singh Vs. Governor, Andaman & Nicobar Islands & Ors.((Rajendra Singh Vs. Governor, Andaman & Nicobar Islands & Ors. AIR 2006 SC 75 AIR 2006 SC 75))
+As has been observed in the above case, the Central Information Commission has been assigned somewhat a unique role under the Right to Information Act, 2005.  The Commission is the last court of appeal, has the exclusive power to impose penalties on defaulting Public Information Officers, and also has a role of superintendence and direction of the information regime.  It can direct public authorities to take specific actions to promote the Right to Information.  Given these facts, to argue that the power of review does not inhere in the nature of the CIC, itself would give scope to recurring miscarriage of justice wherever the CIC may be in error.  The power to correct through review, therefore, **is germane to promoting justice and to preventing its miscarriage**.
+===== Decision =====
+Nihar Ranjan Banerjee, CVO and Shri Bidya Nand Mishra, DGM(Vig), Coal India Ltd Vs Shri MN Ghosh
+{{:important-decisions:cic-case-laws:at-16092009-06.pdf|Shri Nihar Ranjan Banerjee, CVO and Shri Bidya Nand Mishra, DGM(Vig), Coal India Ltd Vs Shri MN Ghosh}}
+===== See Also =====
+  * [[/cancel-power-of-attorney-undo-sales-limitation-2026|I Cancelled My Power of Attorney. Can I Undo the Sales?]]
+  * [[important-decisions/icai-vs-shaunak-h-satya|Supreme Court- ICAI Vs Shaunak H.Satya]]
+  * [[blog/supreme-court-rti-rulings-last-12-months|Supreme Court RTI rulings — the last 12 months that matter]]