rti-first-appeal-second-appeal-guide
no way to compare when less than two revisions
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| — | rti-first-appeal-second-appeal-guide [2026/04/22 19:30] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{htmlmetatags> | ||
| + | metatag-description=(Complete 2026 guide to RTI First Appeal under §19(1) and Second Appeal under §19(3) — deadlines, grounds, sample letters, case law, CIC procedure. Beat any PIO denial.) | ||
| + | metatag-title=(RTI First Appeal & Second Appeal — Complete 2026 Guide with Templates)}} | ||
| + | ====== RTI First Appeal & Second Appeal — Complete 2026 Guide ====== | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{ : | ||
| + | |||
| + | **If your RTI to a Public Information Officer was ignored, refused, or partially answered, the Right to Information Act, 2005 gives you two layers of statutory remedy: First Appeal under Section 19(1) within 30 days of the PIO order (or 30-day reply window expiry), and Second Appeal under Section 19(3) within 90 days of the FAA decision.** Burden of proof falls on the PIO under §19(5). Penalty up to ₹25,000 (₹250/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center round info 95%> | ||
| + | **TL;DR — three timelines you must remember:** | ||
| + | * **First Appeal:** within **30 days** of PIO order OR expiry of 30-day reply window (deemed refusal under §7(2)) → §19(1). | ||
| + | * **FAA disposal:** **30 days** (extendable to 45 with reasons) → §19(6). | ||
| + | * **Second Appeal to CIC/SIC:** within **90 days** of FAA order or date order was due → §19(3). Condonation possible on " | ||
| + | * **Burden of proof on PIO:** §19(5). Applicant only has to show the application + denial. | ||
| + | * **No fee** for either appeal under Central Rules. Some state rules charge ₹10-50. | ||
| + | \\ \\ **[[: | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center round tip 95%> | ||
| + | **Jump to:** | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[# | ||
| + | * [[#fees|9. Fees by state]] | ||
| + | * [[#faq|10. FAQ]] | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Reviewed on:** 23 April 2026. Maintained by RTI Wiki editorial team — advocates, retired Information Commissioners, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== First Appeal — when, where, how ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== When to file ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The First Appeal under **Section 19(1)** can be filed in **any** of the following situations: | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **No reply received within 30 days** of filing the RTI (deemed refusal under §7(2)). | ||
| + | - **No reply within 48 hours** for life-or-liberty matters under §7(1) proviso. | ||
| + | - **PIO has denied** the information, | ||
| + | - **PIO has given an evasive or incomplete reply** — point-wise responses missing. | ||
| + | - **PIO has demanded an excessive or illegal fee** under §7(3). | ||
| + | - **PIO has not transferred** the application to the correct authority under §6(3). | ||
| + | - **PIO has not given reasons** for any rejection under §7(8). | ||
| + | - **Third-party consultation under §11** was procedurally mishandled. | ||
| + | - **Section 8(2) public-interest override** was not considered when applicable. | ||
| + | - **Severability under §10** was ignored — denied as a whole when only part is exempt. | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Time limit:** **30 days** from the date of receipt of PIO order, or from the date the 30-day statutory window expired (whichever is later). Use our [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Where to file ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The First Appellate Authority (FAA) is **the officer senior in rank to the PIO** within the same public authority. They are usually the **Joint Secretary, Director, or Head of Department**. The PIO's reply (or the public authority' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== How to file ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **Online (for Central RTIs):** Login at [[https:// | ||
| + | - **By post:** Address your appeal to the FAA at the public authority' | ||
| + | - **In person:** Hand-deliver and obtain a dated receipt with inward number. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What to enclose ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | - Copy of the original RTI application (with proof of filing — IPO receipt or online ARN). | ||
| + | - Copy of the PIO's reply (or proof of non-receipt — your tracking screenshot or postman remark). | ||
| + | - Your appeal letter (template below). | ||
| + | - **Affidavit of condonation** if you are filing beyond the 30-day window (template at §6). | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Ten grounds of appeal ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Pick the ones that apply. The more specific the ground, the more likely the FAA grants it. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ^ # ^ Ground ^ Statutory basis ^ Strongest case-law support ^ | ||
| + | | 1 | **Deemed refusal** — no reply in 30 days | §7(2) | Bhagat Singh v. CIC (Delhi HC 2007) | | ||
| + | | 2 | **No reasons given** for refusal | §7(8)(i) | CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (SC 2011) | | ||
| + | | 3 | **Wrong exemption** under §8 | §8 + §19(5) | RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry (SC 2016) — narrowed §8(1)(e) | | ||
| + | | 4 | **Severability ignored** | §10 | Bhagat Singh v. CIC (Delhi HC 2007) | | ||
| + | | 5 | **Public interest override** not considered | §8(2) | Aditya Bandopadhyay | | ||
| + | | 6 | **Application not transferred** to correct authority | §6(3) | Subhash Chandra Agarwal v. SC of India (CIC 2009) | | ||
| + | | 7 | **Excessive/ | ||
| + | | 8 | **Third-party process skipped** under §11 | §11 | Arvind Kejriwal v. CPIO (CIC 2008) | | ||
| + | | 9 | **Information sought is life/ | ||
| + | | 10 | **§8(1)(j) over-claim** post-DPDP | §8(1)(j) (DPDP-amended) | Girish Ramchandra Deshpande (SC 2013) — three-part test still applies | | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Sample First Appeal letter ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | < | ||
| + | To: | ||
| + | The First Appellate Authority, | ||
| + | [Designation, | ||
| + | [Public authority name and address] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Subject: First Appeal under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 — against | ||
| + | [deemed refusal / order dated DD/MM/YYYY] of the PIO on RTI ARN [NUMBER] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Respected Sir/Madam, | ||
| + | |||
| + | This first appeal is filed against the [reply / non-reply] of the PIO, | ||
| + | [NAME], in respect of my RTI application dated [DD/ | ||
| + | addressed to [public authority name]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | GROUND(S) OF APPEAL | ||
| + | [Pick from the 10 grounds above. Cite each with statutory provision + | ||
| + | case law reference. Example:] | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1. The PIO has not replied within the 30-day statutory window prescribed | ||
| + | by Section 7(1). Under Section 7(2), this is deemed refusal of the | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | 2. [Add second / third ground if applicable.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | PRAYER | ||
| + | In view of the above, I respectfully pray that this Hon' | ||
| + | pleased to: | ||
| + | |||
| + | a) Direct the PIO to furnish the complete information sought in my | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | b) Initiate proceedings against the PIO under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act | ||
| + | for failure to comply within the statutory window — penalty of | ||
| + | Rs. 250 per day (maximum Rs. 25,000) being personally payable. | ||
| + | |||
| + | c) Award compensation under Section 19(8)(b) for loss / detriment | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | d) Pass any further orders as may be just and necessary in the | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | ENCLOSURES | ||
| + | 1. Copy of RTI application dated [DD/ | ||
| + | IPO receipt). | ||
| + | 2. Copy of PIO's reply / proof of non-receipt. | ||
| + | 3. [Any other documents.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yours faithfully, | ||
| + | [Name] | ||
| + | [Address] | ||
| + | [Mobile, email] | ||
| + | Date: [Today' | ||
| + | Place: [City] | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | **[[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Second Appeal to CIC ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | If the FAA does not decide your First Appeal within 30 days (extendable to 45 with reasons under §19(6)), or decides against you, you have **90 days** to file a Second Appeal under **Section 19(3)** to the **Central Information Commission** (for Central public authorities) or the **State Information Commission** (for state public authorities). | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Where to file ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * **Central Information Commission** — Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110067. Online portal: [[https:// | ||
| + | * **State Information Commissions** — addresses on each SIC's website. Most states accept online filing now. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Time limit ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | **90 days from the date of FAA order, or from the date the FAA was due to decide (45 days from First Appeal filing) — whichever is later.** Condonation of delay possible on " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What CIC can order ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Under §19(8), CIC has wide powers: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Order disclosure of the information. | ||
| + | * Direct the public authority to make systemic improvements (training, RTI manual update, website upload of records under §4). | ||
| + | * Award compensation under §19(8)(b). | ||
| + | * Initiate penalty proceedings against the PIO under §20(1) — ₹250/day, maximum ₹25,000. | ||
| + | * Recommend disciplinary action under §20(2) — service-rule consequences for the officer. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Sample Second Appeal letter ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | < | ||
| + | To: | ||
| + | The Registrar, | ||
| + | Central Information Commission, | ||
| + | August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, | ||
| + | New Delhi 110066. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Subject: Second Appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 | ||
| + | |||
| + | DETAILS OF THE APPELLANT | ||
| + | Name: [Full name] | ||
| + | Address: | ||
| + | Mobile: | ||
| + | Email: | ||
| + | |||
| + | DETAILS OF THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY | ||
| + | Name: [E.g., Ministry of External Affairs] | ||
| + | Address: | ||
| + | PIO: [Name + designation, | ||
| + | FAA: [Name + designation] | ||
| + | |||
| + | DETAILS OF THE RTI APPLICATION | ||
| + | Date filed: | ||
| + | ARN / Reference No: | ||
| + | Date of PIO reply: | ||
| + | Date of First Appeal: [DD/ | ||
| + | FAA order: | ||
| + | |||
| + | GROUNDS OF APPEAL | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1. [Primary ground — typically deemed-refusal at FAA stage, | ||
| + | or FAA upheld PIO's wrongful denial.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | 2. [Statutory provision violated — §8/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | 3. [Public interest in disclosure — §8(2) override applies.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | 4. [Case law support — list 2-3 CIC orders / SC rulings.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | PRAYER | ||
| + | |||
| + | a) Quash and set aside the order of the PIO dated [DD/ | ||
| + | the order of the FAA dated [DD/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | b) Direct the public authority to furnish the information sought in | ||
| + | my RTI application dated [DD/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | c) Initiate penalty proceedings against the PIO under §20(1) — penalty | ||
| + | of Rs. 250 per day up to Rs. 25,000 from PIO's salary. | ||
| + | |||
| + | d) Recommend disciplinary action against the PIO under §20(2). | ||
| + | |||
| + | e) Award compensation of Rs. [AMOUNT] under §19(8)(b) for loss and | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | f) Pass any further orders just and necessary. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ENCLOSURES | ||
| + | 1. Copy of original RTI application. | ||
| + | 2. Copy of PIO reply / proof of non-receipt. | ||
| + | 3. Copy of First Appeal. | ||
| + | 4. Copy of FAA order (or proof of non-decision). | ||
| + | 5. Affidavit of condonation (if filing beyond 90 days). | ||
| + | 6. List of dates and events. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yours faithfully, | ||
| + | [Name] | ||
| + | [Address] | ||
| + | [Mobile, email] | ||
| + | Date: [Today' | ||
| + | Place: [City] | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Condonation of delay ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Filing your Second Appeal beyond the 90-day window? You may still be heard if you file an **affidavit of condonation** under the proviso to §19(3) showing " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Sample affidavit ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | < | ||
| + | AFFIDAVIT OF CONDONATION OF DELAY | ||
| + | (Under proviso to Section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I, [Name], son/ | ||
| + | [address], do solemnly affirm and state as follows: | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1. I am the appellant in the above-mentioned Second Appeal. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 2. The order of the FAA was passed on [date] / was due on [date]. | ||
| + | The 90-day window for filing this Second Appeal therefore expired on | ||
| + | | ||
| + | delay of [N] days. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 3. The said delay was caused by the following bona fide reasons, | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | delay in receiving FAA order by post, etc. Attach proof: medical | ||
| + | certificate, | ||
| + | |||
| + | 4. I have not been negligent or wilful in causing this delay. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 5. The questions raised in the appeal are of significant public | ||
| + | | ||
| + | | ||
| + | |||
| + | I therefore pray that this Hon' | ||
| + | delay of [N] days and admit the present appeal for hearing on merits. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Verified at [city] on this [date]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Deponent | ||
| + | [Name] | ||
| + | |||
| + | [Notarial endorsement on Rs. 100 stamp paper, signed by Notary Public.] | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== CIC backlog & realistic expectations ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Be candid with yourself — the CIC has a serious backlog problem: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * **CIC pending second appeals (Q4 FY 2024-25):** 26,000+ cases nationally. | ||
| + | * **Across all SICs:** ~1 lakh pending second appeals. | ||
| + | * **Hearing wait:** **12-18 months** typically; longer for sensitive ministries. | ||
| + | * **Commissioner strength:** through most of 2025 only 2 of 11 sanctioned posts were filled. Full strength was restored in **December 2025**, but backlog will take 24+ months to clear at current disposal rates. | ||
| + | * **Anjali Bharadwaj v. UoI** — pending Supreme Court monitoring orders on commissioner appointments and disposal targets. | ||
| + | |||
| + | **What this means for you:** If your information has time-sensitivity (medical, court deadline, election), do **not** rely solely on the Second Appeal. Use parallel routes: | ||
| + | |||
| + | - **Writ petition under Article 226** to the High Court — bypasses CIC entirely; faster for urgent matters. | ||
| + | - **CPGRAMS grievance** at [[https:// | ||
| + | - **MP/MLA reference letter** — under-rated; | ||
| + | - **Journalistic exposure** — for matters of public interest where evidence already exists. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Case law ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Supreme Court:** | ||
| + | * **CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011) 8 SCC 497** — every refusal must identify the specific exemption clause + reasons. Generic invocation rejected. | ||
| + | * **RBI v. Jayantilal Mistry (2016) 5 SCC 136** — narrowed §8(1)(e) " | ||
| + | * **Namit Sharma v. UoI (2013) 1 SCC 745** — IC adjudicatory standards; appeals must be heard on merits with reasons. | ||
| + | * **Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC (2013) 1 SCC 212** — three-part test for §8(1)(j); test survives DPDP Act 2023 amendment per pending Supreme Court reference. | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Delhi High Court:** | ||
| + | * **Bhagat Singh v. CIC (Delhi HC 2007)** — deemed refusal under §7(2) triggers full appellate jurisdiction. | ||
| + | * **Subhash Chandra Agarwal v. SC of India (CIC 2009)** — §6(3) transfer obligation is mandatory; failure is appealable. | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Recent CIC orders (2024-25): | ||
| + | * **CIC order dated 14.11.2024** — show-cause to PIOs for non-appearance; | ||
| + | * **CIC order dated 17.01.2025** — initiated §20(1) and §20(2) action against multiple central PIOs for repeated default. | ||
| + | * **Anjali Bharadwaj v. UoI** — Supreme Court continuing to monitor IC vacancies. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Fees by state ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Under the **Central RTI Rules 2012** (and identical rules of most states), **First Appeal and Second Appeal are free**. A few states still demand a fee: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ^ State ^ First Appeal fee ^ Second Appeal fee ^ | ||
| + | | Central | ₹0 | ₹0 | | ||
| + | | Delhi | ₹0 | ₹0 | | ||
| + | | Maharashtra | ₹20 | ₹0 | | ||
| + | | Tamil Nadu | ₹50 | ₹50 | | ||
| + | | Karnataka | ₹0 | ₹0 | | ||
| + | | Kerala | ₹0 | ₹0 | | ||
| + | | Gujarat | ₹50 | ₹50 | | ||
| + | | Rajasthan | ₹0 | ₹0 | | ||
| + | | Uttar Pradesh | ₹50 | ₹50 | | ||
| + | | Madhya Pradesh | ₹50 | ₹50 | | ||
| + | | Punjab | ₹50 | ₹50 | | ||
| + | | Haryana | ₹50 | ₹50 | | ||
| + | | West Bengal | ₹0 | ₹0 | | ||
| + | |||
| + | **BPL applicants pay no fee** in any state under §7(5). Use our [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== FAQ ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What is the time limit for First Appeal? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | **30 days** from date of PIO order, OR from expiry of 30-day reply window (deemed refusal). For life-or-liberty matters where 48-hour rule applied, 30 days run from 48-hour expiry. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== How long does the FAA take? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | **30 days** from date of First Appeal receipt, extendable to **45 days** with recorded reasons under §19(6). If FAA does not decide in 45 days, the Second Appeal window opens automatically. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What is the deadline for Second Appeal? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | **90 days** from date of FAA order, OR from date FAA was due to decide (45 days from First Appeal filing) — whichever is later. Condonation of delay possible under §19(3) proviso. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Is there a fee for First Appeal? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Free for Central RTIs and most states. Some states (UP, MP, Punjab, Haryana, TN, Gujarat) charge ₹50. **BPL applicants pay nothing** anywhere under §7(5). | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Can I file appeals online? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Yes — for Central RTIs** at [[https:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What if the PIO's denial cited §8(1)(j) " | ||
| + | |||
| + | Cite the **Girish Ramchandra Deshpande three-part test** (SC 2013): (a) is the information personal in nature; (b) does it have nexus to public activity; (c) does the larger public interest warrant disclosure. Most §8(1)(j) refusals fail one or more of these prongs. Use our [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Can I get the PIO penalised? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yes. Under **§20(1)**, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Can I get compensation? | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yes, under **§19(8)(b)**. Quantify the loss — lost wages from missed travel, fees paid for parallel litigation, medical costs from delayed access to records, etc. CIC commonly awards ₹500-5, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Does DPDP Act 2023 affect my RTI appeal? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yes — the DPDP Act effective 14 Nov 2025 amended **§8(1)(j)** of the RTI Act. The " | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== What if the FAA is the same officer as the PIO? ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | This is a §19 violation. The FAA must be **senior in rank** to the PIO. If there is no such senior officer in the same authority, the appeal lies to the **Head of Department**. Note this objection in writing and proceed. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Related reading ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | * [[: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Sources ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Right to Information Act, 2005 (full text) — [[https:// | ||
| + | * Central RTI Rules, 2012 — [[https:// | ||
| + | * Central Information Commission — [[https:// | ||
| + | * DoPT RTI Annual Report 2022-23 — [[https:// | ||
| + | * Anjali Bhardwaj v. UoI (SC monitoring orders 2024-25) | ||
| + | |||
| + | //Last reviewed: 23 April 2026 by the RTI Wiki editorial team.// \\ //FAQ + HowTo structured data injected via page-jsonld/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{tag> | ||
Was this helpful?
— views
Thanks for the signal.
rti-first-appeal-second-appeal-guide.txt · Last modified: by 127.0.0.1
