How to File a Section 18 RTI Complaint to the Information Commission

A Section 18 complaint is the only RTI weapon that can put Rs 250 a day on a Public Information Officer who ignored you, capped at Rs 25000 under Section 20. But it comes with a sharp catch that costs thousands of applicants their information every year: the Information Commission hearing a Section 18 complaint cannot order the PIO to hand over the records you asked for. That power lives in the second appeal under Section 19. Choose the wrong door and you win a penalty but still go home empty-handed.

A Section 18 complaint is a direct grievance to the Information Commission about how a public authority handled your RTI request. Unlike an appeal, it needs no prior first appeal. Its purpose is supervisory and penal: the Commission inquires into PIO misconduct, can summon witnesses, impose penalty, and recommend disciplinary action against the officer at fault.

The grounds, Section 18(1). The Information Commission has a duty to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person who:

• could not submit a request because no PIO or Assistant PIO was appointed, or the officer refused to accept the application or forward it;
• was refused access to any information requested under the Act;
• received no response within the time limits fixed by the Act;
• was required to pay an amount of fee they consider unreasonable;
• believes they were given incomplete, misleading or false information;
• has any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under the Act.

The penalty, Section 20. Where the Commission finds the PIO refused an application without reasonable cause, did not furnish information within time, malafidely denied a request, knowingly gave incorrect or misleading information, or destroyed records, it imposes a penalty of Rs 250 each day the default continues, subject to a total ceiling of Rs 25000. For persistent default the Commission also recommends disciplinary action under the officer service rules. The PIO gets a reasonable opportunity to be heard, and the burden of justifying the conduct is on the PIO.

Why Section 18 will not get you the file. This is the heart of the matter. In Chief Information Commr. v. State of Manipur (Supreme Court, 12 December 2011, AIR 2012 SC 864), the Court held that a Commission entertaining a complaint under Section 18 has no jurisdiction to pass an order providing access to the information. The power under Section 18 is supervisory in character. A person refused information must seek redress through the appellate procedure under Section 19, which is the route to obtain disclosure. Treat this as settled law.

The contrast with Section 19. A second appeal under Section 19 follows a first appeal: you first appeal to the officer senior in rank to the PIO within 30 days, then appeal to the Commission within 90 days. Under Section 19(8) the Commission can direct the public authority to provide the information in a particular form, appoint PIOs, and even award compensation under Section 19(8)(b) for any loss or detriment suffered. Under Section 19(5) the onus to prove that a denial was justified rests on the PIO. So Section 19 both gets you the record and can compensate you; Section 18 punishes the officer.

Rule of thumb: if your goal is the information, file the Section 19 second appeal. File a Section 18 complaint when the wrong is the officer conduct itself, or use both in parallel: appeal to get the file, complain to penalise. Our second appeal guide covers the appeal route in full.

1. Confirm you have a Section 18 ground. Pin your facts to one of the six grounds above, for example no response within 30 days, refusal to accept the application, or false information. Run the PIO reply through our PIO Reply Checker to identify the exact lapse.
2. Identify the right Commission. Central public authority goes to the Central Information Commission at cic.gov.in. State public authority goes to that State Information Commission.
3. Draft the complaint. State your name and address, the PIO and public authority, the RTI application date and number, what went wrong, the Section 18 ground, and the relief sought, namely inquiry, penalty under Section 20, and disciplinary recommendation. Use the AI RTI Drafter to structure it.
4. Attach proof. Add copies of the RTI application, dispatch or acknowledgement, any PIO reply, and the fee receipt.
5. File it. Submit by the Commission online portal, by email, or by registered post to the Commission registry. Keep the postal receipt or online acknowledgement number.
6. Attend the hearing. The Commission issues notice to you and the PIO. The PIO must show reasonable cause. Appear or send written submissions and press for penalty and any directions the Commission can lawfully give.

• Copy of the original RTI application with date
• Proof of dispatch or acknowledgement, and the fee receipt
• Any reply, refusal or transfer letter from the PIO
• Copy of the first appeal and its order, if you filed one
• A dated, signed complaint citing the Section 18 ground and relief sought
• Your contact details and a short chronology of events

• Using Section 18 to try to GET the information. The single most expensive error. Section 18 is supervisory and cannot order disclosure (State of Manipur, AIR 2012 SC 864). If you want the record, use Section 19.
• Skipping the appeal route entirely. A complaint may fine the PIO but leaves you without the file. Run the appeal under Section 19 in parallel.
• Vague grounds. A complaint that does not tie facts to a specific Section 18(1) ground is easily dismissed. Name the ground.
• No documentary proof. Without the application, dispatch proof and dates, the Commission cannot fix the daily penalty window under Section 20.
• Missing the appeal clock while complaining. A Section 19 second appeal must reach the Commission within 90 days of the first appeal order. Do not let a complaint eat that window. Build the first appeal with our First Appeal Builder.
• Treating delay as automatically penal. The PIO can show reasonable cause. Document the harm and the absence of any justification.

To,
The Registrar
State Information Commission / Central Information Commission
[address]

Subject: Complaint under Section 18 of the Right to Information Act, 2005

Respected Sir or Madam,

1. I, Dr. Shrawan Kumar Pathak, resident of [address], filed an
   application under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 dated
   04.02.2026 (dispatch no. [____]) with the PIO, [public authority],
   along with the prescribed fee of Rs 10.

2. As on the date of this complaint, no response has been received
   within the period fixed under Section 7(1) of the Act, and the
   PIO also declined to accept or forward my application.

3. This complaint is made under Section 18(1) of the RTI Act, 2005
   on the following grounds:
   (a) failure to respond within the time limit specified;
   (b) refusal to accept the application by the PIO;
   (c) the information furnished, if any, was incomplete or misleading.

4. I therefore request the Hon ble Commission to:
   (i)   inquire into this complaint under Section 18;
   (ii)  impose penalty on the PIO under Section 20 at Rs 250 per day
         of default, subject to the ceiling of Rs 25000;
   (iii) recommend disciplinary action against the PIO; and
   (iv)  pass any further order the Commission deems fit.

Enclosures: copy of RTI application, dispatch proof, fee receipt,
PIO correspondence if any.

Place: [____]                              Yours faithfully,
Date:  [____]                              Dr. Shrawan Kumar Pathak
                                           [signature and contact]

No. A Section 18 complaint goes directly to the Information Commission and needs no prior first appeal. Only a Section 19 second appeal requires a first appeal first.

Generally no. In State of Manipur (AIR 2012 SC 864) the Supreme Court held the Commission has no jurisdiction under Section 18 to order access. To obtain the record, file a Section 19 second appeal.

Under Section 20, Rs 250 for each day of default, up to a maximum of Rs 25000, plus a recommendation of disciplinary action where the default is persistent.

The Act fixes no specific limitation period for a Section 18 complaint, but file promptly and keep the daily-penalty window clear with dated proof. The 90-day clock applies to second appeals, not complaints.

The burden is on the PIO. In appeal proceedings Section 19(5) places the onus to justify a denial on the PIO, and in a Section 18 penalty inquiry the PIO must show reasonable cause for the default.

Yes, and often you should. Run the Section 19 appeal to get the information and the compensation under Section 19(8)(b), and the Section 18 complaint to penalise the officer conduct.

To the Central Information Commission at cic.gov.in for central public authorities, or to the relevant State Information Commission for state bodies. Many accept online, email and postal filing.

No. Compensation for loss or detriment is awarded under Section 19(8)(b) in appeal proceedings, not in a Section 18 complaint.

• Right to Information Act 2005, full text, Sections 18, 19 and 20 (rti.gov.in)
• Central Information Commission (cic.gov.in)
• Chief Information Commr. v. State of Manipur, AIR 2012 SC 864

• How to file a second appeal to the CIC or SIC
• AI RTI Drafter
• PIO Reply Checker
• First Appeal Builder
• RTI Act, 2005
• The RTI Playbook