Public Information Officer Must Get Reasonable Opportunity to Explain Delay Before RTI Penalty Is Imposed: Allahabad High Court

Court Book: Lucknow: Tuesday, 14 July 2026.
The Allahabad High Court quashed a ₹25,000 RTI penalty against a Public Information Officer, holding that the State Information Commission violated Section 20(1) by imposing the fine without notice or hearing. - Amarnath v. State Information Commission U.P. Lucknow Through Chief Information Commissioner and Another

The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has quashed a ₹25,000 penalty imposed by the Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission on a Block Education Officer serving as a Public Information Officer (PIO), holding that the Commission failed to follow the mandatory procedure under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. The Court held that before imposing a penalty, the PIO must be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing and allowed to explain the circumstances leading to the alleged delay.
Background of the Case
Amarnath, a Block Education Officer and Public Information Officer, approached the High Court challenging the State Information Commission's order dated September 6, 2023, imposing the maximum penalty of ₹25,000 under Section 20 of the RTI Act. He also challenged the order dated February 22, 2024, by which the Commission dismissed his review application.
The petitioner contended that the delay in furnishing information occurred due to lapses by subordinate staff and other administrative reasons. He further stated that the requested information had ultimately been supplied to the RTI applicant on January 12, 2024. Most importantly, he argued that the penalty was imposed without any notice, show-cause proceedings, or opportunity to explain his position.
Court's Observations
After examining Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, the Division Bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary observed that the Information Commission can impose a penalty only after forming an opinion, based on material available on record, that the Public Information Officer acted without reasonable cause.
The Court explained that the second proviso to Section 20(1) places the burden on the PIO to prove that he acted reasonably and diligently. However, this statutory burden can arise only when the officer is first given an opportunity to submit documents, explanations and other material in his defence. The first proviso further requires the Commission to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing before imposing any penalty.
Referring to the facts of the case,
the Bench observed, "The whole mechanism for imposition of penalty to the petitioner has been given a complete go by in the present case."
It noted that neither a show-cause notice nor an opportunity to file a reply or participate in a hearing had been provided before the penalty was imposed. The Court also relied on Supreme Court decisions, including State of Orissa v. Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei and Manohar v. State of Maharashtra, reiterating that administrative decisions resulting in civil consequences must comply with the principles of natural justice.
Decision
Holding that the mandatory safeguards under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act had not been followed, the High Court declared the penalty order dated September 6, 2023, legally unsustainable and quashed it for violating the principles of natural justice.
The Court further observed that once the original penalty order was set aside, the order rejecting the review application lost its significance. For the sake of clarity, it also quashed the review order dated February 22, 2024. The writ petition was accordingly allowed, with no order as to costs.
Case Details:
Case Title: Amarnath v. State Information Commission U.P. Lucknow Through Chief Information Commissioner and Another
Case Number: Writ – C No. 4718 of 2026
Judge: Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary
Decision Date: 6 July 2026
(Download Order)

KUWJ urges DGP to crack down on fake journalists,RTI blackmailers : Pramesh S Jain

Country and Politics: Karnataka: Tuesday, 14 July 2026.

A delegation of the Karnataka Union of Working Journalists (KUWJ) met Karnataka Director General and Inspector General of Police,Dr.M.A.Saleem and urged the police department to initiate stringent legal action against fake journalists and individuals allegedly misusing the Right to Information (RTI) Act for blackmail and extortion.
Delegation Led by KUWJ State President,Shivananda Tagadur,expressed concern over the increasing number of people with no connection to the journalism profession allegedly posing as journalists by using visiting cards and the names of media organisations to threaten and extort money from the public and government officials.
The union said such individuals,who neither have the credentials to report news nor any affiliation with recognised media organisations,are tarnishing the reputation of genuine journalists and undermining the credibility of the profession.
The delegation also urged the police to closely monitor those who frequently lodge complaints at police stations in the name of press organisations and allegedly misuse RTI applications for blackmail and harassment.
Responding to the memorandum, DGP,M.A.Saleem assured the delegation that the matter would be examined and appropriate action would be taken.

Repeated RTIs on Same Issues to Be Disallowed

Deccan Chronicle: Andhra Pradesh: Tuesday, 14 July 2026.
The commissioner reviewed the RTI implementations at Kakinada municipal corporation here on Monday.

The Right to Information (RTI) Commissioner VSK Chakravarthi has said that "prohibitory orders are being issued" against individuals repeatedly filing petitions on the same issue.
He said the commission has taken note of instances where petitions regarding the same issues were filed repeatedly, inquiries into such matters have been conducted and prohibitory orders issued against certain individuals where necessary.
The commissioner reviewed the RTI implementations at Kakinada municipal corporation here on Monday. The panel is currently considering some RTI applications. These would be examined in a lawful and fair manner and appropriate action taken.
He said that the public information officers (PIO) and appellate authorities should act responsibly so as to effectively implement the RTI Act at the grassroots levels. He observed the maintenance of records related to the RTI Act and the information maintained under Section 4 (1)(b), managed by the PIOs and AAs of various departments in the KMC and observed that many of the petitioners are seeking information regarding Town Planning and Engineering wings.
The commissioner exhorted the KMC officials to provide complete and comprehensive information within the statutory timeframe. If an applicant seeks information in Telugu, it should be provided in the same language. “Rejecting a request solely because the information is available only in English is not justifiable.”
He said that if the information requested in an application appears unclear, officials should not wait until the deadline expires. Instead, they should immediately contact the applicant to obtain the necessary details and provide assistance.
Rejecting an application on the final day citing ambiguity runs counter to the spirit of the law and could lead to an increase in first and second appeals, he said.
KMC commissioner NVV Satyanarayana, additional commissioner KT Sudhakar, deputy commissioner K Srinivas, SE P Venkatrao, health officer Pridhwi Charan and others were present.

Central Information Commission directs IIT-M to disclose utilisation of grant-in-aid funds

The Hindu: Dehradun: Monday, 13 July 2026.
It gave the direction on a petition filed by Ananya Dubey, who sought details of the grant-in-aid received by the institute in the previous three financial years, along with project-wise utilisation of the funds, copies of utilisation certificates, and the names of collaborations 

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the Indian Institute of Technology-Madras (IIT-M) to provide a detailed, project-wise breakdown of the utilisation of grant-in-aid funds for the financial year 2023-24 sought under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
The direction came on a petition filed by Ananya Dubey, who sought details of the grant-in-aid received by the institute over the previous three financial years, along with project-wise utilisation of the funds, copies of utilisation certificates, and the names of collaborations that IIT-M entered into.
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) initially declined the request, arguing that the information sought for three years was voluminous and retrieving and compiling it would disproportionately divert the institute’s resources. The applicant was asked to narrow the scope of her request by specifying the period and information required. Following this, Ms. Dubey restricted her request to the fiscal 2023-24.
The CPIO informed her that IIT-M had received ₹537 crore towards sponsored research projects and ₹241 crore for industry research projects during the period. The reply stated that the funds had been utilised in accordance with the sanction orders or agreements of the sponsoring agencies. However, the CPIO said copies of utilisation certificates could not be disclosed without the concurrence of the respective sponsoring agencies, while information relating to collaborations was not readily available.
Contending that the institute had failed to furnish the project-wise utilisation details of the grant-in-aid, Ms. Dubey approached the CIC. During the hearing, the CPIO submitted that IIT-M had handled more than 1,000 projects during the relevant period, some of which were yet to attain finality, and any unutilised funds, wherever applicable, would have to be returned to the government. He also argued that project-wise fund utilisation details and related agreements contained third-party personal information which was exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act.
Information Commissioner Sudha Rani Relangi noted that the request for information on the utilisation of grant-in-aid funds had not been addressed adequately. Recording the CPIO’s willingness to revisit the matter, she directed the officer to issue a revised, categorical reply to the petitioner, addressing in particular her request for the utilisation details of the grant-in-aid funds for 2023-24.

CIC grants ex-Rohini jail superintendent partial relief in Sukesh Chandrasekhar case

The Print: Dehradun: Monday, 13 July 2026.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) has granted partial relief to former Rohini jail superintendent Sunil Kumar, who claimed he was implicated in a criminal case linked to alleged conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar.

The CIC directed Delhi Prisons to disclose select records he sought under the RTI Act to defend himself.
The case pertains to alleged irregularities during the incarceration of Chandrasekhar.
Kumar, who is among the prison officials charged by Delhi Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in the alleged Rs 200-crore extortion case involving Chandrasekhar, had filed 10 RTI applications seeking prison records related to the latter’s stay in Rohini Jail between 2020 and 2021.
The information sought included jail entry and exit registers, inspection reports of visiting judges, lodging records, CCTV installation and surveillance records, details of vacant barracks, search reports and records relating to Chandrasekhar’s transfer and stay in the prison.
In one of the RTI applications, Kumar said the documents were required “to defend the case properly”.
The records sought by Kumar are closely related to the allegations levelled against him by the EOW.
The agency alleged that Chandrasekhar was provided an exclusive barrack in Rohini jail in violation of prison rules, enjoyed unrestricted access to mobile phones and other prohibited items, and was able to operate an extortion racket from inside the prison with the connivance of jail officials who allegedly accepted bribes.
It also alleged that opaque curtains were installed in the superintendent’s chamber to shield Chandrasekhar’s activities from CCTV cameras and prison staff were strategically deployed around his barrack to facilitate his activities.
During the hearing before the commission, Kumar submitted that he had been implicated in the criminal proceedings alleging violations of prison rules while serving as superintendent of the jail and the requested records were necessary for his defence.
The CIC observed that the RTI applications were “largely raised based on his impleadment in criminal proceedings arising from allegations that he violated prison rules and committed irregularities while handling/seizing a particular article of an inmate.” Information Commissioner Anandi Ramalingam directed prison authorities to provide Kumar with his own entry and exit records from the jail after redacting third-party personal information and security-sensitive details.
The CIC also ordered disclosure of the date on which prison authorities took possession of newly installed CCTV cameras in 2020, holding that the respondents had failed to satisfactorily justify withholding that information.
It further directed the authorities to issue a revised reply on Kumar’s request for the total number of vacant barracks during the relevant period, observing that the CPIO had not cited any specific exemption under Section 8 of the RTI Act while denying the information. If no exemption applied, the information should be disclosed, the commission said.
In another appeal concerning CCTV surveillance records, the CIC directed the respondent to issue a revised reply in line with the First Appellate Authority’s earlier directions and explain why those directions had not been complied with despite nearly a year having elapsed.
The commission, however, rejected Kumar’s remaining appeals, holding that prison authorities had rightly invoked exemptions under Sections 8(1)(g) and 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act in matters involving prison security and third-party information.
“It may not be out of place to mention that law legitimately protects personal information or identities under Section 8, therefore, in case the information sought involves names of individuals, or personal details of individuals disclosure of which may affect their physical safety, the exemption clauses under Section 8(1)(g) and (j) of the RTI Act may be rightly invoked,” the Commission said.
Kumar also sought register entries relating to a wristwatch worn by Sukesh Chandrasekhar when he was shifted to Rohini Jail in 2020. The CIC declined his request for the watch’s entry date, saying it was not part of the original RTI application. The wristwatch has separately figured in a prison inquiry. PTI
(This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.)

VIP hospitality at Kedarnath under scanner as probe confirms financial irregularities : RTI

New Indian Express: Dehradun: Monday, 13 July 2026.
According to the RTI documents, around Rs 60,000 was shown as expenditure in the name of BJP state secretary Neha Joshi, while more than Rs 37,000 was linked to Kedarnath MLA Asha Nautiyal.

A view of the Kedarnath Jyotirlinga Temple adorned with flowers in Rudraprayag.(Photo | ANI, FILE)

A probe into expenditure on the accommodation and meals of VIP visitors at Kedarnath has confirmed financial irregularities, prompting the Uttarakhand government to order action against the officials and employees found responsible.
The inquiry was instituted by the Shri Badrinath-Kedarnath Temple Committee (BKTC) after documents obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act raised questions over the alleged use of temple funds for VIP hospitality.
Confirming the findings, BKTC Chairman Hemant Dwivedi told TNIE, "The investigation has been completed and its findings have been submitted to the state government. The government has directed action against the officials responsible."
According to the RTI documents, around Rs 60,000 was shown as expenditure in the name of BJP state secretary Neha Joshi, while more than Rs 37,000 was linked to Kedarnath MLA Asha Nautiyal.
The expenses reportedly related to accommodation and meals during visits to the Himalayan shrine. Both leaders denied the allegations and maintained that they had personally paid for their expenses.
Meanwhile, the Opposition has accused the authorities of misusing donations and offerings made by devotees.
As the controversy intensified, Dwivedi constituted a four-member committee to examine bills, records and payment procedures linked to the alleged hospitality expenses.
The inquiry found that, in some cases, bills for the accommodation and meals of VIP guests had been paid by the temple committee. It also found that prescribed financial rules were not fully followed while processing the payments.
In a letter dated June 25, 2026, Deputy Secretary Anil Kumar Pandey directed the BKTC chief executive officer to initiate action in accordance with the rules.
"Prima facie, the release of advance money withdrawn from the temple fund without approval from the competent authority falls within the category of financial irregularity," the government letter said.
The communication also questioned the roles of the then Kedarnath administrator, the then officer in charge at Kedarnath and the then BKTC chief executive officer.
Uttarakhand Congress president Ganesh Godiyal has demanded transparent proceedings and stringent action against those found guilty.
Dwivedi said accountability would be fixed based on the report. He added that measures would be taken to ensure that no irregularities involving temple funds or devotees' faith recur in future.

RTI Commissioner issues show-cause notices to 16 officials

The Hans India: Anantapur: Sunday, 12 July 2026.
State Information Commissioner G Adenna conducted surprise inspections across government offices in Anantapur district on Friday and issued show-cause notices to 16 Public Information Officers (PIOs) and other officials for alleged lapses in implementing Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

The inspections covered Jesus Nagar Secretariat, Anantapur Municipal Corporation, District Court, Two Town Police Station, a government school on Court Road, and government offices in Bukkarayasamudram, Narpala, Atmakur and Kalyandurg. During the visits, the Commissioner reviewed receipt and disposal of RTI applications and examined pending cases.
Addressing officials, Adenna stressed that the effective implementation of RTI Act is essential for ensuring transparency and accountability in public administration. He directed Public Information Officers, First Appellate Authorities and Assistant Public Information Officers to strictly comply with the provisions of the Act and ensure timely disposal of application
The Commissioner said several deficiencies were identified, including the absence of mandatory Citizen Charters and display boards carrying the names and contact details of Public Information Officers and First Appellate Authorities.
Officials found to have failed in fulfilling their statutory responsibilities were issued show-cause notices under Section 19(8)(a) of the Act.
The officials have been directed to submit their explanations within 15 days. Adenna warned that failure to provide satisfactory explanations within the stipulated period could result in further action based on available records, without issuing additional notices.
Surprise inspections were also conducted at Tahsildar and Panchayat offices in Bukkarayasamudram, Tahsildar and Mandal Educational Officer offices in Narpala, Tahsildar and MPDO offices in Atmakur, and Revenue Divisional Officer’s office in Kalyandurg.
During his visit to the government school on Court Road, the Commissioner inspected implementation of mid-day meal scheme and interacted with students. He also reviewed availability of drinking water and directed municipal authorities to complete pending pipeline repair works immediately to ensure uninterrupted water supply to the school.

Search committee formed to select commissioners for info panel

The Times of India: Tamilnadu: Sunday, 12 July 2026.
The vacant state chief information commissioner post and three information commissioner posts of the State Information panel are likely to be filled in two months, as the state govt has formed a search committee to shortlist suitable candidates.

Retired Madras high court judge R S Ramanathan has been appointed as the chairperson of the search committee, while principal secretary C Samayamoorthy and retired IAS official R Sudalaikannan have been appointed as members. The committee will shortlist candidates for chief information commissioner and four information commissioners as one more commissioner M Natesan will retire on August 3.
The number of commissioners disposing of appeals and complaint petitions under the Right to Information Act at the State information commission plunged to five from nine on June 15, as the three-year term of four officials - chief information commissioner MD Shakeel Akhter, information commissioners Thirumalaimuthu, P Thamaraikannan and R Priyakumar came to an end.
Now, V P R Elamparithi, retired IAS official Atulya Misra, retired IPS official Abhay Kumar Singh, and A Vijayaram serve as information commissioners to dispose of appeals and complaint petitions filed under RTI Act.
The search committee will shortlist candidates in compliance with eligibility criteria and recommend them to the selection committee chaired by chief minister C Joseph Vijay, before they are formally appointed.

Karnataka High Court upholds order declaring Century Club a public authority

The Indian Express: Karnataka: Sunday, 12 July 2026.
7.5 acres of land was granted free of cost to the club in 1913 by the then Maharaja of Mysuru.

Century Club moved the High Court against a single judge order passed in 2025 that upheld the order passed by the State Information Commission in 2017.

The Karnataka High Court on Friday dismissed an appeal filed by Century Club in Bengaluru and upheld an order passed by the State Information Commission (SIC) declaring it to be a ‘public authority’, under provisions of the Right to Information Act, as it is built on government land. The land was granted to the club in 1913 by the then Maharaja of Mysuru.
A bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Venkatesh Naik T in its order said, “The land on which the Century Club is situated belongs to the public and therefore, the Century Club cannot enrich itself at the cost of the public money. It is not paying any rent or lease or any royalty to the Government, and the entire land of 7.5 acres is granted free of cost, which would amount to substantial finance by the Government and the property belongs to the State Government.”
The appeal was filed by the Century Club against a single judge order passed in 2025 that upheld the order passed by the State Information Commission in 2017.
The SIC had issued the impugned order while allowing a complaint filed by Advocate S Umpathy after the club rejected his RTI application. The Club had said it was a private authority and not amenable to provisions under the RTI Act.
In an appeal, the club primarily argued that it is not an Authority or body established by or under the Constitution, or any Central/State legislature, as it owes its origin to neither a constitutional text, nor any constitutional scheme. It is a Private Members Club functioning under its own rules and bye-laws without any governmental notification, conferring upon it the character of a public institution.
Outside purview of Section 2(h) of RTI Act
Advocate Prashanth Murthy S G appearing for the club argued that Century Club falls entirely outside the purview of the first part of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, and any attempt to artificially bring it within this framework would be contrary to the plain language of the statute and judicial interpretation thereof. Moreover, the RTI Act aims to ensure openness in public administration, but its objectives do not warrant an overreach into autonomous private institutions. The club also does not perform any public function.
Advocate S Umpathy appearing in person argued that entities receiving substantial benefits from the government, whether directly or indirectly, can be classified as ‘Public Authorities’ under the RTI Act. He pointed out that Century Club was granted 7.5 acres of land by the then Maharaja of Mysuru, and it constitutes substantial support. Since the club has received substantial government support in allotting 7.5 acres of land, that too, in the heart of Bengaluru, i.e. Cubbon Park. Thus, the Century Club comes within the ambit of the RTI Act, making it subject to public scrutiny.
The bench noted that Highness Maharaja of Mysuru Narasimha Raja Wodeyar and Sir M Visveswaraya started the Century Club and it was granted 7.5 acres of land by the then Maharaja of Mysuru in 1913 for its activities free of cost.
Stating that it is therefore a non-government organisation substantially financed by the funds provided by the appropriate Government, the bench said, “Grant made in the name of Maharaja of Mysuru would also indicate that it is not the personal property of the Maharaja of Mysuru. If a King/a Ruler granted land free of cost before independence, the grant is generally recognised as an Act of the State or the sovereign rather than a strictly private transaction. Therefore, providing a major piece of land to Century Club, that too, in the heart of the Metropolitan City for free, or a nominal fee, is classified as substantial indirect financing by the State.”
Members of the Club make payment for its upkeep
The court rejected the contention that the club is run on payments made by its members and there is no dependency on state funds.
“The fact still remains that without the land, the activities of the Club could not be run. If the valuation of the land of 7.5 acres as on today is taken into consideration, the same would run into hundreds of crores or even thousands and the contribution made by the Members of the Club as Membership Fee or any other head of account pales into insignificance,” the court said.
Dismissing the appeal, the court said, “The provisions of the RTI Act apply to the Century Club. Learned Single Judge, by considering all these aspects of the matter, more particularly, the provisions of the RTI Act and the decisions cited supra, has rightly come to the conclusion that the Century Club is considered as ‘Public Authority’ under the RTI Act.

RTI reveals 16-year-old promotion irregularities in differently abled welfare department in Tamil Nadu

Times of India: Chennai: Saturday, 11 July 2026.
An RTI reply has exposed an alleged irregularity in promotions in the department for the welfare of differently abled persons, revealing that 17 employees with only Class X or Class XII were promoted as junior rehabilitation officers (JROs) and later rose to senior positions, including assistant director and deputy director.

The promotions were given based on a 2009 govt order issued by social welfare and nutritious meal programme department, which relaxed the prescribed educational qualification for promotion of orthotic technicians to JROs. Instead of the mandatory postgraduate degree in psychology, social work or sociology, the order allowed orthotic technicians with 10 years of service to become eligible for promotion.
RTI applicant K Parthasarathy, citing official records obtained under the RTI Act, said that based on the govt order, 17 employees possessing only SSLC or higher secondary qualifications were promoted as temporary JROs. Though they later obtained postgraduate degrees in sociology through the open university system, human resource management department’s govt order No. 116 of 2010 states that candidates who obtain a postgraduate degree without first acquiring a basic undergraduate degree are not eligible for appointment or promotion in public service.
The then commissioner for differently abled welfare P R Shampath, in proceedings dated Aug 8, 2010, cited the human resource management department order and directed that such employees be removed from the seniority list and that a fresh promotion panel be prepared.
However, according to the RTI reply, the order was never implemented. Instead, the employees continued in service, received promotions on administrative grounds and their appointments were regularised in 2020.
“Five years later, they were promoted as district differently abled rehabilitation officers. Subsequently, they became assistant directors against vacancies arising due to retirements,” Parthasarathy said. He added that one officer with only SSLC qualification retired as an assistant director, while two others retired as DDROs in the past two years.
Fourteen of the 17 officers continue in service, and two among them have now been promoted as deputy directors. According to the documents availed under RTI Act, the two officers G Jagadeesan and Y D Shrinaath were promoted despite having served for less than two years as assistant directors after department commissioner Laksmi recommended relaxation of another service condition requiring an assistant director to complete at least three years in the post before becoming eligible for promotion.
When contacted, Lakshmi denied any irregularities in the appointment or promotion of staff within the department. “The promotions follow existing procedures and comply with govt orders,” she said.

AIIMS Nagpur sold over 1,000 litres of surplus plasma for Rs 16.44 lakh, RTI reveals : Written By Rumela De Sarkar

Medical Dialogues: Nagpur: Saturday, 11 July 2026.

AIIMS Nagpur Sold 1,000+ Litres of Surplus Plasma, RTI Finds

The All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Nagpur, has sold more than 1,000 litres of surplus Fresh Frozen Plasma (FFP) collected from voluntary blood donors to an external facility for over Rs 16.44 lakh since 2023, according to information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The RTI response, however, does not disclose the identity of the recipient organisation or indicate whether any administrative approvals were obtained before the supplies were made, raising questions over transparency in the transactions.  
According to a news report, the information was provided in response to an RTI application filed by Mumbai-based activist Chetan Kothari on June 7, 2026. In its reply dated July 7, AIIMS Nagpur’s Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) and Administrative Officer Shabbir Sheikh confirmed that the institute’s blood bank, which became operational on June 14, 2022, has been supplying surplus FFP to external facilities. 
According to the documents, AIIMS Nagpur dispatched 10 consignments of surplus plasma between March 2023 and October 2025. Each consignment was supplied at a rate of Rs 1,600 per litre, with the total volume exceeding 1,000 litres and the revenue amounting to Rs 16,44,523.20. 
AIIMS Nagpur further clarified that the plasma was supplied for monetary consideration rather than through an in-kind exchange, with the proceeds credited to the institute's Bank of Baroda account.
However, the RTI response withheld key details sought by the applicant. AIIMS declined to reveal the identity of the recipient organisation or provide copies of the administrative approvals authorising the supplies, citing Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which relates to third-party information.
Responding to the queries, a Maharashtra State Blood Transfusion Council (SBTC) official said the council would examine why the recipient’s identity had not been disclosed. “We will look into the matter and ascertain the reasons for not disclosing the name. We will seek the necessary information from AIIMS Nagpur and examine whether the reply is in accordance with the applicable provisions,” the official said. The RTI records also raise questions about the selection process. Asked whether any tender had been floated before the supplies were made, AIIMS responded: “Nil,” reports Mumbai Mirror.
The records do not indicate whether multiple eligible plasma fractionation facilities were considered, how the recipient was chosen, the basis for fixing the price of Rs 1,600 per litre, or the terms and duration of the arrangement.  
Under India’s regulatory framework, licensed blood banks are permitted to transfer surplus plasma that is no longer required for clinical transfusion to authorised plasma fractionation facilities. Instead of being discarded, the plasma is processed into plasma-derived medicinal products used in the treatment of burns, trauma, immune deficiencies, haemophilia and several other serious medical conditions, according to Mumbai Mirror.

RTI records reveal payments to Maya Ahir and Kirtidan Gadhvi:Activist urges artists to disclose income and taxes since 2017

Bhaskar: Gujarat: Saturday, 11 July 2026.
Controversy over remarks made by noted Gujarat folk artists Maya Ahir and Kirtidan Gadhvi about tax payments during a dayro (folk music event) has sparked widespread outrage across the state and on social media.

Amid the backlash, Morbi resident Ramesh Zhilariya released RTI documents claiming that Maya Ahir received ₹3.5 lakh for one SAUNI Yojana event, while Kirtidan Gadhvi was paid ₹10 lakh for two dayro performances.
In a viral video, Maya Ahir defended government employees, saying people behave 'as if they pay their father's tax' when claiming salaries are funded by taxpayers. Kirtidan Gadhvi, echoing the sentiment, joked from the stage that people 'don't even pay tax and eat rationed wheat'.
The RTI disclosures have fuelled public criticism, with many arguing that artists paid from public funds should not mock taxpayers.

Morbi citizen obtained information through RTI
This arrogant statement by the artists has hurt the sentiments of the poor and middle class of Gujarat, because even the poorest person in the country pays GST on small and large items. As soon as this controversial statement came to light, Morbi citizen Ramesh Zhilariya obtained official information from government departments under the RTI Act of 2005.
Citing this information, he made a shocking revelation that both these artists had participated in a government Sauni Yojana inauguration program held in Rajkot from 22 June, 2017, to 25 June, 2017.
Maya Ahir received ₹3.5 lakh for one dayro, Kirtidan ₹10 lakh for two
According to RTI documents, four government-sponsored dayro (folk music) events were organised under the SAUNI Yojana in 2017. Maya Ahir was paid ₹3.5 lakh for one performance, while Kirtidan Gadhvi received ₹10 lakh for two performances (₹5 lakh each).
Critics say the artists, who questioned whether the public pays tax, themselves earned lakhs of rupees from taxpayer-funded government programmes.
RTI activist questions artists' remarks
Speaking to Divya Bhaskar, RTI activist Ramesh Zhilariya said even the poorest citizens contribute to government revenue through GST and fuel taxes.
He argued that the same tax money funds government salaries, public representatives' benefits and payments to artists. He accused the artists of insulting the public despite benefiting from taxpayer-funded events.
Calls for disclosure of earnings and taxes
Referring to the RTI records, Zhilariya challenged the artists to disclose how many private and government dayro events they have performed since 2017, the fees they received, their total earnings and the amount of tax they paid on that income.
He also said artists should urge the government to improve governance, reduce the tax burden and provide free healthcare and education, adding that they should think carefully before making such remarks about the public.
Debate over ethics of government-funded performances
The controversy has sparked debate over the ethics of artists receiving payments from government programmes while criticising taxpayers. Following the RTI disclosures, many on social media have accused the artists of double standards, and the issue is expected to intensify in the coming days.
What did Maya Ahir say?
During a dayro event in Surat, Maya Ahir criticised people who record videos of police officers and claim government employees are paid from taxpayers' money. He said people behave 'as if they are paying their father's tax' and added that many who make such claims ‘eat rationed wheat’ despite never paying tax. The video quickly went viral, triggering widespread public criticism.
Other artists back Maya Ahir
While many have condemned Maya Ahir's remarks, several Gujarat artists have publicly supported him. Singer Kirtidan Gadhvi, along with Devayat Khavad, Sairam Dave and Rajbha Gadhvi, shared social media posts praising Maya Ahir as a symbol of truth, love, service and compassion. Their support has added a new dimension to the controversy, which is expected to grow further.

CIC directs all governments departments to strictly implement RTI

 Metro India News: Vijayawada: Saturday, 11 July 2026.

Andhra Pradesh State Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) Vajja Srinivasa Rao has directed all government departments to strictly implement the provisions of Section 4(1)(b) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, warning that negligence in enforcing the law will not be tolerated. As part of a review of the implementation of the RTI Act, the Chief Information Commissioner conducted surprise inspections at several government offices in Vijayawada. 
Commissioner Srinivasa Rao reviewed the implementation of the RTI Act and pexpressed displeasure that several offices had failed to display mandatory name boards containing the details of Public Information Officers (PIOs), First Appellate Authorities (FAAs), job charts and citizen charters.

Information Commission Disposes RTI Appeal After Candolim Panchayat Provides 30 Year Old Records

Times of India: Panaji: Saturday, 11 July 2026.

The State Information Commission has disposed of an appeal under the RTI Act after the Candolim panchayat provided an RTI applicant information dating back to three decades ago.
In 2025, Nazario Paul Savio D’Souza sought information under the RTI Act with regard to a building in Candolim from the panchayat. When he was not satisfied with the information provided, he went in first appeal before the first appellate authority and later in second appeal before the commission.
After filing the appeal, the commission directed the public information officer to allow him to physically inspect files to ascertain availability of such old records, and if available, seek copies of identified documents.
He then received the information dating back to the years 1993 and 1994 and sought certified copies of 17 documents. The commission then disposed of his appeal after the PIO complied with directions during the course of proceedings and the appellant received the information.

Specific Notice Under RTI Act Mandatory Before Imposing Penalty On Public Information Officer: Chhattisgarh High Court

Live Law: Chhattisgarh: Saturday, 11 July 2026.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that the State Information Commission cannot treat an earlier notice issued during appeal proceedings as a "final notice" for the purpose of imposing a penalty under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The Court observed that before imposing a penalty upon a Public Information Officer, the Commission must issue a specific notice under Section 20(1) and afford an adequate opportunity of hearing in accordance with the statutory mandate.
Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad was hearing a writ petition filed by a Public Information Officer challenging the order passed by the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission imposing a penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act and recommending disciplinary action under Section 20(2). The dispute arose after respondent No.4 sought information regarding the auction or disposal of unserviceable items purchased under the Skill Development Scheme. The petitioner replied that the information sought was voluminous and insufficiently specific. Although the First Appellate Authority directed the petitioner to furnish the information free of cost within fifteen days, the information seeker preferred a second appeal before the State Information Commission, which ultimately imposed the penalty.
The petitioner contended that no notice under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act had been issued before the penalty was imposed. It was argued that the Commission had erroneously treated the earlier notice issued in the second appeal proceedings as the final notice contemplated under Section 20(1). The State Information Commission and the information seeker contended that once the petitioner had already been issued notice during the appeal proceedings and had failed to comply with the order of the First Appellate Authority, no separate notice before imposition of penalty was necessary.
The Court examined Section 20(1) of the RTI Act and observed that the provision mandates that before imposing a penalty, the concerned Public Information Officer must be afforded an adequate opportunity of hearing. It held that where the statute prescribes a particular procedure, the authorities are bound to follow it in its letter and spirit and cannot substitute or dispense with the prescribed procedure.
The Court found that the State Information Commission had expressly treated the earlier notice issued during the appeal proceedings as the final notice under Section 20(1), which was contrary to the statutory requirement. It held that an appeal notice cannot be equated with the specific notice required before imposing a penalty under Section 20(1).
“State Commission has categorically stated that earlier notice has been issued to the petitioner and as such it would be treated as final notice under Section 20(1) of the R.T.I. Act, which in the considered opinion of this Court is not in accordance with law,” the Court observed.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order dated 06.09.2022 passed by the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission imposing a penalty upon the petitioner.
Case Title: Amarchand Pahare v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission & Ors. [WPC No. 4714 of 2022].
(Click Here to Download Order)

Private Unaided Schools Outside RTI Purview, But Must Disclose Fee Structure, Rules Madras High Court

Catholic Connect: Chennai: Saturday, 11 July 2026.

The Madras High Court has ruled that private unaided schools are not "public authorities" under the Right to Information (RTI) Act and therefore cannot be compelled to furnish information under the Act. At the same time, the court held that such institutions are legally bound to publicly display their approved fee structure and other key details as mandated by Tamil Nadu's education regulations.
Justice M. Dhandapani delivered the judgment while interpreting the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act and the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules. The court observed that although private unaided schools fall outside the scope of the RTI Act, they remain subject to statutory transparency obligations under State law.
The court noted that the Rules require schools to prominently display information such as the approved fee structure, available infrastructure, staff strength and student enrolment at the entrance of the institution. These disclosures are intended to ensure that parents and the public have access to essential information without the need to seek it through RTI applications.
The judgment draws a clear distinction between the RTI Act and the disclosure requirements prescribed under State education laws. While private unaided schools cannot be treated as public authorities for the purposes of the RTI Act, they must continue to comply with the transparency measures laid down in the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules.
The ruling reinforces the obligation of private schools to maintain openness in matters concerning fees and institutional information, ensuring greater accountability to parents and other stakeholders while reaffirming that such schools are not covered by the RTI Act.

Why CIC upheld Indian Oil's refusal to disclose fuel quality inspection records under RTI

Moneycontrol: New Delhi: Friday, 10^th July 2026.
During the hearing, the appellant argued that consumers are "overburdened with the fuel prices" and contended that, "in today's digital era," such information ought to be maintained centrally by the company's head office.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has upheld Indian Oil Corporation Ltd's (IOCL) decision to withhold decade-long records related to fuel quality inspections, fraud detection and consumer complaints sought under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, accepting the public sector oil company's argument that compiling the information would place a disproportionate burden on its resources.
The order was passed by Information Commissioner Khushwant Singh Sethi while disposing of an appeal filed by Robin Zaccheus, who had challenged IOCL's refusal to provide extensive records covering the period from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2023.
According to the order, Zaccheus had sought year-wise details on inspections conducted to identify poor fuel quality, short delivery of fuel at retail outlets, cases involving chip-based manipulation of fuel dispensing machines, action taken against outlets found violating norms, vigilance reports, and consumer complaints.
During the hearing, the appellant argued that consumers are "overburdened with the fuel prices" and contended that, "in today's digital era," such information ought to be maintained centrally by the company's head office.
In response, IOCL told the Commission that the requested information was "not readily available" in the format sought by the applicant. The company said the records were not maintained in a consolidated manner and explained that collecting them would require a massive exercise across its nationwide network.
The Maharatna oil company informed the Commission that it operates through around 42,000 retail outlets and, under its standard operating procedure, carries out a minimum of two inspections every year at each outlet. This translates into nearly eight lakh inspections annually, making it "not possible to collate the sought information," it submitted.
IOCL further stated that "compiling the sought information for a period of 10 years i.e., from 01.01.2014 to 31.12.2023 would disproportionately divert the resources of their public authority, and hence the sought information was denied U/s 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005."
The company also informed the Commission that "all active retail outlets are being automated to capture the data for better monitoring of RO operations." It added that dispensing units are being procured with upgraded specifications validated by the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC). IOCL also said regular training is provided to retail outlet personnel and customer awareness programmes are conducted on an ongoing basis.
In his order, Information Commissioner Khushwant Singh Sethi noted that IOCL had already supplied the applicant with the applicable rules, marketing discipline guidelines, relevant website links and other information that was available, while denying the remaining records under Section 7(9) of the RTI Act.
"The Commission finds that the respondent gave an appropriate reply to the appellant… Therefore, no further intervention of the Commission is required," the order said, dismissing the appeal.
(With inputs from PTI)

CIC upholds Indian Oil’s refusal to disclose records of fuel quality inspection, fraud records

The Print: New Delhi: Friday, 10^th July 2026.
The CIC has upheld IOCL’s refusal to disclose decade-long nationwide fuel quality inspection and fraud records under the RTI Act despite an applicant’s plea that the information was in public interest.

The applicant said consumers are “overburdened with the fuel prices” and the information should be centrally maintained in today’s digital era.
The Central Information Commission accepted the oil major’s contention that compiling the data, scattered across its 16 state offices and 73 divisional offices, would disproportionately divert its resources under Section 7(9) of the RTI Act.
The order came on an appeal filed by Robin Zaccheus against Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL), seeking year-wise data from 2014 to 2023 on inspections conducted to detect poor quality and incorrect quantity of fuel dispensed at retail outlets, chip-based manipulation in fuel dispensing machines, action taken against erring outlets, consumer complaints and vigilance reports.
During the hearing, Zaccheus argued that consumers are “overburdened with the fuel prices” and in today’s digital era, the respondent ought to maintain such information centrally at its head office.
The IOCL submitted that the information was “not readily available” in the format sought.
It also told the Commission that it has around 42,000 retail outlets and, under its standard operating procedure, conducts a minimum of two inspections every year at each outlet, amounting to around eight lakh inspections annually.
It said it was “not possible to collate the sought information”.
The Maharatna oil company said that “compiling the sought information for a period of 10 years i.e., from 01.01.2014 to 31.12.2023 would disproportionately divert the resources of their public authority, and hence the sought information was denied U/s 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005”.
The Corporation also said “all active retail outlets are being automated to capture the data for better monitoring of RO operations”, while dispensing units are being procured with upgraded specifications validated by the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC).
It added that regular training is imparted to retail outlet staff and customer awareness programmes are carried out regularly.
Information Commissioner Khushwant Singh Sethi observed that the respondent had already provided the available rules, marketing discipline guidelines, website links and factual information to the appellant while denying the remaining information under Section 7(9) of the RTI Act.
“The Commission finds that the respondent gave an appropriate reply to the appellant… Therefore, no further intervention of the Commission is required,” the order said while dismissing the appeal. PTI MHS MHS KSS KSS
(This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.)