Maharashtra Reconstitutes Search Committee For Chief Information Commissioner, Information Commissioners' Appointments

FPJ: Mumbai: Tuesday, 6^Th October 2026.
Maharashtra has reconstituted the Search Committee for shortlisting candidates for State Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioner posts, replacing its January 2025 order. Retired Bombay High Court judge Justice Ravi Deshpande will head the panel.

The Maharashtra government has reconstituted the Search Committee responsible for shortlisting candidates for the posts of State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners in the Maharashtra State Information Commission.
Earlier Order Superseded
The General Administration Department issued a government resolution on October 5, superseding its January 7, 2025 order and restructuring the committee in accordance with the Right to Information Act, 2005 and directions issued by the Supreme Court.
The reconstituted committee will be headed by retired Bombay High Court judge Justice Ravi Deshpande. The Maharashtra Chief Secretary will be a member, while the Principal Secretary/Additional Chief Secretary in charge of Administrative Innovations, Excellence and Good Governance in the General Administration Department will also serve as a member.
Panel To Set Eligibility Criteria
The committee will frame eligibility criteria, terms and conditions for advertisements for vacant posts and ensure that the selection process conforms to the RTI Act and judicial directions. It will also scrutinise applications objectively against the prescribed eligibility criteria.
For every vacant post, the committee will shortlist three eligible candidates and submit their names to the selection committee for consideration.
Under Section 15(3) of the RTI Act, appointments of the State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners are made on the recommendation of a selection committee headed by the Chief Minister. The Act also requires candidates to have public standing and broad knowledge and experience in fields including law, administration, journalism, social service, science and technology, or management.
The government said the restructuring was undertaken in view of Supreme Court directions seeking transparency, objectivity and merit in the appointment process.

State Information Commissioner issues show-cause notice in RTI case

Times of India: Kanpur: Tuesday, 6^Th October 2026.

State Information Commissioner, Lucknow, recently issued a show-cause notice to the Public Information Officer for not providing the sought information to the appellant, Praveen Kumar Srivastava, advocate.
The commissioner fixed next date for hearing as Oct 9, 2026.
State information commissioner Swatantra Prakash Gupta in his order dated Aug 20, 2026 that a copy of appeal and application filed under RTI Act on June 22 last to the public information officer’s representative although he was absent. Granting him the last opportunity, the information commissioner asked him to send the sought information to the applicant and ensure his presence before the commission along with proof of dispatch and receipt of information.
The state information commissioner now granted him last opportunity and fixed October 9,2026. In another matter he also summoned public information officer on same date.

11 food licences restored after FDA action in Nagpur; RTI raises questions over follow-up checks

Nagpur Today: Nagpur: Tuesday, 6^Th October 2026.

The Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) intensive crackdown on food establishments in Nagpur has thrown up a fresh question over the follow-up mechanism adopted after licences were suspended for alleged hygiene violations.
Information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act by Adv Sundeep Badana shows that the FDA had taken action against 16 food establishments in Nagpur district for violations of provisions under the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registration of Food Businesses) Regulations, 2011. Of these, the suspensions of at least 11 establishments were subsequently lifted after the department recorded compliance with the prescribed requirements.
The RTI information, supplied in response to an application dated August 18, 2026, shows that the time taken for restoration varied considerably, from just one day to several weeks after the establishments were found to have violated food-safety and hygiene provisions.
Among the prominent establishments listed in the reply, Hira Sweets had its licence suspended after an inspection on July 6, with the suspension lifted on July 29 after compliance was recorded. Indore Namkeen Products, inspected on July 9, had its suspension lifted on August 24.
The Hut Family Restaurant and Dhaba had its licence suspended following an inspection on July 11 and the suspension was lifted on July 13. Sainath Trading Company, inspected on July 17, secured restoration on August 10.
Similarly, Ashoka Restaurant had its suspension lifted on July 24 after its July 17 inspection, while Machan Restaurant, inspected on July 29, had its suspension lifted on August 7.
The RTI reply also records restoration of the licences of Mohadikar, an establishment at Koradi Temple, Super Caterers at VSPM Academy of Higher Education and Tiwari & Company at IIIT Nagpur after compliance was recorded. In the case of Tiwari & Company, the inspection was conducted on August 13 and the suspension was lifted the very next day.
The reply further shows that the suspension of Kiara Noodles and Trading, inspected on August 14, was lifted on August 18.
The FDA had cited violations of various provisions of Parts II and V of Schedule 4 of the 2011 regulations as the reason for the action against these establishments. However, the RTI response, as supplied to the applicant, largely records the dates of inspection, action and restoration and does not provide detailed documentation of the physical reinspections or the individual corrective measures verified at each establishment.
The data also shows that action against some establishments was more stringent. The registration of Salim Mutton Shop Chicken Centre at Mahadula was cancelled following an inspection on June 8. The registrations of two establishments listed under Yarana Family Garden Restaurant at Hazaripahad were also shown as cancelled after inspections conducted on July 11.
The licence of Indian Tandoor on Katol Road was suspended on July 12, while the RTI reply does not show a subsequent restoration against that entry. The entry relating to Mother Dairy Milk Franchisee also does not show a restoration action in the information supplied.
The findings assume significance against the backdrop of the FDA’s intensified food-safety enforcement drive under Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe. The department has undertaken a series of inspections and raids across Maharashtra, including action against restaurants, hotels, sweet shops and institutional food establishments.
The RTI data, however, raises a narrower question: how were compliance claims verified before suspended establishments were allowed to resume operations?
The information supplied under RTI records “compliance verified by inspectors” in cases where suspensions were lifted, but does not, in the material available, specify the date and details of the follow-up inspection, the individual deficiencies rectified or the documentary evidence relied upon for restoring each licence.
This becomes particularly relevant in cases where restoration took place within a very short period. In the case of Tiwari & Company at IIIT Nagpur, for instance, the inspection was recorded on August 13 and the suspension was lifted on August 14. Super Caterers at VSPM Academy of Higher Education was similarly shown as having its suspension lifted a day after inspection.
The RTI applicant has also raised a separate concern after observing that an establishment whose registration was shown as cancelled in the FDA’s reply was still operating. This observation could not, however, establish by itself whether the business was operating under another valid licence, whether the cancelled registration related to a particular activity or whether any subsequent regulatory order had been issued.
The issue therefore calls for clarification from the FDA rather than an assumption of wrongdoing. The department could clarify whether physical re-inspections were carried out in every case before restoration, what corrective measures were verified and whether any establishments whose registrations were cancelled subsequently obtained fresh permissions
The RTI disclosure provides a documented snapshot of the enforcement action and its subsequent outcome. The larger question now is whether the restoration process was backed by equally rigorous on-ground verification, an issue that assumes importance for food safety and consumer protection in Nagpur.

AP Information Commission bars an activist from filing repetitive pleas

Times of India: Vijayawada: Tuesday, 6^Th October 2026.

The Andhra Pradesh Information Commission has barred an RTI applicant from filing repetitive applications, appeals or complaints on matters already disposed of or where the required information has been furnished, citing misuse of the transparency law and avoidable diversion of public resources.
Chief information commissioner Vajja Srinivasa Rao issued the order while disposing of a batch of 164 cases involving Yadala Bhadraiah of Palnadu district. The commission noted that Bhadraiah had filed more than 1,000 RTI applications and over 300 second appeals.
The commission observed that the cases reflected a recurring pattern of seeking repeated opportunities for inspection of records without pointing to specific deficiencies in the information already supplied. It held that the RTI Act cannot be used to repeatedly pursue matters that have already been addressed.
The commission also took note of a ₹10,000 PhonePe transaction allegedly made to Bhadraiah from an account linked to a deputy MPDO while official proceedings were pending. It directed the commissioner and director of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development to investigate the transaction and examine whether any violation of the Prevention of Corruption Act had occurred.
The commission further directed the Palnadu district collector to verify Bhadraiah’s eligibility for a white ration card in view of information indicating that he owned two houses and substantial landholdings. Appropriate action was ordered if any irregularity or fraudulent claim was established.
Referring to Supreme Court judgments, the commission observed that the RTI Act is intended to promote transparency and accountability and cannot be allowed to become a means of harassing public officials or pursuing personal grievances.
It said repeated and vexatious proceedings could consume considerable administrative time and manpower, affecting the ability of public authorities to respond to genuine RTI applicants.
Rao dismissed the batch of 164 cases and directed that future applications from Bhadraiah should be confined to genuinely distinct requests for information and should not repeat matters that have already been answered or adjudicated.
“This commission is of the considered view that this is a fit case to prohibit the appellant from filing applications, appeals, and complaints under the RTI Act, 2005. The commission deems it appropriate to reprimand the appellant, Yadala Bhadraiah, and cautions him to refrain from conduct that may amount to harassment. It is further clarified that any repetition of such conduct may invite appropriate action, including rejection of future applications, appeals, or complaints, in the larger public interest and in furtherance of the objectives of the RTI Act, 2005,” said Vajja Srinivasa Rao.

Manipur Information Commission observes RTI Week 2026 in Imphal

News On AIR: Imphal: Tuesday, 6^Th October 2026.

Addressing the gathering, Principal Secretary R.K. Dinesh Singh stressed the need to increase public awareness about the Right to Information (RTI) Act and ensure its effective implementation to strengthen transparency, accountability and public participation.
He said that the RTI Act initially appeared confusing due to its 31 sections and broad scope and objectives. He highlighted that its objectives include enabling people to access information, ensuring transparency and accountability, eliminating corruption and ultimately strengthening democracy. He also emphasised proactive disclosure by public authorities to reduce the burden on Public Information Officers (PIOs).
RTI Week is being observed for seven days and will conclude on October 12 marking the 21st anniversary of the implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005 which was passed in June 2005 and came into force on October, 12, 2005.

Assam Information Commission to Hold RTI Appeal Hearings in Barak Valley

The Sentinel: Assam: Monday, 5^Th October 2026.
Assam Information Commission to hear RTI appeals outside Guwahati for the first time, beginning with Sribhumi, Hailakandi and Silchar during RTI Week

The Assam Information Commission (AIC) has taken a slew of measures to generate awareness about the Right to Information (RTI) Act and expedite the disposal of appeal cases in a timebound manner.
For the first time in the history of the Commission, appeal cases will be heard outside Guwahati. During RTI Week, beginning October 6, 2026, State Chief Information Commissioner Bharat Bhushan Dev Choudhury, IAS (Retd), will personally hear appellants in Sribhumi, Hailakandi and Silchar. He will also attend several awareness programmes and interact with Public Information Officers (PIOs) in the other districts of the Barak Valley. The State Chief Information Commissioner said similar programmes would be organised in all districts of Assam in a phased manner to generate awareness about the RTI Act, stated a press release.

EC dissent row: How RTI can unlock minutes, orders on SIR decisions - By Madabhushi Sridhar Acharyulu

The Federal: Analysis: Monday, 5^Th October 2026.
RTI can help citizens and political parties seek the documentary trail behind reported EC dissent, decisions on electoral rolls, and database management

The EC is a constitutional authority under Article 324, entrusted with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections. That makes transparency in its institutional decision-making particularly important. File photo

The recent Indian Express investigation into differences within the Election Commission has generated intense political debate. It is reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi recorded objections on at least 14 occasions over 10 months concerning Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, voter registration, deletions, Form 6, electoral appeals, and the centralisation of electoral databases.
The EC, headed by Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, responded that its actions were as per law and the media focus on internal notes only gives “one part of the picture”.
Citizens’ right to seek records
This raises a question: If these matters are contained in official records, can’t they be accessed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act?
This is not to question newspapers’ right to investigate. The larger issue is if the material involves the decision-making process by a constitutional authority, shouldn’t citizens and political parties have the right to seek the records through a statutory mechanism?
As a former Central Information Commissioner, this writer would approach the controversy by seeking the records. Section 2(f) of the RTI Act defines “information” broadly to include records, documents, memoranda, e-mails, opinions, advice, circulars, orders, reports, papers, and electronic data. The Act also gives citizens the right to inspect records and obtain copies or electronic information held by or under the control of a public authority.
This distinction is crucial. An RTI applicant cannot ordinarily ask: “Why did the CEC ignore the two Election Commissioners?” That may require the public authority to create an explanation which doesn’t exist.
Instead, the applicant may ask the EC: “Provide the records showing how the objections of the two Election Commissioners were considered, and a final decision taken.”
Similarly, instead of framing the question on whether or not the CEC acted illegally, an applicant can seek the file noting, legal opinion, order, correspondence, or authorisation identifying the statutory provision under which the action was taken.
RTI plea can ask for the following
Per the Indian Express report, objections were recorded 14 times. A carefully-drafted RTI application could seek:

1. Copies of the recorded objections
2. Replies or comments on those objections
3. Minutes or records of the Commission’s consideration
4. The final decisions in each case
5. Whether each decision was unanimous or by majority
6. The statutory provision relied upon
7. Orders authorising changes to Form 6
8. Records concerning centralised electoral databases
9. Instructions governing access and modification of electoral data
10. Authorisations for appeals filed on behalf of the Commission
11. Relevant audit or technical reports

Need for transparency
This matters constitutionally because the EC is not an ordinary executive department. It is a constitutional authority under Article 324, entrusted with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections. That makes transparency in its institutional decision-making particularly important.
The controversy is not about whether the two Commissioners disagreed with the CEC. Dissent within a multi-member constitutional body is not itself illegality. What matters is: Was the full Commission consulted? Were decisions taken unanimously or by the majority? If there was a majority, was it respected? Was the particular administrative action authorised by law? Was the decision properly recorded and implemented?
The answers to these questions can be elucidated through documents.
During this writer's tenure as Central Information Commissioner from 2013 to 2018, an important principle that came up repeatedly during RTI adjudication was: while the citizen is entitled to existing information, the public authority is not required to manufacture an explanation merely because the applicant wants one. That distinction is particularly valuable here.
The citizen need not ask the EC to explain the entire SIR controversy. They can ask for the records from which the explanation can be understood. This approach also prevents RTI from becoming a political weapon. The Administrative Law says, let the “records” speak.
What about the RTI amendment?
The present legal position is different from the period of this writer's tenure. Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 amended Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, and that amendment was brought into force in November 2025. This makes careful drafting even more important. But the amendment does not mean that every record concerning the EC is exempt from disclosure.
There is a fundamental distinction between personal information about an individual elector and institutional information concerning how the EC exercises its statutory and constitutional functions.
The RTI applicant need not seek voters’ addresses, identity details, or other unnecessary personal data. The request can be confined to institutional records: orders, minutes, notes, authorisations, legal opinions, instructions, audit reports, and electronic records concerning the functioning of the electoral system.
Electronic system cannot override ERO
Any specific exemption claimed by the public authority must still be examined under the Act. The database question is especially important. The reported objections concerning centralisation of electoral-roll data raise an issue extending beyond SIR. Electoral registration is governed by statute.
Technology facilitates statutory functions; it cannot itself become the source of legal authority. If an Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) has a statutory responsibility, an electronic system cannot silently override that authority unless there is lawful authority for doing so.
An RTI application could therefore seek records asking: Who can access the database? Who can modify electoral entries? What authority permits such modification? Are modifications digitally logged? Can a central system override a decision of the competent electoral officer? Who audits these changes?
These are not questions about political preference. They are questions about institutional accountability.
Should political parties use RTI?
The Congress and other Opposition parties are demanding answers from the EC. Their political arguments would be strengthened if they only sought relevant documents lawfully. Instead of relying fully on the Indian Express report, they could ask the EC to disclose the records.
If the EC claims that its decisions were unanimous, the minutes and decision records can establish that. For instance, if two commissioners constituted a majority, if the objections were subsequently resolved, or if a statutory procedure was bypassed, the records can establish them.
EC and CIC
The EC and the Central Information Commission do not have identical constitutional status or powers. The EC derives its primary authority from Article 324; the CIC is a statutory institution created under the RTI Act. But both institutions operate in areas wherein institutional independence, lawful decision-making, transparency, and public confidence are fundamental.
The EC administers the process of citizens’ democratic choice whereas the CIC gives citizens access to information.
To get information, a newspaper may investigate, a political party may allege, a court may adjudicate. A citizen can seek public authority to disclose the records.
Therefore, the central question need not be, “Should the CEC resign?" or "Did the EC make a mistake?”. Rather, one can seek the records of those 14 decisions.

Lawfully yours: By Retired Justice K Chandru | Eternal vigilance needed as secrecy and exemptions continue to weaken RTI Act

DT Next: Chennai: Monday, 5^Th October 2026.
Your legal questions answered by Justice K Chandru, former Judge of the Madras High Court Do you have a question? Email us at citizen.dtnext@dt.co.in

Justice K Chandru, former Judge of the Madras High Court

The Tamil Nadu government recently exempted the Law and Order department from the RTI Act, only to revoke the order following widespread backlash. The retracted notification had invoked Section 24(4) of the transparency law to classify the department as an "Intelligence and Security Organisation", effectively shielding it from public scrutiny. Critics and allies alike condemned the move, warning that it could pave the way for the suppression of human rights. Had the order remained in force, access to crucial records concerning police torture, custodial deaths, police firings, communal clashes, and security-related detentions would have been blocked. Beyond the political reaction, this attempt raises significant legal questions about executive discretion. What are the constitutional boundaries for state governments when invoking Section 24(4)? Is there a legal mechanism or judicial standard that prevents a government from using executive orders to bypass statutory obligations of transparency and public accountability?
— Saravanan R, Parandur
The Official Secrets Act 1923, brought by the British government, still runs in our veins. Nothing will be transparent until the government voluntarily discloses information.
After independence, it took seven decades to enact the RTI Act. It was touted as a measure of transparency in governance, but very little of it came through as information, and in many places, RTI activists were attacked by vested interests. The Chief Justice of India even called them unemployed parasites and cockroaches.
In 1997, the TN government enacted an RTI Act under which exemptions were granted under 23 categories — just three short of all 26 letters of the English alphabet. Even under the 2005 Act, the judiciary wanted exemption, but thanks to Sonia Gandhi's stiff refusal, it was dropped. Today, no information can be sought from the PM Shree fund headed by the Prime Minister of this country. Even his educational qualification is barred under the RTI Act.
There is no surprise that the new govt wanted to cover itself with its abortive move of exempting the Public Dept from the RTI Act, and thanks to opposition voices, it was dropped. Now you cannot even ask who was the author of the move and who prevailed upon withdrawing it; even that will be kept a guarded secret. Ultimately, eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.

Naga Students’ body demands ILP overhaul after RTI records flag enforcement gaps

The Assam Tribune: Dimapur: Thursday, Sunday, 4^Th October 2026.
According to the ILRC, the Nagaland Police checked more than 1,900 passes on April 10 and 11 following the Assam Assembly elections and the Mokokchung by-election

The Naga Students Federation (NSF) has demanded an overhaul of the Inner Line Permit (ILP) enforcement mechanism by constitution of an autonomous Nagaland Inner Line Regulation Commission through legislation, restoration of checkpoints, a centralised entry-and-exit register and stronger coordination between departments.
The Inner Line Regulation Commission (ILRC) of the NSF, in a 17-page representation to Nagaland Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio on Thursday, said its review of 1,490 pages of records obtained through the Right to Information Act found 644 ILP defaulters detected during police checks over two days in April, while only one removal was recorded in the material made available to it, calling for an overhaul of the ILP enforcement mechanism.
The representation said hundreds of people were detected allegedly violating Nagaland’s ILP requirements during checking drives in 2026, but the enforcement action that followed appears limited, according to a compilation of government records by the ILRC.
The ILRC said the ‘consolidated recommendations’ were based on a two-day national seminar on the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation (BEFR), 1873, held in Dimapur in August.
The commission said it had also sought information from the State Home Department and all 17 district administrations in May 2026 on the matter. It also cited earlier RTI applications made in August 2025.
It said the records, together with government committee reports and other documents, showed “serious gaps” between detection and enforcement.
According to the ILRC, the Nagaland Police checked more than 1,900 passes on April 10 and 11 following the Assam Assembly elections and the Mokokchung byelection.
It further cited the detection of 436 defaulters on April 10 and another 208 on April 11, among other ILP defaulter detections.

360 plaints received against doctors in 3 years; 57% rejected: RTI

The Tribune: National: Thursday, Sunday, 4^Th October 2026.
National Medical Commission’s 5-member ethics board operating with just one member

India’s apex medical education regulator received 360 complaints of doctors’ misconduct since 2023 and rejected appeals in more than half of these cases.
Responding to a Tribune query under the Right to Information Act, the National Medical Commission (NMC) disclosed that its Ethics and Medical Registration Board (EMRB) had received 360 complaints against doctors from January 2023 to August this year.
The Commission, which also regulates professional conduct and medical ethics in the country, added that it had rejected 57% of the appeals. The complaints involved grievances of professional misconduct and medical negligence by the doctors.
In the RTI, the NMC also mentioned that it accepted 150 appeals while 74 were pending for approval. Importantly, the RTI reply further reveals that the five-member ethics board is currently operating with just one member.
According to rules, a patient can file a professional misconduct or medical negligence complaint against a doctor with the respective State Medical Council (SMC) where the doctor is registered. If the response is not satisfactory, the patient can file an appeal with the EMRB within 60 days of the order.
The Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002, states that any complaint with regard to professional misconduct can be brought before the appropriate Medical Council for disciplinary action. Upon receipt of any complaint of professional misconduct, the medical council would hold an enquiry and give the registered medical practitioner an opportunity to be heard in person. “If the medical practitioner is found to be guilty of committing professional misconduct, the appropriate medical council may award such punishment as deemed necessary or may direct the removal altogether or for a specified period, from the register of the name of the delinquent registered practitioner,” the Indian Medical Council clause says.
The punishment, if the NMC finds a doctor guilty of misconduct, can either suspend them from a medical college for a fixed term or permanently debar them. The doctors can also lose their license.
“Registration of two associate professors of government medical colleges in Jaipur and Ajmer were suspended by the Rajasthan Medical Council (RMC). One of them faced action for allegedly taking a patient from SMS Hospital to a private hospital for her treatment and another’s licence was suspended for providing false information in her (annual confidential report (ACR) and also for mentioning misleading qualification on her prescription letter. Likewise, medical councils in Karnataka and Delhi have also taken action against doctors for tampering with medical records,” an official with the NMC said.
A recent case also involves action against 30 doctors for allegedly accepting luxury foreign trips funded by a pharmaceutical company. The case lingered from 2024-2025 with the NMC. A special audit committee of the Department of Pharmaceuticals had also asked NMC to take action against the offending doctors. NMC recommended action against the doctors who then approached the Delhi High Court, which stayed the disciplinary proceedings in August 2026.

RTI panel rejects plea saying there is no public interest, and may affect routine work

Times of India: Chennai: Thursday, Sunday, 4^Th October 2026.
Tamil Nadu Information Commission has rejected an RTI appeal seeking information under 90 heads, holding that the request had no public interest element and that providing such voluminous information could affect the day-to-day functioning of a government office.

State information commissioner V P R Ilamparithi said the information sought related to a third party and that the appellant had sought excessive details concerning an official from the School Education Department. The Commission said such a request, in the circumstances, attracted Section 7(9) of the Right to Information Act, as it could affect the resources of the public authority required for its routine functioning.
The case concerned an RTI application filed by Mohan S Thamizhkumaran seeking information under 90 heads about V Rameshkumar, who was serving as a block educational officer in Palani union of Dindigul district. The information included details of the union to which Rameshkumar was first appointed as a block educational officer and disciplinary action, if any, taken against him.
The application was initially transferred between various authorities under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act. The public information officer (PIO) subsequently furnished information through a letter dated Jan 3, 2024. The appellant, dissatisfied with the response, filed a first appeal and later approached the Commission with a second appeal under Section 19(3).
During the hearing last week, the PIO submitted that the information sought had already been furnished through registered post. The officer also told the Commission that the appellant had sought an excessive amount of information, which could affect routine office work, and that there was no public interest involved in the request.
The officer further submitted that the information was being sought for reasons of personal animosity or other unnecessary purposes.
After examining the application and response, the Commission found that the appellant had sought an excessive amount of information, all of which related to a third party. It also recorded that sufficient information had already been furnished by the PIO.
The Commission accordingly disposed of the second appeal and advised the appellant to seek only information required by him, specify his requests clearly and pursue them with a public-interest objective without causing hindrance to the day-to-day functioning of the public authority and the Commission.

PMO publishes Shah’s secretariat roster after RTI request

The Farsight: Nepal: Thursday, Saturday, 3^rd October 2026.
The Prime Minister’s Office had earlier disclosed that 27 people had been appointed to the prime minister’s secretariat but declined to identify them all. It has now published a 25-name roster on its website.

Balendra Shah, Prime Minister of Nepal

Six months into Balendra Shah’s tenure as prime minister, the Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers has published the names and positions of officials working in his advisory group and personal secretariat, after a newspaper sought the information under the Right to Information Act, 2007.
The OPMCM’s website now lists 25 officials, including five advisers, experts and members of the prime minister’s personal secretariat, along with their designations and the government rank or level of facilities attached to their positions.
The disclosure came days after Naya Patrika published details obtained through an RTI request concerning advisers and personal-secretariat staff appointed by the prime minister and ministers.
Who is on the list?
The published roster shows that the prime minister’s team is not made up solely of political or policy advisers.
Kumar Byanjankar is listed as an unpaid chief adviser with facilities equivalent to a minister, while Asim Shah is the political adviser, also with minister-equivalent facilities. Byanjankar’s role has often been criticised as extending beyond the conventional scope of an advisory position. 
Shah earlier led the task force formed to prepare the “Constitution Amendment Discussion Paper,” which prompted concerns for entrusting the important task of constitutional amendment to an individual without formal expertise in constitutional or legal matters. 
Sudip Dhakal, adviser for policy, administration and good governance, and Bibek Mishra, adviser for information and communication technology, have facilities equivalent to state ministers.
Prof Dr Jagadish Prasad Agrawal is listed as an unpaid health adviser, with minister-equivalent facilities.
The remaining 20 positions include personal-secretariat staff, experts and administrative and technical personnel.
Subash Sharma is the chief personal secretary. Nabin Bhandari is the personal secretary, and Sanjib Pandey is listed as personal joint secretary.
The roster also includes Deepa Dahal as a press and research expert, Santosh Giri as programme and visit coordinator and Bishwo Rai as a social-development expert.
Prakriti Dhakal, Bishal Adhikari and Binay Shakya are listed as personal deputy secretaries. Suman Gautam is an assistant expert for civil aviation, while Rabi Kiran Adhikari is an assistant expert for language and drafting.
At the section-officer level are Surendra Bajgai, listed as a press facilitator; Roshan Tamang, responsible for graphics design; Bedananda Joshi, a personal section officer; and Hem Narayanadas Chaudhary, a research officer.
The roster also includes administrative assistants Anup Thapa Magar, Rishi Thapa, Raj Kumar Gautam and Benis Karki, and computer assistant Amrit Pandey, designated as a videographer.
A disclosure that followed an RTI request
The sequence raises a basic transparency question: Why were the names not publicly available when the appointments were made?
The OPMCM response to the RTI request in late September established that 27 people had been appointed, but did not identify them. The subsequent online roster, however, names 25 people and provides their designations and facility levels.
The office has not, in the material published on its website, explained the difference between the earlier figure of 27 appointments and the current list of 25 names.
That leaves an unresolved question over whether two people have since left, whether the two lists cover different categories of appointments, or whether the personnel composition has otherwise changed. The discrepancy is particularly relevant because the RTI response and the website disclosure are from the same office but provide different headcounts.
The broader secretariat framework
The disclosure also comes after the government revised the framework governing ministers’ advisers and personal secretariats.
The government reduced the prime minister’s approved secretariat establishment from the previous figure of 66 to 48 positions. The current government also reduced the number of ministries from 22 to 18.
The government subsequently allowed advisers and personal-secretariat staff to be appointed under a revised arrangement. According to Naya Patrika, the combined appointments across the prime minister and 16 ministers amounted to 128 advisers and personal-secretariat personnel, based on information supplied in response to the RTI requests.
The publication of Shah’s roster therefore does more than identify the people working around the prime minister. It provides, for the first time on the OPMCM website, a public breakdown of who occupies which position and what government-equivalent status has been attached to each post.
But the government’s own two figures, 27 in its September RTI response and 25 in its October website roster, remain to be reconciled.

Nagaland wildlife case: Police probe alleged ₹1 lakh demand as RTI seeks 20-year compounding record

Hub News: Kohima: Thursday, Saturday, 3^rd October 2026.

A wildlife offence case involving Vezhoto Hesuh has taken a new turn, with Nagaland Police ordering a preliminary enquiry into an alleged demand of ₹1 lakh for his release, while a separate RTI application seeks two decades of records on how wildlife offences have been compounded in the state.
The twin developments have brought renewed scrutiny on enforcement of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, particularly the procedures followed in detention, seizure and compounding of wildlife offences in Nagaland.
MLA seeks FIR over alleged money demand
MLA and Advisor to the Department of Science & Technology, Kuzholuzo (Azo) Nienu, has approached the Director General of Police, Nagaland, seeking an FIR and investigation into an alleged demand of ₹1 lakh by officials of the Wildlife Crime Control Unit (WCCU), Dimapur, for the release of Hesuh.
In his complaint dated September 24, Nienu alleged that no written notice, receipt, challan, compounding order or other lawful document was provided to substantiate the alleged demand.
He also pointed to a subsequent denial by the department and called for an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the detention and alleged demand.
Nienu has sought investigation into the role of all officials involved, including WCCU Dimapur Officer-in-Charge Hukai H. Zhimo. He has also asked police to examine whether the alleged conduct amounted to corruption or abuse of official position and whether similar incidents had occurred in the past.
The MLA has further requested that relevant documents and electronic evidence be preserved and that departmental action be initiated if a prima facie case is established.
CID orders seven-day preliminary enquiry
The complaint has now prompted Nagaland Police to order a Preliminary Enquiry. An order issued by the Office of the Inspector General of Police (CID), Nagaland, in September directed ACP (West), Dimapur, Zubenthung Ovung, NPS, to conduct the enquiry, following directions from ADGP (L&O).
The matter has been registered as State Crime Police Station PE No. 05/2026, dated September 28, 2026.
The enquiry concerns the allegations of unlawful demand of money, abuse of official position and misconduct in connection with Hesuh’s detention.
The Enquiry Officer has been directed to submit a report within seven days.
RTI seeks 20 years of wildlife compounding records At the same time, an RTI application has sought detailed records covering January 1, 2006, to date on the compounding of wildlife offences in Nagaland.
Filed by Cusayi Lohe before the Public Information Officer of the Department of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, Office of the PCCF & HoFF, the application seeks information on 13 points, including the year-wise number of cases compounded and certified copies of compounding orders.
It also seeks details of officers authorised to compound offences, relevant notifications, departmental rules and SOPs, the basis for fixing composition amounts, and receipts and treasury challans showing whether the money collected was deposited into the government account.
Records relating to detention and release, seizures and disposal of seized wildlife have also been sought.
The application invokes Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, under which information is ordinarily required to be provided within 30 days.
Enforcement meets customary practice debate
The developments follow recent WCCU enforcement in Phek district, including the detention of youths and seizure of protected birds.
The action triggered protests from the Centre Chakhesang Youth Organisation (CCYO) and a wider debate over social media about wildlife law, customary practices and due process.
One side of the debate has argued that keeping or rearing birds forms part of local tradition and has questioned the circumstances surrounding the detention and alleged demand for money. Conservation advocates, meanwhile, have stressed that protected wildlife is covered by the Wildlife (Protection) Act and that enforcement remains necessary.
The issue also intersects with Nagaland’s distinctive land and resource ownership structure, with most forests under community ownership, making the role of local communities central to conservation and enforcement.
The RTI could provide a broader picture of how wildlife offences have been dealt with in Nagaland over the past 20 years including how frequently offences were compounded, who authorised the settlements, how amounts were determined and whether the money collected was formally deposited.
The police preliminary enquiry and the RTI therefore place the spotlight not only on the allegations surrounding the Hesuh case, but also on the procedure and accountability mechanisms governing wildlife enforcement in Nagaland.

CIC Opens 4-Year Gandhi Smriti Fund and Spending Records for Inspection.

Deccan Chronicle: New Delhi: Saturday, October 02, 2026.

The applicant had sought details of funds provided by the ministry to the samiti during the four years, year-wise and item-wise details of expenditure, and certified copies of its audit reports.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has allowed an RTI applicant to inspect four years of "voluminous" financial records of the Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti after he sought details of funds received from the Ministry of Culture, expenditure incurred and audit reports.

The person alleged that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) subsequently directed the CPIO to provide the information, holding that it could not be denied as third-party information since it was not personal. During the CIC hearing, the CPIO said the samiti provided a revised reply in compliance with the FAA's order. He said the relevant annual accounts are already available in the public domain and that the applicant was offered an inspection of records since it was voluminous.

The applicant did not avail the opportunity, the CPIO said. Information Commissioner P R Ramesh observed that since the information is already in the public domain, the CPIO can tell the applicant how it could be accessed. "Where information is already available in the public domain, the CPIO may appropriately intimate the applicant about the manner in which such information can be accessed," the commissioner said

However, in the interest of transparency and effective access to information, the CIC gave the applicant four weeks to approach the respondent office to inspect the records. The CIC said that the copies of documents sought during the inspection be provided free of cost up to 20 pages, while prescribed fees may be charged for additional pages. The CPIO was also allowed to withhold or redact third-party information or other material exempt from disclosure under Section 8 of the RTI Act, read with Section 10, while facilitating inspection and providing copies.

Incomplete RTI info even after 6 years: Haryana panel orders Rs 10k relief for PFA trustee, probe.

Times of India : Chandigadh: Saturday, October 02, 2026. 

The Haryana State Information Commission has ordered the Faridabad municipal corporation to pay Rs 10,000 compensation to animal welfare activist and People for Animals (PFA) trustee Gauri Maulekhi for failing to provide complete information under the Right to Information Act for more than six years.

State information commissioner Ajay Kumar Sura, in a Sept 11 order, also directed the Faridabad municipal commissioner to conduct a departmental inquiry into officials responsible for the “prolonged delay” and non-compliance with the commission’s directions.

Maulekhi had filed an RTI application on Dec 23, 2020, seeking information on compliance with Animal Birth Control Rules, 2001. The information included details of the civic body’s monitoring and implementation committee, a master plan for animal birth control, the agency engaged for the programme and steps taken to promote the adoption of Indian dogs.

The commission noted that despite repeated directions between Dec 2021 and June 2026, complete and satisfactory information had not been provided. It also found that information supplied on one of the points was incomplete.

The commission said the application had effectively been “shuttled from one wing/department to another”. It also described responses of the SPIOs as “insufficient” and “evasive”.

The commission said prolonged delay defeated the purpose of the RTI mechanism. “The right to information cannot be rendered illusory by administrative delay. Timely disclosure is an essential component of the statutory right conferred by the RTI Act, and repeated disregard of the lawful directions of the commission cannot be countenanced,” wrote the commission.

The commission also directed the additional chief secretary of urban local bodies to ensure effective institutional mechanisms for timely disposal of RTI applications and appeals across municipal corporations, councils and committees in the state.

TMC engineer summoned over RTI delay.

Mumbai Mirror: N. Ganesh: Mumbai: Saturday, October 02, 2026.

The State Information Commission directs police to serve summons after officer fails to provide records on Vartak Nagar redevelopment.

The State Information Commission has summoned a Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) officer to appear before it for an enquiry after he allegedly failed to provide information as directed and did not appear for a subsequent hearing.

State Information Commissioner Shekar Channe of the Konkan division was peeved that executive engineer Sandeep Sawant did not provide the information ordered by the commission on June 15 and also failed to appear before it during the subsequent proceeding.

Channe has directed the Thane police commissioner’s office and the senior police inspector of Vartak Nagar police station to serve the summons on Sawant. The summons has been issued under Section 18(3)(c) of the RTI Act, 2005. Sawant is an executive engineer with the Lokmanya Nagar/Savarkar Nagar ward.

The matter relates to 127 families from Vartak Nagar who claim they were rendered homeless after the redevelopment of buildings where they had lived for several decades. The residents allege that they were deprived of their homes due to the “connivance of TMC and MHADA”.

The RTI appeal arose from an application filed by Salil Rane with the TMC regarding the redevelopment of MHADA buildings 54, 55 and 56 at Vartak Nagar. Rane had sought copies of all communications from 1970 related to the procurement of the buildings from MHADA as service quarters.

The query was based on a claim made by the TMC before the high court that the three buildings had been procured from MHADA as service quarters.When contacted, Sawant said he had not received the summons.

“The reason they are unable to provide the communication regarding the procurement of the three MHADA buildings as service quarters is because it doesn’t exist. TMC is weaving a story that these were service quarters and yet it is not denying that there were residents whose members were not civic employees residing in these buildings,” said Sudhir Parab, one of the residents fighting for their homes.

The Mirror had reported on March 17, that residents of the three buildings were housed there after being uprooted during a road widening project undertaken in the 1970s. The then civic body allotted tenements in the three buildings to project-affected persons (PAPs) as well as civic employees.

However, during the redevelopment process, TMC conveyed to MHADA that the buildings were occupied only by civic staff. MHADA, which owns the land, subsequently gave its approval accordingly.

Under the conditions laid down by MHADA for redevelopment of service quarters, the erstwhile PAPs were allotted rooms which they could neither sell nor rent out.

The High Court, too, in its order, observed that occupants of the MHADA buildings who had approached the court were yet to be rehabilitated.

‘PM Modi’s degree personal information’: Gujarat High Court rejects Kejriwal plea: Written by: Somya Panwar

Indian Express: New Delhi: Thursday, 1^st October 2026.
The Gujarat High Court has dismissed Arvind Kejriwal's appeal in the case seeking disclosure of PM Modi’s educational qualifications, holding that such details are protected personal information under the RTI Act.

The Gujarat High Court has ruled that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s degree is personal information that cannot be disclosed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act and dismissed a plea filed by former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal seeking details of the PM’s educational qualifications.
The September 29 ruling passed by Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D N Ray held that just because personal information about the educational degree sought was that of the Prime Minister of the country, it does not mean that the said information would automatically fall “within the purview of ambit, or the public interest or larger public interest”, the exception to the exemptions under Section 8 (1)(e) and (j) of the Act.
Sections 8(1)(e) and 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, provide legal exemptions that allow public authorities to refuse the disclosure of information involving fiduciary relationships and personal privacy.
“The fact that the information about the educational degree of the Prime Minister is already in the public domain, as noted by the CIC (Central Information Commission), has no relevance in so far as the consideration of obligations under the RTI Act,” the order added.
Appearing for Kejriwal, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, assisted by advocate Amum K Kotwal, challenged the remarks made by the single judge that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader had continued the case despite Gujarat University having already put the degrees on its website. He also sought removal of the Rs 25,000 cost imposed on Kejriwal.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Gujarat University, opposed Kejriwal’s plea and defended the single judge’s order, including the observations and cost imposed on him.
The court said statutory authorities and courts should not be treated as a public platform to ventilate political vengeance. It added that a political leader holding public office cannot use legal proceedings for their political motives.
The court stated that the RTI Act envisages access to information held by public authorities, with the right to seek specific information available to a person seeking it under the Act. In the absence of a proper request in writing submitted to the public information officer of the concerned public authority, there is no question for any authority established under the RTI Act, 2005, to provide any information to anyone. 
The bench said that the directions of the information commissioner requiring the PMO to provide the specific number and year of the degree and PG degree to the Delhi University and Gujarat University office to facilitate the university to search and provide any documents relating to it, and further directing the public information officer of the Delhi University and the Gujarat University (the original petitioner) to search for the information regarding the degrees and provide them to the appellant, were “directly hit by Section 8(1)(e) and (j) of the RTI Act, 2005”.
“None of the information directed to be disclosed can be said to be necessary for disclosure in public interest or larger public interest,” it said.
The bench went on to add, “Even a public servant being a citizen of the country cannot be compelled to disclose his personal information to the public merely because he is holding a public office or is a public servant, unless and until there is an obligation upon him to disclose or the public authority with whom the information is available is obliged to disclose under the RTI Act, 2005.”