No records of RTI training being provided to PIOs

New Indian Express: Coimbatore: Friday, 01 May 2026.
PIO of DEE forwarded TNIE’s petition to district officers, asking them to provide the details instead of responding directly.

In a recent reply to a Right to Information (RTI) petition filed by TNIE, it was revealed that the Department of School Education has no details on the conduct of RTI training for its Public Information Officers (PIOs) in the respective education offices in previous years.
Following information from PIOs that the department had not conducted RTI training for them, TNIE sought details on how many RTI training programmes had been conducted for staff over the past two decades.
The PIO of the Directorate of Elementary Education (DEE) forwarded TNIE's petition to district-level officers, directing them to provide the details instead of furnishing the information themselves.
Notably, PIO of the director's office of school education said that it is considered that information can be provided only from current files and records under Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act.
A PIO in office of a Chief Educational Officer in a district, on conditions of anonymity, told TNIE that in the two decades since the implementation of the RTI Act, the school education department has not provided RTI training to staff serving as PIOs.
He said that officers should regularly provide RTI training to ensure staffs are well-informed, and that proper training records should be maintained in offices. "As there has been no training, PIOs at the district level are unaware of the RTI Act. As a result, RTI petitioners do not receive proper information and instead get tactical information in a mechanical manner, with officials refusing to provide complete information or even giving false information. The objective of the RTI Act has been undermined, and citizens are unable to assess the department's transparency," he alleged.
"For instance, due to lack of knowledge, a block educational officer in a district had provided a teacher's personal details and photographs to a petitioner under the RTI Act. Before sharing such information, the PIO should have sought the concerned teacher's consent. If the department had provided regular training, these incidents would not have happened. There are several incidents like this," he pointed out.
RTI activist P Arulkumar said, "The school education department has already clarified under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act that 'information' includes any material in any form, including records, memos, emails, circulars, orders, log books, etc., which can be provided to applicants. But, in reply to TNIE's petition, they said that only current files and records are considered and can be provided under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. It is a contradiction and shows that officer is unaware of RTI Act," he alleged.
"Central Information Commission said that advocates cannot use the RTI Act by filing applications to seek details related to cases they are handling for their clients. But whether PIOs in this department are aware of this or not," he said.
School education secretary B Chandra Mohan was not available for comment.

PIC penalises LDA officer for ‘wilful’ RTI violations : By Asif Mehmood Butt

News Pakistan: Lahore: Friday, 01 May 2026.

The Punjab Information Commission building. The News/File

The Punjab Information Commission (PIC) has imposed a fine of Rs50,000 on a senior official of the Lahore Development Authority (LDA) for persistent failure to provide information sought under the Punjab Transparency and Right to Information Act 2013, in a case that underscores systemic gaps in compliance with transparency laws.
The penalty was awarded to the Public Information Officer (PIO) and Deputy Director Saad Bin Tariq in a complaint filed by citizen Mehr Muhammad Nadeem who had sought inspection of project sites and official records related to multiple development schemes in Lahore.
According to the commission’s detailed order issued on April 6, 2026, the complaint had remained pending since November 11, 2025, and was fixed for hearing on eight occasions. The PIO appeared only once on January 14, 2026 to seek time for compliance but failed to attend subsequent hearings or respond to a show-cause notice issued under Section 15 of the RTI law. Consequently, the commission imposed a fine of Rs50,000 on the PIO, directing that the amount be deducted from his salary. When contacted, Saad Bin Tariq denied knowledge of the development.

Punjab info panel recommends action against Kharar EO for RTI delay : By Hillary Victor

Hindustan Times: Chandigarh: Friday, 01 May 2026.
The commission granted the state government the liberty to transfer or reassign the staff concerned, including the EO, if deemed necessary
The Punjab state information commission (PSIC) has recommended disciplinary action against the executive officer (EO) of Kharar municipal council and other officials for delay in processing Right to Information (RTI) applications, and repeatedly ignoring the commission’s directions.

The case was filed by Rajiv Mohammad of Kharar, Mohali, who sought information related to administrative and local issues concerning the functioning of the nagar council.
EO Sukhdev Singh, who also serves as the public information officer (PIO) of the nagar council, was named the respondent.
After not receiving the requested information, the appellant approached the first appellate authority – Mohali additional deputy commissioner (urban development) – and later filed a second appeal before the commission.
Despite a formal notice sent through registered post, the EO failed to submit a reply, take action on the RTI application or appear before the commission on January 22, 2026.
Taking a serious view of the non-compliance, the commission issued a show-cause notice to the officer and scheduled another hearing on March 19, 2026. However, the EO again failed to appear, and no written submissions or representation were made on his behalf. The commission observed that such repeated absence indicated a willful disregard of its orders and a clear violation of the RTI Act.
Following this, chief information commissioner Inderpal Singh recommended disciplinary action against the officer. The commission granted the state government the liberty to transfer or reassign the staff concerned, including the EO, if deemed necessary. The matter has now been listed for hearing on May 12, in Chandigarh.

Kashmir Food Safety Wing Hit by Staff Crunch and Case Backlog, RTI Reveals

Kashmir Life: Srinagar: Friday, 01 May 2026.

The Food Safety Department in Kashmir is grappling with manpower shortages, limited laboratory infrastructure and a mounting backlog of cases, reveals official information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act by activist MM Shuja.
The RTI reply states that 25 posts are lying vacant in the Kashmir division, including 5 gazetted and 20 non-gazetted posts. It said that against a sanctioned strength of 13 gazetted posts, only 8 are in position, while in the non-gazetted category, 41 officials are working against 61 sanctioned posts.
Regarding budget utilisation, the reply states that the department has consistently utilised most of its allocated funds over the last five financial years. In 2025–26, out of Rs 878.02 lakh allocated, Rs 868.30 lakh was spent.
Similarly, Rs 786.85 lakh out of Rs 795.57 lakh was spent in 2024–25, Rs 738.98 lakh out of Rs 767.69 lakh in 2023–24, Rs 721.08 lakh out of Rs 736.84 lakh in 2022–23 and Rs 614.10 lakh out of Rs 621.73 lakh in 2021–22.
Regarding inspections, the reply states that figures show a fluctuating trend over the years. While 13,201 inspections were conducted in 2021–22, the number declined to 10,920 in 2025–26. The figures stood at 12,068 in 2022–23, 11,873 in 2023–24 and 12,204 in 2024–25.
The RTI also reveals limited sampling in certain categories. “Only 29 egg samples were collected, all of which were found conforming to standards. However, in meat quality checks carried out during 2025, 104 samples were lifted, out of which 30 were found substandard, unsafe or with labelling defects,” it reads. It added that action was taken under relevant provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
As per the RTI, 1,011 civil cases are pending as of February 28, 2026, with Rs 1.16 crore in fines imposed.
Additionally, 84 criminal cases have been registered, with fines amounting to Rs 4.46 lakh. The department has also issued 1,499 challans, collecting around Rs 18.89 lakh in penalties.
The reply further states that over the past five years, 1,145 civil cases have resulted in convictions, while only 7 criminal cases have ended in conviction, indicating low conversion in criminal enforcement.
The RTI states that the Kashmir division currently has only one functional food testing laboratory at Dalgate Srinagar, along with six mobile food testing vans. Samples are also sent to national-level laboratories for advanced analysis.
Notably, the department has disclosed that ‘no Detailed Project Report (DPR)’ has been prepared or submitted so far for establishing modern food testing laboratories or strengthening monitoring systems.
Officials said that district-level food safety offices are operational across Kashmir, headed by designated officers and supported by field staff. However, the existing manpower shortage continues to affect enforcement on the ground. (KNO)

Arunachal: DPGC Hosts National Seminar on RTI

Arunachal24: Kamki: Friday, 01 May 2026.
Scholars and officials discuss the role of RTI in promoting transparency, accountability, and citizen empowerment in governance.

The Department of Political Science at Donyi Polo Government College (DPGC), in collaboration with its Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC), organised a one-day national seminar on “Role of Right to Information in Promoting Transparency and Accountability” on April 30.
Sponsored by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, the seminar brought together faculty members, research scholars, and students from various institutions, with a total of 88 participants attending the programme.
The event was inaugurated by Tamo Riba, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamba, as Chief Guest. Tejum Padu, Vice Chancellor of North East Frontier Technical University (NEFTU), attended as Guest of Honour, while Sailajananda Saikia, Dean of the Faculty of Environmental Sciences at Rajiv Gandhi University, participated as the Resource Person.
The programme began with a welcome song by sixth-semester students and was anchored by Dr. Gektum Tangu. In his welcome address, Principal Dr. Gomo Karbak highlighted the continued relevance of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, describing it as a key instrument for ensuring transparency and accountability in governance.
In the keynote address, Prof. Saikia elaborated on the role of the RTI Act in empowering citizens by enabling access to information held by public authorities. He noted that transparency mechanisms and public scrutiny can act as deterrents to corruption and improve institutional functioning.
Dr. Padu, in his address, described the RTI Act as a fundamental tool for citizens, emphasising its role in strengthening awareness of rights and encouraging participatory governance. Chief Guest Riba urged students to utilise the RTI mechanism responsibly, acknowledging its potential as a legitimate instrument for seeking accountability.
The technical session, chaired by Prof. Saikia and anchored by Dr. Dipak Sharma, featured presentations of 15 research papers examining various aspects of the RTI Act, including its implementation, challenges, and impact on democratic governance.
The seminar concluded with a valedictory session during which certificates were distributed to paper presenters in recognition of their contributions. The vote of thanks was delivered by Mrs. Dombi Boje Potom, Head of the Department of Political Science, who acknowledged the participation of attendees and the efforts of the organising team.
The event served as a platform for academic engagement on issues of transparency, governance, and citizen empowerment, particularly in the context of Arunachal Pradesh.

Centre silent on compensatory afforestation as forest land diverted for projects; RTI reveals lapses : CP Sreeharshan

Mathrubhumi: New Delhi: Thursday, 30 April 2026.
Even as the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change continues to divert large stretches of protected forest land for development projects, it remains silent on whether compensatory afforestation is being carried out in return. Between February and June 2025 alone, more than 3,457 hectares of forest land were cleared for such projects.

Aerial view of Andaman Nicobar Island. Photo: P Venkidesh

In a reply under the Right to Information Act, the ministry said it does not maintain data on whether the land and funds required for compensatory afforestation were secured while approving the diversion of these forest areas. While the ministry informed Parliament that protected forests account for 5.4 per cent of India’s total geographical area, concerns are growing that the lack of clarity over afforestation measures could result in significant depletion of forest cover.
The Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife is responsible for clearing large-scale diversion of forest land for development projects. Since 2014, nearly 97 per cent of the projects placed before the committee have involved land located near protected forest areas. Its own rules of procedure state that decisions concerning protected forests must contribute to the improvement of wildlife habitats.
However, minutes of 58 meetings of the Standing Committee, accessed under the Right to Information Act, suggest that the panel has moved away from the framework of forest conservation. The lack of clarity has emerged from replies obtained by Prakriti Srivastava, a former Indian Forest Service officer from the Kerala cadre.
In three meetings held in 2020, approval was granted for the diversion of 1,792 hectares of forest land. Between January and June 2021 alone, permissions were issued for the transfer of more than 14,000 hectares of forest land.
Under the law, whenever forest land is diverted for non-forest purposes, an equivalent area of non-forest land must be earmarked for compensatory afforestation. In addition, an amount equal to the total market value of the diverted forest land must be deposited into the afforestation fund. However, when asked whether these conditions were complied with in the case of the 3,457 hectares of forest land diverted last year, the ministry responded that no such information was available.
While minutes of Standing Committee meetings held before 2014 recorded detailed discussions and dissenting views, no such information appears in meeting records after 2014, raising concerns over a lack of transparency in the committee’s functioning.
The Supreme Court had ruled on November 13, 2000, that the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife does not have statutory authority to de-notify wildlife sanctuaries or national parks without prior permission from the apex court. However, when asked whether this directive was followed in relation to the controversial Andaman project, the response stated that no information was available.
There is also a provision requiring the Wildlife Board to submit a report to the ministry every 10 years after assessing the status of wildlife conservation. The RTI reply stated that no information was available on this matter as well.
Major controversial projects:

• The Great Andaman Project in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands was approved in January 2021. Galathibey Wildlife Sanctuary and Megapod Sanctuary were given away. This is a centre for rare sea turtles.
• The Kachua Wildlife Sanctuary, located on the banks of the Ganges in Varanasi, has been given over to inland waterways and tourism. It is a habitat for sea turtles and dolphins.
• In the 86th meeting of the committee held in October last year, 262 sq km of the Pamed Wildlife Sanctuary in Chhattisgarh was given over to the CRPF for a Jungle Warfare College.

Big Moment for Exam Transparency Supreme Court to Clarify If PSC Can Deny Answer Sheets Despite RTI

 Indian Masterminds: New Delhi: Thursday, 30 April 2026.
The Supreme Court will examine if State PSC rules can override the RTI Act on answer sheet disclosure. The verdict may change transparency rules for government exams in India.

The Supreme Court RTI answer sheets case has become a major legal issue in India, as it will decide whether State Public Service Commission (PSC) rules can override the Right to Information Act, 2005 in matters of answer sheet disclosure.
This case is important for lakhs of government job aspirants. The Supreme Court will examine if candidates can demand answer sheets before the stage fixed by PSC authorities or must follow internal rules.
The final decision may reshape transparency norms in recruitment exams across India.
Details of the Supreme Court RTI Answer Sheets Case
The Supreme Court is set to examine a key legal question:

• Can a State Public Service Commission decide when exam-related information is disclosed?
• Or can candidates use the RTI Act, 2005 to access answer sheets earlier?

According to the report, the Court will decide whether PSC rules can limit access to information, even when RTI law allows disclosure.
In simple terms, the conflict is between:

• Administrative rules of PSCs  vs
• Legal rights under RTI Act

Why Supreme Court RTI Answer Sheets Case Is Important
This issue directly affects:

• Government job aspirants
• Competitive exam transparency
• Recruitment fairness

Many candidates want early access to answer sheets to:

• Check evaluation errors
• Challenge results
• Ensure fairness

But PSCs often restrict access until the recruitment process is complete.
Legal Conflict: RTI Act vs PSC Rules
RTI Act, 2005
The RTI Act gives citizens the right to access information held by public authorities.

• Promotes transparency
• Ensures accountability
• Applies to exam bodies

PSC Rules
State PSCs create their own rules for recruitment exams.

• They may delay answer sheet disclosure
• They argue early access can affect exam integrity

Core Legal Question
The Supreme Court will decide:
Whether PSC rules can legally override RTI rights.
Background: What Courts Have Said Earlier
Transparency Favored

• Courts have often supported transparency in exams
• Example: Marks are not confidential and can be shared under RTI

Limited Disclosure

• Some rulings restrict access to others’ answer sheets
• Authorities may allow inspection but not copies

Recent Developments

• In some cases, candidates were allowed to inspect answer sheets even before final results
• Courts stressed that procedural rules cannot block legal rights

Key Issues Before the Supreme Court
1. Timing of Disclosure
Can candidates demand answer sheets immediately after exams?
Or only after the final result?
2. Transparency vs Confidentiality

• Transparency ensures fairness
• Confidentiality protects exam process

3. Uniform Policy Needed
Different states follow different rules
This case may create a nationwide standard
Supreme Court RTI Answer Sheets Case: Possible Outcomes
If RTI Act Prevails

• Candidates can access answer sheets earlier
• Transparency in exams will increase
• PSCs may need to change rules

If PSC Rules Prevail

• Access may remain restricted
• Candidates must wait for official stages
• Less immediate transparency

Telangana DEO fined for English reply to Telugu query

New Indian Express: Nalgonda: Thursday, 30 April 2026.
However, on July 26, the authorities reportedly sent an irrelevant reply in English instead of furnishing the requested information.

State Information Commissioner Sri Deshala Bhupal congratulates 8-year-old Kannekanti Karthik for his RTI query and for following it up, in Nalgonda on Wednesday(Photo | Express)

The State Information Commission has imposed a fine on the District Educational Officer (DEO), Nalgonda, for replying in English to a student’s query on the implementation of Telugu in the district education department and for seeking a fee for information that should have been provided free of cost.
The case arose after eight-year-old Kannekanti Karthik, a student of MVR School living near Saibaba temple in Shivajinagar, Nalgonda, filed an application under Section 4(1)(B) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act on July 15 last year.
Karthik told TNIE that he had sought information on 17 points, including the implementation of the Telugu language in the Nalgonda district education department, the appointment process of all staff members working in the DEO office, their specific responsibilities and their salary details.
However, on July 26, the authorities reportedly sent an irrelevant reply in English instead of furnishing the requested information. Karthik said that after he appealed against receiving a response in English, the office sent a reply in Telugu stating that he would have to pay a fee to obtain the information.
He said the authorities did not specify the amount to be paid or the grounds for seeking the fee, though the information ought to have been provided free of cost under Section 4(1)(B) of the RTI Act.
DEO slapped with Rs 5K fine
After receiving no response to his appeal submitted to the DEO on August 2, Karthik approached the State Information Commission on September 3 and lodged a complaint over the demand for payment.
State Information Commissioner (SIC) Deshala Bhupal conducted an inquiry at the Nalgonda collectorate on Tuesday. During the hearing, SIC took exception to the failure to provide information, the use of English in response to a query concerning Telugu implementation, and the demand for a fee contrary to RTI rules. He imposed a fine of Rs 5,000 on DEO B Bhikshapati for negligence of duty. The SIC directed that the amount be paid within two days, failing which the penalty would rise to Rs 25,000.

RTI activists flag bureaucratic bias as state sets eligibility norms for info commissioners

Times of India: Pune: Thursday, 30 April 2026.
RTI activists have raised fresh concerns over bureaucratic appointments to key transparency posts after the state govt introduced new eligibility criteria for information commissioners.

A govt resolution (GR) issued on Monday laid down age, education and experience norms for the posts of state chief information commissioner (SCIC) and state information commissioners (SICs), marking a shift from the earlier system where no such formal criteria existed.
Officials said the move followed a high-level committee meeting on April 24 to finalise terms for advertisements for the posts. "We used to have even 12th pass candidates and 19-year-olds applying. The new norms will help streamline recruitment and ensure suitable candidates are selected," a senior official said.
A senior official said that the criteria will definitely be better, but it is possible that more retired bureaucrats will be considered.
However, activists argued that the revised rules could tilt the selection process in favour of retired bureaucrats, diluting the spirit of the Right to Information framework.
RTI activist Vijay Kumbhar said, "The RTI Act is already on its deathbed, and these rules will deal another blow. The new conditions are not part of the original law and appear to favour bureaucratic appointments, even though the Act envisages eminent persons from public life."
Under the new norms, applicants must be "persons of eminence in public life" with knowledge of law, governance, journalism, social service, science and technology, or management as provided under the RTI Act, 2005.
The GR mandates a minimum of 20 years' experience for the SCIC post and 15 years for SICs. It also states that preference will be given to candidates with senior-level experience in govt, semi-govt bodies, PSUs, autonomous institutions, reputed private sector organisations, or social/charitable entities a clause that has triggered concern among transparency advocates.
Applicants must be between 45 and 63 years of age, hold a graduate degree, and demonstrate knowledge of the RTI Act, quasi-judicial procedures, and governance principles such as transparency and accountability. They must also submit affidavits declaring no criminal cases or pending disciplinary proceedings.
Appointments to these posts are made by a selection committee headed by the chief minister, typically drawing from individuals with diverse professional backgrounds.
While the govt maintains that the norms will bring clarity and improve the quality of appointments, activists said the criteria could narrow the pool and sideline independent voices, reinforcing long-standing concerns over bureaucratic dominance in information commissions.
"This risks turning independent oversight bodies into extensions of the administration," another activist said, calling for wider consultations before implementing such changes.

Delhi High Court Grants Additional Time to Delhi University in PM Modi Degree Disclosure Appeals

Law Beat: New Delhi: Wednesday, 29 April 2026.
The Delhi High Court on Monday granted an additional two weeks to Delhi University to file its objections in connection with applications seeking condonation of delay in appeals concerning the disclosure of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s bachelor’s degree records.

The development comes in an ongoing legal battle that sits at the intersection of transparency under the Right to Information framework and the protection of personal academic records.
The matter is currently being heard by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.
During an earlier hearing in February 2026, the Bench had granted three weeks’ time to Delhi University to respond to the delay condonation applications and had listed the matter for April 27. However, with the university seeking further time, the Court has now extended the deadline by two additional weeks, signalling that the issue of delay remains a threshold question before the appeals can be considered on merits.
The matter originated from a Right to Information application filed by activist Neeraj Sharma, who had sought access to records of all students who cleared the Bachelor of Arts examination in 1978, the same year in which Prime Minister Modi is believed to have graduated from Delhi University.
Acting on this application, the Central Information Commission, in an order dated December 21, 2016, permitted inspection of such records. The CIC’s decision was widely debated, as it raised questions about the extent to which academic records, even of public figures, could be disclosed under the RTI Act.
The matter took a significant turn on August 25, 2024, when a single judge of the Delhi High Court set aside the CIC’s direction. The Court, in that ruling, effectively barred the disclosure of the records in question, thereby giving precedence to considerations of privacy and institutional control over academic data.
This decision prompted multiple appeals before the Division Bench.
The appeals have been filed by several petitioners, including Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh, RTI activist Neeraj Sharma, and advocate Mohd Irshad. They have argued that the single judge’s order suffers from fundamental legal infirmities and that the CIC’s directive allowing inspection of records ought to be restored.
According to the appellants, transparency in public life, especially concerning elected representatives, is an essential component of democratic accountability.
However, before the Division Bench can examine the substantive issues raised in the appeals, it must first determine whether the delay in filing them can be condoned.
This procedural aspect has assumed central importance in the proceedings. In November 2025, the High Court had already flagged the delay and directed Delhi University to file its response explaining the reasons for not filing objections within the prescribed time.
The Court’s decision to grant additional time suggests a cautious approach, ensuring that all parties are given adequate opportunity to present their case before any determination is made.
The outcome of the delay condonation applications will be crucial, as it will decide whether the appeals are maintainable and whether the Court will proceed to adjudicate the larger legal questions involved.
The case continues to generate public and legal interest, as it touches upon broader issues such as the scope of the RTI Act, the balance between transparency and privacy, and the extent to which personal records of public figures can be subject to public scrutiny.
It also raises questions about institutional responsibilities in maintaining and disclosing archival academic data.
The Court’s eventual ruling on both the procedural and substantive aspects is likely to have significant implications for future RTI-related disputes involving personal information and public accountability.
Case Title: University of Delhi v. Neeraj

CIC pulls up NDMC for vague RTI reply on Gole Market demolition

Daily Pioneer: New Delhi: Wednesday, 29 April 2026.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) has pulled up the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) for a “vague and non-specific” RTI reply on demolition and alleged reconstruction of shanties near Gole Market, whereas the civic body had cited unavailability of police force and later, the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) for not carrying out further action.

The appellant had sought details on whether around 45 “jhuggis” (shanties) were demolished in March 2022 and how nearly 100 structures allegedly came up at the same site again, along with information on action taken by authorities.
However, the NDMC’s central public information officer (CPIO) denied answering most queries, citing section 2(f) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
On the issue of reconstructed jhuggis, the NDMC had said demolition action was planned but “due to unavailability of police force, proposed action for removal of reconstructed jhuggies has not been executed. Thereafter, due to enforcement of Model Code of Conduct, demolition action has been kept in abeyance”. Taking exception, Information Commissioner Vinod Kumar Tiwari noted that “the CPIO has denied information on point Nos. 1 to 3 by invoking section 2(f) of the RTI Act in a mechanical manner, without adequately examining whether the information sought is available on record”.
Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005, defines “information” as any material in any form-records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advice, press releases, circulars, contracts, reports, samples or data held by or under the control of a public authority. Tiwari further stressed that the queries were related to “action taken by the public authority which should have been provided to the extent available on record”.
“The Respondent ought to have provided a clear, categorical and record-based point-wise reply instead of giving a vague and non-specific response,” the order said, adding that even the response on the reconstruction issue lacked clarity and completeness.
Directing corrective steps, the CIC ordered the NDMC to issue a “revised, point-wise and specific reply” based on available records. It specifically instructed that on the demolition aspect, the authority must disclose “the factual position based on records, including providing the file/firm number, relevant orders, or any documentary evidence pertaining to demolition action, if available”. The commission also mandated that if any information is unavailable, “the same shall be clearly stated”.

RTI Belagavi Bench aims to dispose of 7k application annually: Commissioner

Times of India: Belagavi: Wednesday, 29 April 2026.

Karnataka Information Commission's Belagavi Bench commissioner Prakash Narayan Channal said that the number of applications coming to the Belagavi Bench under the Right to Information Act (RTI) has increased, and a plan has been formulated to hear and dispose of 6,000 to 7,000 applications per year.
In a release, Channal said that the RTI Act is a solid foundation of democracy and is pro-people. The RTI is the most revolutionary law in independent India. The RTI came into force on Oct 12, 2005, with the aim of making govt information easily accessible to the common people. Karnataka is the first state to implement this Act.
The Karnataka Right to Information Commission has disposed of a record 40,000 second appeal cases in the country in the last one year. The Karnataka Information Commission's Belagavi Bench is hearing about 40-60 applications every day, offline and online. Applications of people from rural areas are being prioritised. Inquiries on drinking water, roads, power supply, cleanliness, health and basic infrastructure issues in rural areas are being resolved.
Disciplinary action is being taken against the officers who do not provide information. Recommendations of the inquiry committee, fines and compensation orders are being made to the applicants, he added.

CIC pulls up DDA for denying RTI on school land allotment

Edex Live: New Delhi: Wednesday, 29 April 2026.
The case relates to a school in Phase-3, Ashok Vihar, where an RTI applicant sought details on whether the land was allotted at market or concessional rates

Raising concerns over transparency in the allocation of public land to private schools, the Central Information Commission has questioned the Delhi Development Authority for denying information under the RTI Act, noting that the matter involves students' interest.
The case relates to a school in Phase-3, Ashok Vihar, where an RTI applicant sought details on whether the land was allotted at market or concessional rates and the terms of such allotment.
The applicant claimed that the school's claim of being "self-owned" was being used to justify fee hikes affecting around 6,000 students.
In its response, the DDA denied the requested information by invoking Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, stating that the information sought "relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual."
The First Appellate Authority upheld this response, terming the reply satisfactory.
However, Information Commissioner Sanjeev Kumar Jindal said in the order that the denial of information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act appeared to be a "mechanical reproduction" of the provision without adequate justification and noted that the matter involves students' interest.
It held notes that "information on the land status asked in the RTI application can be given by the respondents" and directed the respondent CPIO to issue a revised reply clearly stating the factual position within 21 days.
The commission also flagged the absence of the respondent during the hearing, calling it a disregard for quasi-judicial proceedings, and issued a show-cause notice for possible penal action.
In a separate case, another RTI application sought information about land allotment to a private school in Kailash Colony.
The applicant asked when the land was allotted, whether it was granted at a concessional rate, the total area allocated, the price, the conditions tied to the allotment, and related documents, such as lease agreements and allotment letters. Concerns were raised about the enforcement of conditions associated with concessional allotments.
With both the appellant and the respondent absent during the hearing in the second matter, the commission directed the respondent CPIO to submit a written explanation for the absence despite due notice, warning of action under the RTI Act. PTI MHS MPL

Fest Violence, RTI Dispute Lead To Suspension Of 30 Students At Hansraj College : Yekkirala Akshitha

Morning Voice: New Delhi: Tuesday, 28 April 2026.
Fest Violence, RTI Dispute Lead to Suspension Of 30 Students at Hansraj College

The administration of Hansraj College has suspended around 30 students, including four office-bearers of the students’ union, over allegations ranging from violence during the annual fest to defaming the institution on social media, triggering a major controversy on the campus of Delhi University.
The suspensions were issued through five separate notices between April 20 and April 25 following incidents of alleged violence, misconduct and disruption of campus order during the college’s annual fest held on April 8 and 9. Videos circulating on social media reportedly showed clashes among students during the event.
The first notice, issued on April 20, targeted former student union president Parth Srivastava, accusing him of indiscipline, defaming the institution and using derogatory language against teaching and non-teaching staff. The college said he had been given several opportunities to appear before the disciplinary committee along with his parents but failed to do so, and when he appeared on March 23, he neither acknowledged the allegations nor expressed remorse.
Srivastava rejected the charges and said the action was arbitrary, claiming he had raised questions about administrative decisions and filed RTI applications seeking information on alleged irregularities. He has also moved the Delhi High Court challenging the suspension.
Subsequent notices suspended 14 students over alleged violence and misconduct during the fest, four students for physical violence on campus, and seven students for allegedly defaming the college through social media posts that were said to have harmed the academic environment.
The final order issued on April 25 placed four elected office-bearers of the Hansraj College Students’ Union under interim suspension pending disciplinary proceedings. The orders bar the students from entering the campus except to appear for examinations and internal assessments, while the duration of suspension has not been specified.
The action has drawn sharp criticism from the Delhi University Students’ Union, which termed it a “brazen attack on student democracy” and demanded immediate revocation of the suspensions. Student groups, including the Student Federation of India, also condemned the move and called for protests, alleging the administration targeted student leaders and dissenting voices without a fair process.
The controversy comes amid wider tensions on campus that began earlier this year after protests over the alleged use of college premises for the principal’s son’s wedding, a dispute that escalated into broader questions about governance, transparency and student dissent within the institution.

88 Tiger Deaths Unresolved Since 2020, Multiple Unexplained, Reveals RTI : Reported By Anurag Dwary

NDTV: Madhya Pradesh: Tuesday, 28 April 2026.
Right to Information (RTI) documents have revealed that 88 tiger deaths recorded between 2020 and 2021 remain unresolved, with no confirmed cause, no completed investigation, and no accountability fixed.

Activist Ajay Dubey said, "This is not closure, this is burial"

In a development that raises serious concerns over wildlife monitoring in India, Right to Information (RTI) documents have revealed that 88 tiger deaths recorded between 2020 and 2021 remain unresolved, with no confirmed cause, no completed investigation, and no accountability fixed.
The cases span major reserves such as Bandhavgarh, Kanha, Panna, Kaziranga, Tadoba, Dudhwa, and Corbett, including deaths reported from within protected areas. In several instances classified as "seizures", tiger parts were recovered, indicating possible poaching, yet investigations have not reached legal closure.
The records show that these deaths, spread across states including Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Assam, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, and Uttarakhand, are marked as "US" (Under Scrutiny/Unnatural), but in many cases, the cause of death column remains blank.
Madhya Pradesh, which has the highest tiger population in the country, accounts for a significant share of the pending cases, including deaths reported from core habitats like Bandhavgarh, Kanha, and Panna. In Maharashtra, several cases have been reported from Tadoba-Andhari and adjoining areas such as Chandrapur, including regions outside reserve boundaries.
In Assam's Kaziranga, multiple tiger deaths since 2020 remain unexplained despite the park's high level of protection. Similar concerns have been flagged in Karnataka's Nagarhole and Uttar Pradesh's Dudhwa, where cases marked as "seizures" suggest poaching, but no conclusive legal outcome has been reported.
Uttarakhand also shows a backlog of cases, including from Corbett Tiger Reserve and surrounding areas such as Ramnagar and Shyampur. In some instances, deaths dating back to 2020 are still awaiting final forensic reports.
Experts point out that several of these cases lack basic documentation, including post-mortem reports, forensic analysis, and histopathology, raising concerns that delays may have compromised key evidence.
Wildlife activists warn that without establishing the cause of death, it becomes difficult to pursue criminal cases or fix responsibility, potentially allowing wildlife crime to go unpunished.
In a January 2026 directive, the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) has asked states to submit pending reports by January 27, failing which the cases may be closed.
Activists have raised concerns over the move, arguing that closure without conclusions could weaken accountability. RTI activist Ajay Dubey said, "This is not closure, this is burial. You are wiping out evidence of poaching and failure from the national record."

First appellate authority has no powers to impose cost: GIC

Times of India: Chandigarh: Tuesday, 28 April 2026.
The Gujarat Information Commission (GIC) has set aside an order imposing a Rs 1,000 cost on an RTI applicant and directed that the amount be refunded within 10 days, holding that the first appellate authority had no legal power to levy such a penalty.

The order was issued during an appeal filed by Vishal Panchmatiya against the public information officer (PIO) and the first appellate authority of the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Jamnagar. Panchmatiya had sought a copy of an application filed during mediation proceedings, along with related remarks.
The PIO denied the information, citing provisions of the Mediation Act, 2023, and relevant rules that mandate confidentiality of mediation proceedings. The first appellate authority upheld the denial and additionally imposed a Rs 1,000 cost on the applicant, alleging repeated filing of similar RTI applications.
During the hearing, the commission examined records and observed that Panchmatiya had not filed multiple applications in a manner that could be termed misuse of the RTI Act. It noted that there was no evidence to support the claim of repeated or frivolous applications within a single year.
The commission further ruled that the first appellate authority does not have statutory power under the RTI Act to impose monetary penalties or costs on applicants. "Such an order is beyond jurisdiction," the commission observed while quashing the order imposing the cost.
However, on the issue of disclosure, the commission upheld the PIO's decision, stating that the requested information pertained to mediation proceedings, which are protected under confidentiality clauses of the Mediation Act, 2023, and relevant civil procedure mediation rules. It added that no larger public interest had been established to override these provisions.
Accordingly, while denying the information sought, the commission directed the PIO to refund the Rs 1,000 collected from the applicant within 10 days of the order.

RTI can’t be misused to settle personal scores: Punjab info panel

Times of India: Chandigarh: Tuesday, 28 April 2026.
Observing that the Right to Information (RTI) Act cannot be used to settle personal scores, the Punjab State Information Commission has said vexatious and non-public-interest applications can be rejected at the level of a public information officer (PIO). It held that such requests disrupt the functioning of public authorities and undermine the spirit of the law.

The observation was made by state information commissioner Pooja Gupta while disposing of an appeal filed by a Mohali resident who sought information from the municipal corporation, Zirakpur, Mohali district.
During the last hearing, the appellant submitted that complete information was not provided even after two years and sought penal action against the Public Information Officer (PIO) under Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005. The appellant also requested permission for another inspection of records, stating that his representative was not aware of the contents of the RTI application.
The respondent PIO, represented by a draftsman along with counsel, said the appellant filed an RTI application seeking voluminous information and, despite a demand for the prescribed fee, requested inspection instead of depositing the copying charges. The appellant was allowed inspection as per the commission's order dated July 9, 2025. During the inspection, 100 pages were handed over to the appellant free of cost, but he did not pay any further fee and is therefore not entitled to raise any deficiency, as he sought extensive information running into thousands of pages. They further submitted that the appellant habitually seeks voluminous information without any public interest and avoids paying fees on one pretext or another. The PIO submitted that the original record produced before the commission comprised 76,481 pages and that the appellant could obtain copies at his own expense.
After examining the case record and the averments narrated by the respondent PIO, the commission noted that it is ascertained that the appellant is unnecessarily harassing the respondent PIO and wasting the time of the department as well as the commission. Five hearings were held in the matter, and the appellant was given sufficient opportunities to inspect the records. It also observed that the appellant sent a representative who was not aware of the facts of the case, as admitted by the appellant during the proceedings, which shows that the appellant has no public interest in obtaining the information and is instead harassing the respondent PIO. The commission further held that the information sought was vague and voluminous, and that collecting and compiling such data is diverting the resources of the public authority.
Concluding that the appellant was misusing the RTI Act, the commission ruled that such applications, not filed in public interest, can be dismissed at the initial stage. It held that no further cause of action remained in the matter and disposed of the appeal, directing that copies of the order be sent to both parties.

State introduces eligibility criteria for RTI commissioners : By Yogesh Naik

Hindustan Times: Mumbai: Tuesday, 28 April 2026.
RTI activists alleged that the new norms reopened the door for bureaucratic appointments to these posts

The Maharashtra government has introduced age-, education- and experience-based norms for selection of the Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners, following a high level committee meeting last week to finalise terms and conditions for advertisements for the posts. A government resolution (GR) regarding the same was issued on Monday, marking a change in selection policy as there were no conditions regarding age, education and experience till now.
"We used to have 12th pass candidates and 19-year-olds apply for RTI commissioner posts. The new norms will help streamline the recruitment process and select the right candidates,” an official said, requesting anonymity.
RTI activists, however, alleged that the new norms reopened the door for bureaucratic appointments to these posts.
The State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioners are appointed based on recommendations of a selection committee headed by the chief minister. Typically, preference is given to individuals in public life with wide knowledge and experience in fields such as law, administration, journalism, social service, science and technology, management, or related areas.
During the meeting of the high level committee on April 24 to finalise terms and conditions for advertisements for the posts, a decision was taken to fix the eligibility criteria, officials said. Accordingly, as per the GR issued on Monday, applicants for the posts must be persons of eminence in public life as per RTI Act, 2005.
Applicants must possess knowledge in one or more of the following fields: law, governance, journalism, social service, science and technology, or management. They must have at least 20 years of experience in one or more of these fields for the State Chief Information Commissioner’s post, and 15 years of experience for the State Information Commissioner posts.
Preference would be given to those with experience in senior positions in government, semi-government, autonomous bodies, public sector, reputed private sector, or social/charitable organisations, the GR said.
With regards to age, applicants must be aged at least 45 years and not more than 63 years as per the date of application. They must be a graduate in any discipline, have knowledge of the RTI Act and related laws, understanding of quasi-judicial procedures, commitment to transparency, accountability and good governance, as well as administrative leadership and decision-making ability.
Applicants must also submit an affidavit stating that no criminal offense was registered or pending against them; in case they are in government/semi-government service, they must submit an affidavit saying no disciplinary proceedings were pending or proposed against them, the GR said
RTI activist Vijay Kumbhar said while the RTI Act was already on its deathbed, the state government had dealt another blow to the law.
“The new rules introduced by the state government have not only raised serious legal concerns but have also reopened the door for bureaucratic appointments to these posts. As per the RTI Act, information commissioners are expected to be eminent persons from public life. However, the government’s decision has introduced additional conditions that are not part of the original law and appear to favor the bureaucracy,” Kumbhar said.