Whispers Forum

The respondent informed that the RTI Application was filed by Ms. Saroj Gupta and as the information was sought regarding report of auditing pertaining to grant of said 3rd MACP of Sh. Mangat Goyal, the same was denied under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. It was counter argued by Sh. Mangat Goyal that the Appellant is his wife who had filed the RTI Application on his behalf seeking internal audit report related to him and denial of the information u/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act is wrong. The respondent further stated that the report is a 10 years old record and is not traceable in their official records. Considering the fact that Shri Mangat Goyal represented the Appellant during the hearing, the CIC ruled that the plea of exemption under Section 8(1)(j) does not survive. The CIC directed to examine the instant RTI Application and furnish a revised reply within four weeks. In the event, no records on such points are available in their office, the fact should be categorically reflected in the revised reply of the PIO.
Comments
It is preferable for an individual to file an application directly under the RTI Act instead of asking a friend or a relative to seek information on one’s behalf.
Citation: Saroj Gupta v. Sports Authority of India, Second Appeal No. CIC/SAOIN/A/2024/643474; Date of Decision: 22.01.2026
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an accomplished Right to Information (RTI) consultant who has worked for organisations such as IIM Indore, IIM Mumbai, IIM Visakhapatnam and ICAI. She is the co-author of two widely acclaimed books, PIO's Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. She conducts training programmes, workshops, and capacity-building sessions on the RTI Act. She also provides consultancy services on RTI implementation, compliance, and third-party audits. Her weekly article has been published on this website since 2008. Other articles and publications can be accessed on the RTI Foundation website at: www.rtifoundationofindia.com

I don't think Anil Chauhan will replace Doval as the next NSA. Chauhan is a career military man, and despite his scholarly pursuits and expertise in geopolitics, India needs an NSA who can handle internal security and diplomacy at the same time. Nevertheless, it is possible that Chauhan could be in the VIF to push a reformist position for the Indian military.
Kishore Anandan
No single power centre in TN
Not one power centre ha, ha. This is too bad for Tamil Nadu. CM should learn everything to improve our TN. Then only TVK will come to power again.
Ravi Appakutty

If there was a manipulation, would congress have won in Telangana Karnataka Kerala or TVK winning TN. In several states there were duplicate votes, many voters have moved to other cities and applied for new Aadhar Card Voter Card PAN Card without cancelling the earlier one ... And then when they get transferred yet again after five years, they do the same with cancelling their previous identity cards / documents. So the same person would have three and four sets of cards. This was a common thing that's why the SIR is cleansing all those duplicate triplicate cards, so that no illegals can vote on those "genuine" voter ID cards.
Dennis Collins
Deletion of illegal Bangladeshi voters
The pain is visible. The pain of deletion of illegal Bangladeshi voters through the SIR process which were the vote banks of congress. Well done sir, Gyanesh kumar sir.
Anuz Hazarika

This election commission matter needs to be resolved as soon as possible. It's the duty of the ruling government to restore the confidence which the election commission has lost in previous months because all those acquisitions which Rahul Gandhi has made, if even one percent of them is true then it is a matter of serious concern. If BJP can find the loopholes in the present election scenarios there is no guarantee that Congress will not do it. It is a matter of serious concern for a democratic country like India. We need to resolve it so that the confidence of this country can be restored.
Mohammad Fahad
More efficiently work
The biggest advantage of having ips officers from their own state is that they work more efficiently.
Dhirendra

Can repetition of an RTI application be a ground of refusal?

The Appellant sought details of income of Appellant’s estranged spouse. The Respondent stated that information has been initially denied to the Appellant under Section 8 (1)(j) of the RTI Act on receipt of objection letter from the third party under Section 11 of the RTI Act. However, upon receipt of hearing notice from the CIC, a revised reply as per RTI Act giving numeric figures of income sought has already been given to the appellant. The CIC noted that after initial denial of information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, the Respondent furnished a revised reply to the Appellant. During the hearing, it was also observed that similar Second Appeals of the Appellant was earlier heard and disposed of by the Commission bearing case File No. CIC/MP/A/2016/001539 dated 12.01.2017, CIC/LICOI/A/2019/162743 dated 10.08.2021 and CIC/LICOI/A/2023/148347 dated 16.04.2025. The CIC has been ordering relief in cases where the applicant’s spouse alleges marital discord and seeks information i.e. gross and net taxable income of their spouse in pursuance of a case pending for maintenance and the Respondent has already shared the generic details of income of Appellant’s estranged spouse vide written submission which is in the spirit of the RTI Act. The CIC held that once an RTI application is answered, the appellants shall refrain themselves from filing another RTI application against the public authority as once information is received and held by them or posted in public domain, because such information is deemed to have ceased to be 'held' by the public authority. Repetition shall be grounds for refusal.
Comments
Seeking the details of the spouse's income is not an uncommon issue in the RTI arena. The CIC has directed for the disclosure of gross income in some cases. In this case, the CIC has spoken out strongly against repeat RTI applications directing that ‘Repetition shall be ground of refusal’ creating a new ground for rejection of information.
Citation: Archana Singh v. LIC of India, CIC/LICOI/A/2024/108893, Date of Decision: 25.08.2025

Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an accomplished Right to Information (RTI) consultant currently working with the IIM Visakhapatnam. She is the co-author of two widely acclaimed books, PIO's Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. She conducts training programmes, workshops, and capacity-building sessions on the RTI Act. She also provides consultancy services on RTI implementation, compliance, and third-party audits. Her weekly article is being published on this website since 2008 other articles and publications can be accessed on the RTI Foundation website at: www.rtifoundationofindia.com

The appellant sought for the rank, name and marks secured by candidates for Labour Enforcement Officer separately in RT and interview and the total aggregate rank wise. On appeal, the FAA directed to furnish appropriate reply on this point. On second appeal, after the perusal of the FAA’s order, the CIC observed that the directions for disclosure of information were passed without application of mind, although the appellant had sought personal details including educational qualification of other candidates. The FAA’s order was set aside by the CIC regarding providing the educational details of candidates. It was held that personal details/ information of other candidates is held by the UPSC in a fiduciary relationship and is exempted under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2025.
Comments
Information about the educational qualification or the marks scored by the other candidates is often an issue raised in an application filed under the RTI Act. Understanding privacy and respecting the personal information is a responsibility entrusted to the PIO.
Citation: Rahul Kumar Pathak v. Union Public Service Commission, Second Appeal No. CIC/UPSCM/A/2024/650667; Date of Decision: 25.08.2025
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Vishakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books PIO’s Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. Her weekly article is being published since 2008 on this site. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and third party audit to individuals / organisations. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation at the link https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com