Monday, November 9, 2026
Live
“
“
Right to Information

RTI Corner

Key RTI rulings, CIC decisions and what they mean for citizens — archived by date.

0 posts 0 months Latest: 9 Nov 2026
  Browse by date   All posts384
  202632
  202545
  202447
  202348
  202242
  202142
  202037
  201931
  201837
  201723

November 2026 2 posts

Clear filter
Monday, 9 November 2026

Information concerning the death of an employee of a Second Schedule organisation

RTI Applications were filed seeking information in matters related to inquiry conducted relating to the death of an officer (I.C. No.81948P Captain Abhishek Mishra) by the father of the said deceased officer in Border Roads Task Force (BRTF). The appellant apprehended foul play and alleged corruption charge in the matter of death of his son. The CIC observed that the information sought concerns the death of an employee while in service, which directly attracts the human rights exception and in this matter, the appellant is not a stranger but the father of the deceased.
Comments
The appellant had lost his young son who was an army officer and was making efforts in pursuit of justice for his deceased son. The CIC has consistently held that next of kin (NOK) are entitled to inquiry records relating to death of the deceased officer in an organisation, which otherwise is exempted under 2nd schedule of RTI Act and in the instant matter as well, the Commission would reiterate that even the organisations listed in the Second Schedule are bound to disclose such information.
Citation: Santosh Kumar Mishra v. Ministry of Defence HQ 50 BRTF, File No: CIC/DODEF/A/2024/119747 with CIC/IARMY/A/2024/117327; Date of Decision: 23.01.2026
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
Monday, 2 November 2026

Without an enquiry in progress, can the exemption under section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act be invoked?

The appellant sought a copy of the Transfer application and the correspondence in respect of Sri. S.Ramesh Sunkasari Programme Executive AIR Hyderabad and also the order copy of the transfer order No: 07/01/23 dt 31/05/2023 from AIR Kothagudem to AIR Hyderabad. He sought the details of the staff and leave management, work flow order at AIR kothagudem for the period from Jan-2023 to June 2023 and the name of the sanctioning authority in respect of leave of the staff during the above period. He also sought the correspondence over e-office in respect of certain computer no's along with the reasons for inordinate delay in taking up the needful action. The Appellant stated that he works in the All India Radio (AIR) and one of his colleagues misbehaved with him. He raised complaints against the same, but no action was taken by the All India Radio. The Respondent submitted that an enquiry was ordered at that time based on the e-office files sought by the appellant and hence, the same was denied under section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, at that time. However, the respondent submitted that the aforesaid enquiry did not take place. The CIC observed that there is no on-going enquiry and hence, exemption under section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act is not applicable. The CIC directed to provide to give a revised reply to the appellant incorporating the information pertaining to the appellant, after redacting third-party information under section 10 of the RTI Act like officer’s names, contact details etc.,. Also, the respondent was directed to give a revised reply about the sanctioning authority (only designation) in respect of leave of the staff. In case, no such sanctioning authority has been notified, the respondent shall state the same explicitly in their revised reply.
Comments
8(1)(h) of the RTI Act permits denial of information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. If there is no enquiry, the mute question is whether it would ‘mpede’ the process of investigation.
Citation: S Ramesh Sunkasari v. All India Radio, File No: CIC/PBSEC/A/2024/121626; 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 is being published on this website since 2008. Other articles and publications can be accessed on the RTI Foundation website at: www.rtifoundationofindia.com