CIC Attains Full Strength With RK Goyal as Chief Information Commissioner; Eight ICs Appointed

Indian Mandarins: New Delhi: Sunday, 14 December 2025.

The Central Information Commission (CIC), the apex transparency watchdog, is finally set to operate at its full capacity for the first time in years, with the New Delhi establishment completing the high-level process to fill nine critical vacancies.
Indianmandarins has learnt that files pertaining to the appointment of the new Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and eight Information Commissioners (ICs) have reached the highest levels of the government and are expected to receive final endorsement shortly.
Currently, the headless CIC has only two Members Anandi Ramalingam (Former CMD, Bharat Electronics Ltd and Vinod Kumar Tiwari (Retd IFoS: HP) whhile eight posts of IC are laying vacant.
If the internal schedule holds, the President of India is expected to administer the oath of office to the next Chief Information Commissioner as early as next week. Following this, the new Chief IC will administer the oath to the eight Information Commissioners, bringing the Commission's total strength to 11 (Chief IC + 10 ICs).
The move comes as a major push to clear the substantial backlog of appeals and complaints under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, which has mounted while the Commission functioned with a skeleton staff.
The Current Crisis:
The CIC has been operating with severe constraints, as the post of the Chief Information Commissioner is currently vacant, and only two Information Commissioners are in office. Out of the total sanctioned strength of eleven members, nine positions are lying vacant. The Commission has rarely functioned at its full strength since its inception.
High-Profile Names in the Reckoning:
While the official notification is awaited, sources suggest a mix of high-profile bureaucrats and domain experts are in the final list for the top posts. A retired IAS officer is understood to have been selected to take on the leadership role as Chief Information Commissioner. Jaya Varma Sinha, the former Chairperson of the Railway Board, is reportedly among the candidates selected for the post of Information Commissioner, leveraging her extensive experience in administration.
Other key names in the reckoning include a former Special Director of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) Swagat Das (Retd IPS: 1987: CG); a 1993 batch IAS officer; a former Member (Legal) of the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) are also in the reckoning. P. R. Ramesh, Khushwant Singh Sethi (Retd IFoS: 1990: TR), Ashutosh Chaturvedi and a 1989 batch of the Central Secretariat Service (CSS) Cadre are also said to be on the final list.
The formal notification is now awaited before the President proceeds with the swearing-in ceremony.

CIC appointments: Government sources counter Rahul, say 5 of 8 shortlisted names from disadvantaged groups

 The Hindu: New Delhi: Saturday, 13 December 2025.
For the eight vacancies of Information Commissioners considered at the meeting, the Centre recommended one SC, one ST, one OBC, one minority representative, and one woman, according to the source

A high-level panel has recommended the names of five people belonging to disadvantaged sections for filling vacancies in the Central Information Commission (CIC), sources said, dismissing opposition leader Rahul Gandhi’s reported claim that the finalised list lacked names from the Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), Other Backward Community (OBC) and minority communities.
The leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha recorded his dissent during a meeting of a three-member high-level committee, comprising Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah and himself, held on Wednesday (December 10, 2025) to choose the next Chief Information Commissioner and eight Information Commissioners.
Dismissing Mr. Gandhi’s claims, the sources said eight names were finalised for filling the vacancies in the CIC by the three-member committee.
For the eight vacancies of Information Commissioners considered at the meeting, the Centre recommended one SC, one ST, one OBC, one minority representative, and one woman, according to the sources.
Overall, five of the eight recommended names were from disadvantaged sections.
The CIC was established in 2005. From 2005 to 2014, during the UPA Government’s tenure, not a single person from the SC/ST community was appointed as either a member or the chairperson of the commission, they said.
It was the NDA Government that appointed Suresh Chandra in 2018, a member of the ST community, to the CIC.
In 2020, Heeralal Samariya was appointed as Information Commissioner, and in 2023, he became the Chief Information Commissioner the first-ever CIC from the SC community, the sources said.

Former IAS Rajkumar Goyal likely to head Central Information Commission

The Economic Times: New Delhi: Saturday, 13 December 2025.
Former law secretary and retired 1990 batch IAS officer Rajkumar Goyal is likely to be named the chief of Central Information Commission, the final appellate authority for the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

Journalist P R Ramesh, former Railway Board chairman Jaya Verma Sinha, former social justice and empowerment secretary Surendra Singh Meena, former IPS officer Swagat Das, Ashutosh Chaturvedi, former Indian Forest Service Officer Khushwant Singh Sethi, Sudha Rani Relangi and Sanjeev Kumar Jindal are likely to be appointed as information commissioners, according to sources. The formal notification is likely to be issued on Saturday. Jindal is also a retired IAS who was an additional secretary in  home ministry.
With these appointments, the government has filled all the nine vacancies, including that of the chief, in the commission. Anandi Ramalingam and Vinod Kumar Tiwari are the only two information commissioners at CIC presently. With Ramalingam, there will be three women information commissioners at CIC -the highest ever representation of women on the panel.
The appointments had become a highly political issue with Leader of Opposition submitting a dissent note saying there wasn't ample representation of candidates belonging to SC, ST and OBC categories presented at the meeting of a three-member high-level committee, comprising Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Gandhi, held on Wednesday.

More cases booked under SC/ST Act in Pudukottai: RTI

Times of India: Trichy: Friday, 12 December 2025.
Pudukottai district has recorded nearly double the number of cases registered under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in the last five years compared to the previous five, according to an RTI response obtained by a Pudukottai-based activist.

The RTI filed by K Muruganandham revealed that 463 cases were registered across all 43 police stations in the district between Jan 1, 2020, and Aug 31, 2025. The activist had filed two separate queries one for the past five years (2020–2025) and another for the last 10 years (2015–2025). The 10-year dataset showed a total of 697 cases registered until Aug 31 this year, with 463 of them falling within the last five years alone.
Within the five-year period, 2020 saw the fewest cases at 55, while 2022 recorded the highest at 115. In 2023, 101 cases were registered, followed by a drop to 64 in 2024. So far this year, 56 cases have been recorded. Police stations in Karambakudi, Annaivasal and Vadakadu accounted for the highest numbers with 31, 27 and 20 cases respectively. Aranthangi and Gandharvakottai recorded 33 and 31 cases.
Referring to a clash in May in Vadakadu, where huts belonging to SC residents were set on fire in a temple dispute, he said caste violence has become more pronounced in recent years, resulting in a surge in cases. "Many cases linger for years in court. Although investigations under the SC/ST Act should be completed within a stipulated time frame, this is rarely followed. Delays in filing chargesheets, prolonged court proceedings, lack of awareness about the Act, and at times, indifference from authorities all contribute to this," he said.
He added that only 10 convictions have been recorded in the last decade, with none in the past three years. Meanwhile, 120 cases have ended in acquittals, and 22 remain under investigation.
A Kathir of the dalit rights NGO Evidence attributed the rise in cases being registered after the Vengaivayal incident in 2022. "After the incident played out prominently, more cases began to be taken seriously and registered by law enforcement agencies as they realised it could spiral into a bigger issue. But the bigger factor is the growing awareness among people, who are now coming forward to lodge- those complaints," he said.

RTI activist gets notice for hearing - 11 years after seeking info

Times of India: Raichur: Friday, 12 December 2025.
An RTI appeal submitted in Jan 2015 finally received a response after a lengthy wait of 11 years. RTI activist Allappa has recently been notified about the hearing for his RTI appeal, which he lodged in 2015, following an extensive delay of 11 years.

"I submitted a request under the Right to Information Act in Jan 2015 to obtain details regarding the survey number, area, and original maps of govt lands within the Devdurg Municipality from 1964 to 2015. However, after not receiving a response, I filed an appeal to the State Information Commission, SIC. Eleven years later, I received a notice from the Kalaburagi Bench of the SIC to attend a hearing on Thursday," he stated.
Through the media, Allappa expressed his dissatisfaction with the RTI Commission's performance by questioning the actions of both the commission and the govt throughout the years, as well as the lengthy process to attend to a simple query.
He claimed that the Karnataka Information Commission was effective until 2018, but since then, it has acted as a protective shield for officials.
"There is no fear of the commission among corrupt officials. The situation is such that applicants are being denied justice," Allappa said, expressing his dissatisfaction.

Activists plan a legal fight against datalaw clauses

The Hindu: New Delhi: Friday, 12 December 2025.
Transparency advocates have pushed back on the Right to Information Act’s dilution through the Digital Personal Data Protection Act

For long, transparency advocates have decried the Digital Personal Data Protection Act’s dilution of the Right to Information Act, executed by a reduction to Section 8(1)(j), which previously allowed disclosure of personal information with safeguards; that allowance became a full exemption after the DPDP Act was notified in November. Now, civil society groups are considering the next steps, including a legal challenge, to continue their fight against the dilution.
The groups include the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information (NCPRI), the Right to Food Campaign, the National Campaign for Dalit Human Rights, the National Federation of Indian Women, the Right to Education Campaign, the National Alliance of Peoples’ Movements, People’s Union for Civil Liberties, Internet Freedom Foundation, Jan Swasthya Abhiyan, Common Cause, and Constitutional Conduct Group.
In a meeting in the capital on Wednesday (December 10, 2025), the groups discussed the way forward, and committed to a legal challenge. “It was resolved that the campaign will continue its efforts to raise awareness about the implications of the law and also approach courts to challenge the provisions of the law,” a statement by the Roll Back RTI Amendments Campaign said.
Retired Supreme Court judge and chairman of the United Nations Internal Justice Council Madan B. Lokur assailed the amendments, saying that a full restriction on sharing personal information under the RTI Act would impede public accountability. Citing the example of the blaze in a Goa nightclub on December 6, Mr. Lokur said that government departments could refuse to identify key public officials in responsible positions due to this exemption.
Beyond the RTI Act amendment, the groups discussed other concerns about the DPDP Act. “The chilling impact on activists, journalists, lawyers, political parties, groups and organisations who collect, analyse and disseminate critical information as they will become ‘data fiduciaries’ under the law was discussed,” the statement said. “The excessive centralisation of power in the central government, including the constitution of a government-controlled Data Protection Board with powers to levy penalties of up to ₹250 crore (which can be doubled up to ₹500 crore), raises concerns about the weaponisation of this law against those seeking accountability.”

Rahul Gandhi records dissent as PM-led panel meets to select CIC, Vigilance Commissioner: What LoP objected to

The Indian Express: New Delhi: Thursday, 11 December 2025.
After Gandhi points to a “systematic pattern” of “exclusion” of backward and minority communities in appointments to Constitutional posts, PM Modi, Amit Shah agree to consider a few appointments from the limited applicant pool.

At a meeting Wednesday of the three-member panel headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to choose the next Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners, and a Vigilance Commissioner, Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi recorded his dissent while pointing out that the shortlists lacked names from the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, OBC, EBC and minority communities. The third member of the panel is Union Home Minister Amit Shah.
Sources said Gandhi had asked the government several weeks ago to provide him with the caste composition of the applicants. The details were provided Wednesday and sources said only 7% of the applicants and one shortlisted candidate were from the backward communities. Gandhi flagged this at the meeting and submitted a detailed dissent note.
Gandhi, sources said, also said that the government was weakening the Right to Information Act, alleging that some of the shortlisted candidates had a record of not being transparent in their previous capacities.
He claimed that there had been a “systematic pattern” of “exclusion” of SC, ST, OBC, EBC and minority communities when it came to appointments to Constitutional and autonomous institutions. Sources said that after Gandhi raised the issue, there was an agreement to consider a few appointments from the limited applicant pool.
The meetings came a day after Gandhi said in Lok Sabha that he, as the Opposition nominee, had no voice in meetings of such panels. He was talking in the context of the selection of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, which, like the CIC and CVC selection panels, has the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister as members.
“I sit in that room. It is a so-called democratic decision. On one side, PM Modi and Amit Shah and on the other side the LoP. I have no voice in that room. What they decide is what happens,” Gandhi told Lok Sabha Tuesday.
The post of the CIC has been lying vacant since September 13, when incumbent Heerala Samariya, a Dalit, demitted office on attaining the age of 65. Eight posts of Information Commissioners (ICs) too have been lying vacant for some years. The Commission, which can have up to ten Information Commissioners, now has only two Commissioners.
This is not the first time the Opposition has disagreed with the government on the appointment of the CIC. In fact, the appointment of Samariya in 2023 too had triggered a row with Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, the Opposition member in the PM-led high-powered selection committee then, claiming that the government neither consulted nor informed him about his selection.
In 2020, Chowdhury had in the meeting of the selection panel opposed the appointment of former IFS officer and Information Commissioner Yashvardhan Kumar Sinha as the Chief Information Commissioner and journalist Uday Mahurkar as an Information Commissioner. Sinha and Mahurkar were appointed despite objections by Chowdhury in a dissent note he had submitted.

HC issues contempt notices to Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation chief, ex-chief over RTI non-compliance

 The Indian Express: Hyderabad: Thursday, 11 December 2025.
In 2023, Vaddam Shyam had filed an RTI application seeking information on an occupancy certificate issued by the then chief city planner of the Serilingampally zone.

The Telangana High Court has issued notices to Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) Commissioner R V Karnan and his predecessor K Ilambarithi in a contempt proceeding and directed the two IAS officers to file a counter-affidavit on or before January 9, 2026, failing which the court would impose Rs 10,000 towards costs.
The contempt case against the two officials was filed by petitioner Vaddam Shyam for the alleged “wilful and deliberate disobedience” of a previous court order.
The court had previously directed the GHMC commissioner to dispose of Shyam’s RTI application the 2023 plea sought information on an occupancy certificate issued by the then chief city planner of the Serilingampally zone on merits and strictly in accordance with the RTI Act within four weeks.
On December 5, Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka, after hearing the arguments, passed an order directing the registry to issue notice to the respondents. The notice, dispatched on December 8, directs the respondents to “show cause as to why they should not be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for non-compliance of the aforesaid order”.
The notice directed the two IAS officers to show cause, either appearing in person or through advocate duly instructed, on January 9, 2026, at 10.30 am. “It is made clear that if the counter-affidavit is not filed on the date specified, the same shall not be accepted without payment of costs of Rs. 10,000/- to the Registrar (Judicial) by the respondents,” the order stated.
The court warned that if they fail to appear or respond, the case will be heard and determined ex parte. The matter is now listed on January 9, 2026.

Govt reluctant to disclose information under RTI, alleges TMC MP

 The Hindu: New Delhi: Thursday, 11 December 2025.
TMC MP noted that eight of the 10 posts at the Central Information Commission are vacant as of November 2025, he informed the House

Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mohammed Nadimul Haque on Wednesday (December 10, 2025) alleged in the Rajya Sabha that the central government is 'reluctant and scared' about disclosing information under Right to Information (RTI) Act and demanded that the sanctity of law should be protected.
During Zero Hour, Mr. Haque said under Article 19 of the Constitution, right to seek information has been recognised as a fundamental right.
"Despite this, the RTI Act 2005 is being systematically demolished by this government. When it was introduced, India's RTI Act was miles ahead of similar laws in other countries. We are the only country where there is a time limit of 30 days for providing information," he said.
He rued that 20 years later, the NDA, that is "No Data Available" government has made a mockery of RTI.
As of November 2025, eight of the 10 posts at the Central Information Commission are vacant, he informed the House.
To make it worse, India does not have a Chief Information Commissioner since September 5, he alleged. Due to this, it takes almost two to three years to dispose of pending second appeals, and by that time the information given has no meaning, he pointed out.
"This government likes to talk about digital India. In reality, the RTI website is a nightmare. Over the last seven months, RTI activists have been complaining about website crashes and delayed OTPs. By not fixing the issue, the government is showing how reluctant and scared it is about disclosing information," he said.
"We saw the same issue with the Waqf Umeed portal recently, which was full of glitches, yet the government not only failed to fix it, but also failed to extend the deadline," he informed the House.
People of India demand information, which is their right.
The people of Bengal deserve to know why ₹52,000 crore of pending Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) dues have not been released by the Union government despite court order, he stated.
"We deserve to know by when the pending dues of ₹2 lakh crore under various schemes will be released by the Union government. We have seen, how this government runs away from the accountability in this Parliament," he said.
Mr. Haque alleged that by weakening the RTI Act, the Modi Government is running away from being accountable to the people.
"In the end, I can only urge the government to fill vacancies, restore capacity and protect the sanctity of this law and Indian democracy. Otherwise, the RTI Act remains intact on paper, while transparency collapses in practice, and that collapse is entirely this government's responsibility," he said.

SIC cracks down on RTA Amritsar, raises fine for RTI violation

The Times of India: Patna: Wednesday, 10 December 2025.
The Punjab State Information Commission has taken firm action against the Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Amritsar, for persistent non-compliance with repeated directions in an RTI appeal case.

The commission enhanced the penalty imposed on the public information officer (PIO) and ordered recovery of the amount from the officer's salary. State Information Commissioner Pooja Gupta, who heard the matter, also conveyed "severe displeasure" to the principal secretary, department of transport, Punjab, over the "casual attitude of their subordinate officers."
The case relates to an appeal in which the appellant filed an RTI application on April 3, 2023. As recorded in the order, then State Information Commissioner Asit Jolly conducted three hearings, but no one appeared from the office of the RTO, Amritsar. A penalty of Rs 10,000 was imposed on April 22, 2024, for non-appearance, but there was still no compliance.
After Jolly's superannuation, the case was reallocated, and despite repeated notices, including a bailable warrant issued on September 23, 2025, the PIO again failed to appear. The commission observed that such disregard for the RTI Act "needs to be condemned" and that erring officials must receive "a right kind of message" to ensure transparency in public administration.
After examining the case record, the commission noted that the conduct of the PIO "shows carelessness and irresponsible behaviour towards the orders of the Commission," calling it "not acceptable at all." The order states that despite ample opportunities, the respondent failed to comply, resulting in a delay of two years in providing information to the appellant.
Taking a serious view, the commission enhanced the penalty on the PIO from Rs 10,000 to Rs 25,000, to be imposed on the officer who was incumbent at the time the RTI application was filed on April 3, 2023. The RTA, Amritsar, has been directed to recover the amount from the salary of the concerned officer. The official must also submit an undertaking to the commission and be personally present at the next hearing.
Pooja Gupta also instructed the principal secretary, transport department, Punjab, to ensure that all officers concerned appear at the next hearing and to review all similar cases for early compliance. Further, the PIO PCS-cum-RTO, Amritsar, has been directed to attend the next hearing with the complete information sought in the RTI application and explain his conduct and the status of the complaint to enable the commission to reach a logical conclusion. The matter has been adjourned to January 13, 2026.

HC upholds penalty on ex-DCLR for RTI delay

The Times of India: Patna: Wednesday, 10 December 2025.

Refusing to quash a penalty of Rs25,000 imposed by the state information commissioner (SIC) on a former deputy collector land reform (DCLR) of the state capital (Sadar), the Patna high court directed the erring officer to deposit the fine amount within next four weeks.
The court also ordered that failure to deposit the fine within stipulated time would make the officer liable for an additional fine of Rs5,000.
A single bench of Justice Rajiv Roy while disposing of a decade-old writ petition filed by one Sudhanshu Kumar Chaubey, passed this verdict on Dec 4 which came into public domain after being uploaded on HC website on Tuesday.
Petitioner’s counsel Pawan Kumar argued that his client had wrongly been imposed with a fine allegedly for not furnishing information related to disposal of mutation cases in a circle of state capital, as sought by one Surendra Prasad Yadav under the provisions of Right to Information Act (RTI) .
The requisite information was provided at a late stage when Surendra had already appealed before the SIC.
SIC counsel Binita Singh submitted that Sudhanshu was given an opportunity give an explanation before being awarded a penalty. Yet the erring officer gave no reply for next 11 months till he was transferred to another department.
The court found that the erring officer had behaved in a non-professional manner by not replying to the commission within time frame.

PM-Led Committee Likely To Meet Tomorrow To Select New CIC

Daily Excelsior: New Delhi: Wednesday, 10 December 2025.

A three-member committee headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and also including Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi is likely to meet on Wednesday to decide the next Chief Information Commissioner and information commissioners for eight vacant positions at the Central Information Commission (CIC).
The government had informed the Supreme Court on December 1 that the Prime Minister Modi-led panel is likely to meet on December 10 to select and recommend names for these posts.
Under Section 12 (3) of the Right to Information Act, the prime minister is the chairperson of the committee, which also comprises the leader of opposition and a Union minister nominated by the prime minister, that selects and recommends the names for appointment as Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners.
According to the RTI Act, the CIC has a Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Information Commissioners who adjudicate complaints and appeals filed by the RTI applicants against the unsatisfactory orders of government officials on their applications.
The CIC, which is staring at 30,838 pending cases, according to its website, is left with just two information commissioners — Anandi Ramalingam and Vinod Kumar Tiwari — with eight vacancies.
The highest appellate authority to adjudicate RTI-related complaints and appeals had gone headless for the seventh time since 2014 after incumbent Chief Information Commissioner Heeralal Samariya demitted office on September 13.
The Commission had become headless for the first time after then CIC Rajiv Mathur demitted office in August 2014.
Samariya, who had become the Chief Information Commissioner on November 6, 2023, demitted office on attaining the age of 65 years, according to an office order issued by the Commission.
In an RTI response to activist Commodore Lokesh Batra (retired), the Department of Personnel and Training had said that 83 applications were received for the post of Chief Information Commissioner in response to its advertisement issued on May 21.
It also said that 161 applications were received in response to an advertisement issued on August 14, 2024, for the vacancies against the post of Information Commissioners in the CIC.
According to the procedure for the appointment of the Chief Information Commissioner, particulars of interested persons are invited through advertisements in newspapers and through the DoPT website.
These details are tabulated by DoPT and sent to a Search Committee constituted by the Prime Minister and chaired by the Cabinet Secretary.
The names as well as the shortlisted ones along with their applications are sent to the committee headed by the Prime Minister and also comprising the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha and a Cabinet minister.
Persons recommended by the prime minister-led committee are appointed by the President.

Act fast in cash-for-vote RTI plea, Madras HC directs CIC

DT Next: Chennai: Wednesday, 10 December 2025.
SP Aadithya Cholan, Chennai Zonal Joint Coordinator of the TVK Advocate Wing, had approached the High Court seeking a direction to the CIC to act on his pending appeal

The Madras High Court has directed the Central Information Commission (CIC) to consider, within two months, a second appeal seeking information on measures being taken to prevent cash-for-votes in the forthcoming Legislative Assembly elections.
SP Aadithya Cholan, Chennai Zonal Joint Coordinator of the TVK Advocate Wing, had approached the High Court seeking a direction to the CIC to act on his pending appeal.
He had filed an RTI application seeking details of steps proposed by the Election Commission of India to curb cash distribution during the 2026 Assembly elections.
In his RTI application, he had requested information on the toll-free number for lodging complaints about cash distribution, action taken against political parties and candidates involved in cash-for-votes, whether mobile apps or websites would be launched for filing complaints, and the number of related complaints received over the past 50 years.
The Public Information Officer of the Election Commission had responded to only two of his questions. The petitioner then filed a second appeal before the CIC in August last year, challenging the incomplete response. The appeal, however, has remained undecided.
Hearing the petition, a bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan directed the CIC to hear and dispose of the second appeal expeditiously.

Gujarat Information Commission rejects retired cop’s RTI plea, cites threat to officials

The Times of India: Ahmedabad: Wednesday, 10 December 2025.
The Gujarat Information Commission (GIC) has dismissed an RTI second appeal filed by a 72-year-old retired police sub-inspector, ruling that disclosing the requested information could endanger the lives of govt officials involved in his case.

State chief information commissioner Dr Subhash Soni passed the order following a hearing on Dec 6, citing provisions under Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act, which protects officials from potential threats.
The Jamnagar-based retired PSI had sought details of departmental proceedings initiated against him, specifically requesting the names and designations of staff members who handled his defence reply dated Dec 28, 2023.
In Nov 2024, he was penalized with a two-year pension cut of Rs 2,000 per month following a home department inquiry into a custodial torture case that held him responsible.
The retired officer, who left service in 2018, has also approached the Gujarat high court after authorities rejected his licence application.
During the hearing, the appellant argued that crucial information from several sub-points in his original RTI application dated Jan 2, 2025, remained undisclosed. He maintained that identifying the employees who processed his representation was essential to his case.
The Public Information Officer (PIO) responded that certified documents for specific points had already been provided, while the remaining information pertained directly to individual officers.
The commission observed that the applicant, facing departmental punishment, appeared to seek information with a retaliatory motive.
The order states that revealing the names and roles of employees involved could "cause harm to their life or physical safety".
Dr Soni noted that internal notes and employee identities are recorded with confidentiality and operational safety in mind. "Disclosing them would undermine the secure functioning of govt processes," the order stated.
Regarding other requests related to the standing orders of the finance and general administration departments, the commission directed the appellant to access the documents through the departmental websites or to file fresh RTI applications with the relevant PIOs. While disposing of the appeal, the commission emphasized that transparency cannot override the safety of govt employees.

Right to Information: The limit does exist - By Joanne Jary & Cosmo Cater

Holding Redlich: Queensland: Tuesday, 9^Th December 2025.

Government agencies increasingly face complex Right to Information (RTI) requests from individuals involved in internal disputes, complaints or litigation. These scenarios test the boundaries between statutory transparency obligations, the protection of internal management discussions and the limits of using parallel disclosure regimes to obtain information.
The recent decision in the case of Stella v Griffith University [2025] QCA 203 clarifies the limits of RTI access when tribunal orders and court procedures apply, providing important guidance for agencies, applicants and legal practitioners.
Case background: Stella v Griffith University [2025] QCA 203
Mr Stella was a student at Griffith University. In 2022, the University conducted preliminary inquiries into whether Mr Stella’s social media commentary breached its Student Misconduct Policy. During those inquiries, Mr Stella provided both written and oral responses, and University staff discussed the complaint internally.
The University ultimately decided not to proceed with a formal investigation and informed Mr Stella of that outcome through a letter dated 6 September 2022, which advised him to avoid similar commentary in the future. Mr Stella believed the complaint was outside the Policy’s scope and that University officers had engaged in improper conduct.
Right to Information applications and reviews
On 27 September 2022, Mr Stella applied under the Right to Information Act 2009 (RTI Act) for all documents relating to the complaint and the University’s handling of it. The University granted partial access and refused access to other documents. An internal review resulted in limited further disclosure.
The Information Commissioner affirmed the University’s decision on the first access application and varied the decision on the second, substituting different grounds for refusal (S41 and Griffith University [2023] QICmr 64). Mr Stella then appealed to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Appeal Tribunal (QCATA), which dismissed the appeal on 18 March 2025.
Both the Information Commissioner and QCATA determined that two key documents were exempt from release.
Application to the Court of Appeal
In the Court of Appeal proceedings, Mr Stella sought an order compelling the University to disclose the same two documents, arguing the Court should examine them itself.
QCATA had previously made non-publication orders under section 66(1) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 for ‘Part B’ documents, which included the disputed material.
Court of Appeal’s reasoning
Writing the main judgment for the Court of Appeal, Justice Bradley held that disclosure orders could not be made because UCPR r 223(1) does not apply to appeals. Even if it did, disclosure would only be possible in special circumstances and where the interests of justice required it (r 223(4)(a)). Ordering disclosure in this case would directly conflict with QCATA’s existing non-publication orders.
The Court did not decide whether the documents were exempt from disclosure under the RTI Act, but observed that documents recording the University’s investigation of a complaint reflected the exercise of a management function. Such documents may therefore fall within an exemption from release under the RTI Act. The issue was left open because the disclosure application was rejected on procedural grounds.
In the end, the application for disclosure was dismissed, and costs were later awarded against the applicant.
Important observations about the Right to Information Act
In the course of their judgment, the Court of Appeal made several significant observations:
the RTI Act does not contemplate endless sequential access applications about information generated by earlier applications
decision-makers undertaking the section 49 public interest balancing test are not confined to the factors listed in Schedule 4 of the RTI Act
the effective operation of complaint processes requires that University (and by analogy, other agencies) management can discuss matters openly when performing management functions. This was an identified public interest factor and is especially relevant where RTI applicants are simultaneously involved in employment or disciplinary disputes with their agency.
Practical implications for agencies, applicants and lawyers
Agencies
Agencies must remain alert to confidentiality and non-publication orders, which may override RTI access rights. Where such orders exist, they can heavily constrain or preclude disclosure.
Applicants
RTI is the proper statutory pathway for access. Attempting to circumvent it through court disclosure procedures is unlikely to succeed. Applicants seeking documents for litigation must demonstrate a genuine legal need for those documents, particularly in appellate contexts.
Furthermore, documents created in response to one access application do not create a foothold for launching further applications in an ‘endless loop’. Attempting this practice risks being declared vexatious, either by a court or by the Information Commissioner.
Lawyers and RTI practitioners
Lawyers and legal officers, particularly those in the public sector, should be aware of the interplay between RTI rights and other procedural regimes, including tribunal orders and court appeal processes. The Stella decision suggests that even when the RTI Act process is invoked, other procedural or statutory constraints may override access.
The UCPR disclosure rules cannot be used to obtain information that has been refused under the RTI Act or is the subject of non-publication orders. Additionally, decision-makers for RTI release who undertake the section 49 public interest balancing test are not confined to only considering the factors listed in Schedule 4 of the RTI Act.
Key takeaways
While the RTI has a pro-disclosure bias, access is limited not only by statutory exemptions but also by broader procedural constraints such as tribunal suppression orders.
The decision reinforces that UCPR disclosure (and other disclosure) provisions do not grant a parallel right to access exempt or protected material and cannot be used by unsuccessful RTI applicants to bypass the RTI decision and obtain access through general procedural rules. RTI must be sought within its own framework.
In employment disputes and investigations, participants may attempt to ‘look behind’ the decision and fish for ammunition by using RTI to obtain material. This decision confirms that agency management can discuss matters openly when performing management functions, and this was an identified public interest factor tending towards exempting documents like this from disclosure to an applicant.
Finally, the decision further emphasises the importance of relevance and necessity in disclosure applications and rejects attempts to fish for documents outside the RTI process.
If you have any questions about the Right to Information process, need guidance on exemptions or procedural requirements, or require legal assistance with a request, please contact us here.
Disclaimer
The information in this article is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, we do not guarantee that the information in this article is accurate at the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future.

Unaided private schools not under RTI Act: Telangana schools' management body

The New Indian Express: Hyderabad: Tuesday, 9^Th December 2025.
TRSMA president Madhusudan appealed to authorities to prevent the misuse of RTI provisions and protect unaided schools from unwarranted pressure and harassment.

The Telangana Recognised Schools Managements Association (TRSMA) on Sunday clarified that unaided private schools do not fall under the ambit of the Right to Information Act, 2005, as they are not funded or controlled by the government.
This issue has come to the forefront, as in recent times, a few individuals, for harassment and extortion, have filed applications seeking private, administrative and staff-related information of the schools.
Expressing serious concern over the misuse of RTI, S Madhusudan, president, TRSMA, said, “That such information is exempt under Section 8(1)(d) and 8(1)(j) and this trend is causing the Education Department and school managements to waste lakhs of man-hours unproductively, affecting the smooth functioning of schools and also clarified that unaided private schools do not fall under the ambit of the RTI Act, 2005, as they are not funded or controlled by the government.”
The members also submitted a representation letter to the state government. TRSMA president Madhusudan appealed to authorities to prevent the misuse of RTI provisions and protect unaided schools from unwarranted pressure and harassment.

Odisha Information Commission Reduces RTI Pendency to 14,000 Cases

Argus: Odisha: Tuesday, 9^Th December 2025.

The Odisha Information Commission has achieved a record reduction in pending appeals and complaints, bringing the backlog down from 22,611 to 14,000 cases within just seven months, officials said on Monday.
This milestone reflects the Commission’s renewed focus on speedy disposal and transparency under the leadership of State Chief Information Commissioner Shri Manoj Parida.
Strengthened Commission:
Following the appointment of four new Information Commissioners in April 2025, including the Chief Information Commissioner, the Commission has been conducting hearings throughout the week. This expansion has significantly boosted disposal rates, addressing delays caused during the Covid period and the earlier shortage of commissioners.
Special Drive for Pendency:
A special initiative has been launched to clear old cases, with strict discouragement of frequent adjournments. Priority is being given to individual applicants rather than repetitive bulk filings. Video conference hearings have increased, and weekly reviews of disposal rates are being conducted to ensure efficiency.
Landmark Judgments:
In recent months, the Commission has delivered several notable rulings. OPSC was directed to disclose interview marks to all candidates, while the Staff Selection Commission was asked to reveal marks in proficiency tests. Another ruling restricted misuse of the RTI Act by repetitive applicants, ensuring genuine seekers benefit from timely information.
Transparency and Accountability:
The Commission has emphasized proactive disclosure, directing departments to upload basic information online to reduce RTI applications by up to 60%. District Collectors have been asked to review RTI disposal quarterly. Over the years, fines totaling Rs1.47 crore have been imposed on erring officials, with disciplinary action recommended against 1,857 officers and compensation of Rs16 lakh awarded to applicants.
Future Goals:
With the High Court of Orissa upholding several of its decisions, the Commission now aims to reduce pendency further to just a few thousand cases by next year, ensuring applicants receive information within 30 days.

Pedestrian deaths account for 37% of road accident fatalities in Coimbatore

 The Hindu: Coimbatore: Tuesday, 9^Th December 2025.
Roads in Coimbatore city appear to be less friendly for pedestrians as data accessed from the police under the Right to Information (RTI) Act showed that pedestrians accounted for 37% of road traffic accident fatalities reported in the first 10 months this year.

Of the 232 persons who lost their lives in road traffic accidents in the city from January to October, 86 were pedestrians. A total of 971 accidents (fatal and non-fatal) were reported in the city during this period and 280 of them (28.83%) were involving pedestrians.
“Pedestrian deaths account for more than 20% of total road fatalities nationwide. But this figure is 37% in Coimbatore, a clear indicator of lack of facilities for the safety of pedestrians in the city. The alarming percentage of pedestrian fatalities in Coimbatore shows sheer negligence by authorities, including the Highways Department,” said K. Kathirmathiyon of Coimbatore Consumer Cause, who accessed the data from Coimbatore City Police under RTI Act.
As per the RTI reply, even though pelican signals are useful for the public to cross roads, subways or foot overbridges were necessary.
The police stated that subways or foot overbridges were necessary at Anna Statue, Lakshmi Mills junction, RK Mill junction, Fun Mall junction, airport junction, Chinniyampalayam, Gandhipuram junction, No:3 bus stop, Ukkadam, Chinthamani junction, Kavundampalayam junction, Thudiyalur junction, Singanallur junction and Ramanathapuram junction.
“The RTI reply by the police clearly states the need for safe pedestrian crossings at these places. Though there was allocation of ₹15 crore for five subways or foot over bridges for Avinashi Road flyover in the original plan, it was not executed. Similarly, ₹5 crore allocation for a subway at Gandhipuram junction for the flyover was also not utilised. Authorities are not bothered about pedestrian safety since they barely cross these roads by foot,” said Mr. Kathirmathiyon.
Officers attached to Coimbatore City Police said that they were forced to deploy personnel at busy locations, where people tend to cross the road in large numbers, due to the absence of subways or foot overbridges.
Mr. Kathirmathiyon, who is also a member of the District Road Safety Committee, had highlighted lack of facilities for pedestrians in the city in a submission given to the Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety recently.

Make public details of MoU with Google on data centre in Vizag, demand rights organisations.

The Hindu: Vishakhapattnam: December 08, 2025.

Rejection of RTI application seeking access to the MoU citing confidentiality not only violates the spirit of the Act but also raises concerns about the government’s commitment to transparency in matters of critical public resources, say leaders of HRF and UFRTI.

The Human Rights Forum (HRF) and the United Forum for RTI Campaign (UFRTI) have demanded that the Andhra Pradesh government disclose details of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed with Google for the proposed data centre and allied investments in Visakhapatnam and Anakapalli districts.

In a release on Saturday, HRF’s A.P. and Telangana Coordination Committee member V.S. Krishna and UFRTC co-convener Chakradhar Buddha said, “It is widely acknowledged that such large data centres will exert significant pressure on the State’s already stressed power and water infrastructure.”

“Moreover, without access to the MoU, how will civil society organisations, concerned citizens, and researchers assess whether adequate environmental safeguards, social impact assessments, data localisation safeguards, privacy protections, requisite oversight mechanisms, and data privacy frameworks have been built into the agreement?” they questioned.

“Decisions taken in the name of people must be open to public scrutiny. The State government must immediately upload all documents relating to the MoU on an official public platform,” they demanded.

“The government has been projecting the MoU as a landmark investment and game-changer with far reaching economic benefits and that it will position the State as a digital infrastructure hub. But, it has refused to make the contents of the MoU available in the public domain. It clearly violates the basic principles of the Right to Information Act, 2005,” they observed.

Citizens had the right to know the safeguards contained in the MoU, especially given its potential impact on water, energy use, land and data governance in the State, they said.

“The Google Data Center, which is said to involve an investment of $15 billion, is signed in secrecy, erodes public trust and undermines democratic oversight. A formal RTI application seeking access to the MoU has been rejected recently by the Andhra Pradesh Government citing confidentiality. This refusal not only violates the letter and spirit of the RTI Act but also raises concerns about the government’s commitment to transparency in matters related to critical public resources,” they said.

Information Commission imposes fine of Rs 25,000 on Bengaluru sub‑division officer, Rs 50,000 on tahsildar.

English Public TV: Monday, December 08, 2025.

The Bengaluru North Sub‑Division Officer, Dr Kiran, who ignored a Right to Information (RTI) application and failed to provide the requested information on time, has been fined Rs 25,000 by the Information Commisson. The Bengaluru North Tahsildar, Madhuraj, has also been fined Rs 25,000 in two separate cases for similar lapses.

The Commission imposed the penalties not only because the officers missed the deadline for furnishing information, but also because they repeatedly failed to appear for the Commission’s hearings, showing a blatant disregard for the proceedings. In addition to the fines, the Commission issued a show‑cause notice to both officials, asking why disciplinary action should not be recommended to the government for violating the RTI Act.

Venkatesh, a resident of Belathur Colony in Bengaluru, had filed an RTI request several years ago seeking certain documents related to his land in K Dommasandra village. When the Sub‑Division Officer did not provide the information within the stipulated period, Venkatesh appealed to the Commission. The Commission ordered the officer to appear and explain, but Dr Kiran ignored the notice and continued to neglect the request.

Consequently, the Commission imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 and directed that the information be supplied immediately, warning of further disciplinary action.

Similarly, a resident Chandappa from Bengaluru had submitted an RTI application to the Bengaluru North Tahsildar requesting documents concerning his family property in Malagalu village. Tahsildar Madhuraj also failed to furnish the information and did not attend the Commission’s hearings.

Despite a show‑cause notice, he did not respond. The Commission fined him Rs 25,000 in each of the two cases (total ₹50,000) and ordered that the requested documents be provided forthwith, warning of departmental inquiry.

In recent times, the Commission has also penalised several other officials for ignoring RTI requests — Bengaluru South Sub‑Division Officer Vishwanath, Doddaballapur Sub‑Division Officer Durgashri, KR Pura Tahsildar Raju, and Devanahalli Tahsildar Anil, among others.

The Commission emphasized that anyone filing an RTI request must receive either the requested information or a proper reply within the prescribed timeframe. It also mandated that officials appear before the Commission in person or send a representative to offer an explanation. Failure to comply may result in fines and a recommendation for disciplinary action to the government. The Commission further noted that the RTI Act provides for compensation to applicants who are deliberately delayed or harassed by officials.

Tamil Nadu among five least transparent states on juvenile justice: IJR.

New Indian Express: Rajlakshmi Sampath: Monday, December 08, 2025.

An official from the Social Welfare department attributed the lack of responses to the format in which information was sought. Police officials were not available for comment.

The India Justice Report (IJR), released recently with a focus on juvenile justice and children in conflict with the law, has ranked Tamil Nadu among the least transparent states.

The IJR, a quantitative index assessing the capacity of justice systems across states and produced collaboratively since 2019 with organisations including the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, found that Tamil Nadu was among five states that did not respond to any queries sent primarily under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The other states are Jharkhand, Manipur, Tripura and Uttar Pradesh.

As a result, the report was unable to assess Tamil Nadu on most indices, apart from a few basic parameters, such as the presence of Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs), which could be verified from secondary sources. The report noted that the state “shared almost nothing.” Police headquarters did not provide information on Special Juvenile Police Units (SJPUs), while the State Child Protection Society, responsible for maintaining records on Observation Homes, Special Homes and Places of Safety, failed to furnish details on capacity, staffing or inspections.

The Social Welfare department allegedly transferred RTI applications to districts, which only provided partial responses. TN also gave “no information” on allocations or utilisation of the Juvenile Justice Fund for several years. An official from the Social Welfare department attributed the lack of responses to the format in which information was sought. Police officials were not available for comment.