Home » Right to Information » CIC Decisions/Court Judgements » Selected Decisions of Central Information Commission (CIC)
CIC Decisions

Selected Decisions of Central Information Commission (CIC)

LINKS TO OTHER RTI PAGES
Decisions of Central Information Commission – Section-Wise.
Decisions of Central Information Commission (CIC) – Subject-Wise
.

RTI – Rules/Guidelines/Orders (Date-Wise).
RTI Rules/Orders (Subject-Wise)
.

RTI – Court Judgements

MORE: Latest Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT)/DPPW Orders/Circulars

RECENT DECISIONS/JUDGEMENTS

2021

  • CIC Decision dated 16.08.2021 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Saurav Das Vs. CPIO, Department of Health & Family Welfare – The CIC decided: “However, in view of the extraordinary predicament the world finds itself in, it is of vital importance that all relevant updates, notifications and information which are likely to serve larger public interest, and address concerns and worries should be widely disseminated to create awareness among the public. The Respondent must note that dissemination of vital information is as much a national duty as proper and effective discharge of their onerous responsibilities.” [Sections 2(f), 6(3), 7(1), 8(1)(a), 19 and 25(5); Centralised Procurement of COVID-19 Vaccines for States, Foreign Aid, Larger Public interest, Life and Liberty Clause, Suo Motu Disclosure]
  • CIC Decision dated 13.08.2021 on the Second Appeal/Complaint filed by Shri Shyamlal Yadav Vs. PIO, CPV Division, Ministry of External Affairs – As per the Decision of CIC, the RTI application was mechanically replied to by the erstwhile CPIO without application of mind. The Commission thus cautioned the erstwhile CPIO and Dy Passport Officer (Ops) to ensure that RTI applications are not dealt with in a casual manner in future. The Commission also directed the incumbent CPIO to re-examine the RTI application and provide the information. [Section 2(f); Passports, CPIO/PIO]
  • CIC Decision dated 17.05.2021 on the Complaint filed by Shri Aniket Gaurav Vs. PIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare – CIC: “However, before concluding the decision at hand, the Commission wishes to advise the Respondent to ensure that maximum information which serves larger public interest, is proactively disclosed, to enhance transparency and dissemination of correct information. This will also obviate the need for filing of RTI cases by citizens on matters of such vital importance.” [Sections 4, 18; Covid Vaccination Result Data]
  • CIC Decision dated 23.03.2021 on the Second Appeal/Complaint filed by Shri Venkatesh Nayak Vs. CPIO, Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, New Delhi – The CIC observed that “The Commission observes at the outset that the denial of the information in the initial reply of the CPIO under Section 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act was grossly inappropriate as no justification was provided for invoking the said exemption, in fact, the CPIO merely reproduced the provision of Section 8(1)(i) in his reply to the RTI Application. The said conduct of the CPIO is viewed adversely by the Commission as it is suggestive of his non-application of mind in dealing with the matters under the RTI Act.” The CPIO was severely admonished for the inappropriate denial of the information to the Appellant and he is warned to ensure that due diligence is exercised while dealing with the RTI Applications in future.
    Regarding the prayer of the Appellant regarding the suo motu disclosure of the Cabinet note pertaining to The Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019 in light of the provisions of Section 4(1)(c) & 4(1)(d) of the RTI Act as well as Section 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act a copy of the order was marked to the Secretary, MoSJ, to look into the prayer of the Appellant. [Sections 4, 8(1)(i); Cabinet Note, etc., Public Authority]
  • CIC Decision dated 16.02.2021 on the Second Appeal filed by Jitendra Kumar vs. CPIO, O/o Income Tax Officer, Aligarh, UP – The Central Information Commission directed the respondent to inform to the appellant the current status of his Tax Evasion Petition and/or if the said TEP has already been disposed of, then, broad outcome of the Tax Evasion Petition should be informed to the appellant as per his RTI application, before transfer of the TEP to the Investigation wing. [Sections 8(1)(j); Tax Evasion Petition]
  • Section 8(1)(h)
    Delhi High Court: It was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that “the legal position as settled by this court is that cogent reasons have to be given by the public authority as to how and why the investigation or prosecution will get impaired or hampered by giving the information in question.” [Exemption under Sec. 8(1)(h)]Delhi HC Judgement dated 05.02.2021 – Amit Kumar Shrivastava Vs. Central Information Commission, New Delhi >>> RTI – Court Judgements
  • Section 8(1)(d)
    Delhi High Court: “On the basis of the above judgments, the following principles can be clearly gleaned:
    i) CPIO/PIOs cannot withhold information without reasonable cause;
    xxx       xxx
    v) PIO/CPIO cannot function merely as “post offices” but instead are responsible to ensure that the information sought under the RTI Act is provided
    xxx      xxx
    viii) Information cannot be refused without reasonable cause.”
    [Section 5(3), 5(4), 5(5), 8(1)(d); PIO/CPIO]Delhi HC Judgement dated 22.01.2021 – Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta (Erstwhile CPIO) Union Bank of India & Ors. Vs. Central Information Commission & Anr.
  • Delhi HC Judgment dated 12.01.2021 – Har Kishan Vs. President Secretariat through its Secretary & Anr. – Delhi High Court: Whenever information is sought under the RTI Act, disclosure of an interest in the information sought would be necessary to establish the bona fides of the applicant. Non-disclosure of the same could result in injustice to several other affected persons, whose information is sought. The petition was dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000/- to be paid to the “High Court of Delhi (Middle Income Group) legal Aid Society”. …” [Sections 8(1)(j); Disclosure of an Interest in the Information, Candidatures’ Particulars] – Delhi HC Judgment dated 12.01.2021 – Har Kishan Vs. President Secretariat through its Secretary & Anr.

2020

  • CIC Decision dated 28.12.2020 on the Second Appeals filed by Deeksha Chaudhary Vs. CPIO, Air India Ltd., New Delhi – The CIC decided that it was necessary to ascertain the compliance of the FAA’s order dated 12.11.2018 and that in order to expedite dissemination of the information and ensure compliance of the FAA’s order, it was thus deemed expedient that the 25 second appeals be remanded to the FAA to ensure compliance of his/her earlier order dated 12.11.2018 in response to the Appellant’s first appeals, in order to address the central issue agitated by the Appellant. [Section 7(9); Second Appeals Remanded to FAA]
  • CIC Decision dated 21.12.2020 on the Second Appeal by Vihar Durve Vs. CPIO, State Bank of India, Mumbai – CIC: “The Commission upholds the contention of the respondent that in the disclosure of the names of the donors and donees of electoral bonds from books of accounts may be in contravention of the provisions contained under section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of RTI Act. There appears to be no larger public interest overriding the right to privacy of the donors and donees concerned.” [Sections 8(1)(e) & (j); Donors & Donees of Electoral Bonds, Larger Public Interest]
  • CIC Decision dated 06.11.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Rahmat Bano Vs. Office of Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhawan, Jodhpur, Rajasthan – CIC: “9. Taking into consideration the aforementioned analysis and the judgments of the Higher Courts, the Commission directs the respondent to inform the appellant about the generic details of the net taxable income/gross income of her husband held and available with the Public Authority for the period 2017-2018 ….
    10. The details/copy of income tax returns and other personal information of third party need not to be disclosed to the appellant except as mentioned at para no. 9 above.[Sections 8(1)(j), 19(3); Copy of Husband’s ITRs]
  • CIC Decision dated 05.11.2020 on the Complaint filed by Varun Krishna Vs. CPIO, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Mumbai – CIC: “The CPIO cannot be expected to examine and make judgement to find out the name of the official and then provide him report of the controlling authority, reasons for non-disposal including name, official mobile number and designation of their controlling authority. xxx   xxx In light of the factual matrix of these cases and the legal principles enunciated in the aforementioned case-laws, this Commission comes to the conclusion that no action under Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 is warranted in these cases.[Sections 18, 18(1)(e), 20; Penalty on CPIO pressed by the Complainant]
  • CIC Decision dated 30.10.2020 on the Second Appeal/Complaint by Shri Kuldeep Kumar Baranwal v. CPIO, Prime Minister’s Office, New Delhi – As per the CIC Decision, the queries of the Appellant were vague, hypothetical, clarificatory and interpretative in nature which do not fall within the definition of information/right to information as per Section 2 (f)/(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Appellant was advised to strictly refrain in future from seeking information under the RTI Act by filing such applications before offices which do not ordinarily possess the relevant information. [Section 2(f), 2(j), 8(1) (d), or (j); Improper Use of RTI Act]
  • CIC Decision dated 16.09.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Mahendra Singh Vs. PIO/SDM (Narela), Naya Bans, Delhi through Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal, Consultant of PIO – A significant aspect of this case is that it was remanded back to FAA by the CIC and that the Respondent was represented by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal, consultant/representative of the PIO through audio conference.
    CIC: “Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during hearing, Commission observes that the Appellant is not satisfied with the information provided by the Respondent. It is further observed that the Appellant has brought in certain aspects during the hearing which is outside the adjudicatory powers of the Commission.
    Hence, Commission deems it fit to remand the instant case back to Shri Tanvir Ahmed, FAA/ADM-North to provide a fair hearing to the relevant parties i.e., Appellant, Respondent and the BDO concerned and pass a reasoned, speaking order by 31.12.2020.. ..” [Agricultural Land]
  • Delhi HC Judgment dated 31.08.2020 – Dr. R.S. Gupta Vs. Govt. of NCTD & Ors. – Delhi High Court: In absence of even a remote connection with any larger public interest, disclosure of information would be exempted as the same would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual under section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act. [Sections 7, 8(1)(j); Attendance Record] – Delhi HC Judgment dated 31.08.2020 – Dr. R.S. Gupta Vs. Govt. of NCTD & Ors..
  • CIC Decision dated 26.08.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Smt. Meeta Agrawal Vs. CPIO, DGM(G) & Nodal PIO, North Central Railway, RTI Cell, Subedarganj, Allahabad -In light of the Delhi High Court Judgment dated 24.11.2014 [in the case of Naresh Trehan v. Rakesh Kumar Gupta (W.P(C) 85/2010)], and considering the facts of the case, the Commission observed that the grounds for the cancellation of the tender, the minutes and approval of the competent authority must be made available to a tender participant as non-disclosure of the same would have affected the competitive as well as personal interest of the said participant. The Commission, therefore, directed the respondent to provide requisite information on point nos. 1, 3 and 4, after redacting information which related to commercial confidence or personal information of third parties, the disclosure of which is exempted under Section 8(1) (d), or (j) of the RTI Act, to the appellant. [Section 8(1) (d), or (j); Minutes of the Tender Committee, Approval of the Competent Authority]
  • CIC Decision dated 23.07.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Saurav Das Vs. CPIOs, ICMR, and Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi – CIC: ” … it is the considered  view of the Commission that authentic, verified and cogent reply based on factual information needs to be furnished to the Complainant as also disclose on the Public Authority website for the benefit of public at large. The fact that the application shuttled from one Division of the Public Authority to another indicates that there is a very urgent requirement for not only notifying a Nodal Authority in the M/o H&FW to compile, collate and consolidate the information sought in the RTI application but to effectively act and suo motu upload the same on its website in compliance with Section-4 of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the Commission advises the Secretary, Health & Family Welfare to have this matter examined at an appropriate level and the Nodal Authority so notified should furnish all the details sought by the Complainant in a clear, cogent and precise manner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order depending upon the condition for containment of the Corona Virus Pandemic in the Country or through email.”  [Sections 4, 6(3), 8(1)(a); Coronavirus-related Information]
  • CIC Decision dated 20.07.2020 on the Second Appeal/Complaint by Smt. Savitri Devi Vs. PIO, NDMC, Narela Zone, New Delhi – In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, audio hearings (audio conferencing) were scheduled by the Hon’ble Central Information Commission after giving prior notice to both the parties.
    The Commission observed that the PIO had made a mockery of the FAA’s order by merely re-sending the initial PIO reply, which had not been received by the Appellant till the date of hearing. The Commission directed the PIO to furnish a comprehensive status report with respect to the property under reference by the specified date failing which action would be initiated against the PIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act. [Immovable Property; PIO]
  • CIC Decision dated 10.07.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Smt. Basavantamma Vs. CPIO, Office of the Income Tax Officer, Bengaluru – CIC : 14. … “… this Commission after considering the factual matrix of the case is of the opinion that in the absence of any larger public interest in the matter, the appellant is not entitled to seek the details of the Income Tax Returns filed by the third party, Mr. G H Sharanappa which is exempted u/Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
    It is to be noted that the appellant has requested this Commission for disclosure of at least the ‘gross income’ of Mr. G H Sharanappa so that she could defend her matrimonial case. Therefore, considering the aspect of marital discord between the husband and wife vis-à-vis her right of maintenance, this Commission is of the opinion that the respondent should consider providing only the limited information of the last six years, i.e. the numerical figure(s) of the ‘gross income’ of her husband, Mr. G H Sharanappa …” [Sections 8(1)(j), 19(3),20; Income Tax Return Details of Spouse]
  • CIC Decision dated 24.06.2020 on the Second Appeal by Shri Baljeet Singh Vs. CPIO, Central University of Haryana, Mahendergarh (Haryana) – The CIC decided that the CPIO erred in stating that no information was asked, whereas the information sought was specific and it is relevant to mention that right to information includes right to inspect also. The CIC directed the CPIO to provide a revised reply to the appellant in respect of point no. 3 of the RTI application. In point No.3, the applicant had sought a copy of the Minutes of Meetings of the Committee constituted for considering promotions, held from 01 January 2018 to 30 April 2019, for considering promotion/selection of non-teaching staff (posts). [Section 8(1)(j); Minutes of DPC/Committee]
  • CIC Decision dated 22.06.2020 on the Second Appeal by Mr. R.K. Jain Vs. CPIO, Office of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax Settlement Commission, Mumbai/Kolkata/New Delhi/Chennai – The CIC, in view of the facts and upon hearing the parties at great length came to the conclusion that ‘right to information’ under the RTI Act, 2005 also includes right to obtain accessible information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device. Therefore, denial of accessible information in the CD/DVD format under the RTI Act, 2005 could not be upheld by the CIC. [Sections 2(j)(iv), 4(2), Rule 15 of the Customs and Excise Settlement Commission Procedure 2007; Copies of orders passed by the Settlement Commission, no. of orders passed, etc.].
  • CIC Decision dated 05.06.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Venkatesh Nayak Vs. CPIO, Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi – The Complainant vide his RTI application sought information on 05 points regarding the district-wise number of hospitals and healthcare facilities called by any other name, designated as COVID-19 treatment centers as on date; postal addresses and telephone numbers of the hospitals and healthcare facilities and other issues related thereto. The complainant, Mr. Venkatesh Nayak, attended the hearing through WhatsApp.
    From the Respondent’s side, the hearing was attended by Dr. Sandeep Sharma, CPIO (SJH), Mr. Mahesh Mangla, CAPIO, SJH, Dr. R. Laxmi Narayan, ADG, ICMR, Dr. Ashok Kr. Singh, Prof. Chest Med. LHMC, Dr. U.B. Das, CMO, DGHS in person; Mr. Rajender Kumar, US, PH Division, M/o H&FW and Mr. G.P. Samanta, CPIO & US (Hospital-D) (SJH, RML and LHMC) through WhatsApp/TC. Expressing its displeasure at the state of affairs, the CIC advised the Secretary, M/o H&FW to designate an officer of an appropriate seniority as a Nodal Officer to examine the matter and suo motu disclose the information sought in the RTI application on the website of the Public Authority within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order in the larger public interest. [Section 4(1); Distt.-Wise No. of Hospitals for Covid Treatment]
  • CIC Order dated 03.06.2020 on the Appeal filed by Priti Ranjan Das Vs. CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai – The Appellant and the Respondent were not present during the course of the hearing. The CIC ordered as under:-
    “6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, feels that it is necessary for both parties to be present for proper adjudication of the issues raised in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is adjourned.” [Sections 8(1)(a)&(d), 11(1),20(1); Appeal from Public Authority]
  • CIC Decision dated 01.05.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Anil Sood Vs. CPIO & Nodal Officer, Office of Central Govt. Health Scheme. R.K. Puram Sector 12, New Delhi-22 The complainant attended the hearing through WhatsApp.
    The CIC in the case of the complaint filed by Mr. Anil Sood Vs. CPIO & Nodal Officer of Central Govt. Health Scheme, R.K. Puram Sector 12, New Delhi-22, observed on May 01, 2020 that there was complete negligence and laxity in the public authority (CGHS) in dealing with the RTI applications. It is abundantly clear that such matters are being ignored and set aside without application of mind which reflected disrespect towards the RTI Act, 2005 itself. The Commission expressed its displeasure on the casual and callous approach adopted by the respondent (CGHS) in responding to the RTI application. It was felt that the conduct of Respondent was against the spirit of the RTI Act, 2005 which was enacted to ensure greater transparency and effective access to the information.  [PIO, Public Authority, CGHS, Supply of Medicines to WCs]
  • CIC Decision dated 24.04.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Smt. Kairun BiBi Vs. CPIO, Steel Authority of India, Dhanbad [Sections 19(3), 20; CPIO (Warning to CPIO)]
  • CIC Decision dated 23.04.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Varun Krishna Vs. CPIO & Dy. GM (Legal), Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., New Delhi [Section 20(1); ATR, File Notings, CPIO, Public Authority]
  • CIC Decision dated 22.04.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Mohit Kumar Gupta Vs. CPIO, University of Delhi  – The CIC in the case of the complaint by Mr. Mohit Kumar Gupta Vs. CPIO, University of Delhi, decided on April 22, 2020, as under:-
    (i)         An advisory was issued u/s 25(5) of the RTI Act to the Secretary DoPT to evolve a system after coordinating with the Director General, NIC in the spirit of the RTI Act and take immediate steps towards providing a platform for implementation of Sec 7(1) of the RTI Act.
    (ii)         A report on the action taken on the advisory might be sent to the Commission by the Secretary, DoPT within 7 days from the date of withdrawal of lockdown. Due to the ongoing pandemic of coronavirus in the country and the prevalent lock down, the Commission found it appropriate to highlight the issue of Sec 7(1) implementation by citizens more so, when postal receipt of RTI applications are minimal, in such situations all public authorities should encourage RTI applications through e-mail in case of life and liberty matter.
    (iii)        A unique e-mail id can be created by the CPIOs in this regard and reflected in their respective website. A method of online acceptance of RTI fees also has to be thought of in this regard. In so far as other normal RTIs are concerned, the RTI portal can be used. The Deputy Registrar was directed to  circulate this order widely to the public authorities related to the Registry. [Sections 4(1)(b), 7(1), 19(1), 25(5); Sports Quota, Delhi University, Public Authority, Minutes of Meeting]
  • CIC Decision dated 19.03.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Ajay Manda Vs. CPIO, Ch. Charan Singh National Institute of Agriculture Marketing, Jaipur – CIC: “Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the rival contentions made by the parties, the Commission deems it appropriate to dismiss this appeal, as voluminous information was sought for which replies have been provided and any further requirement for disclosure would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority. The appellant is advised to be responsible and avoid filing repeated RTI applications seeking voluminous information.” – [Section 7(9); Habitual RTI Applicant]
  •  CIC Decision dated 17.03.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Mr. D.T. Eshwaran Vs. CPIO, Central Govt. Employees Welfare Housing Organization, New Delhi – The Commission expressed extreme displeasure at the conduct of the CPIO in flouting the FAA’s order. Hence, the concerned CPIO was issued a strict warning to be careful in future with regard to the observations, made in the Decision. The present CPIO was directed to serve a copy of this order to the then CPIO for his information and in case such kind of lapse is repeated in future, the Commission decided that it would be constrained to initiate penal action against him under the relevant provisions of the RTI Act.
    The Hon’ble Commission also directed the present CPIO to comply with the direction given by the FAA. It was also ordered by the Hon’ble Commission that the CPIO should note that at this stage he cannot transfer the RTI application, however, he could obtain information from its custodian after seeking assistance u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act. It was further ordered that the onus was now on him to obtain the required information and provide it to the appellant as per the timeline specified in the Decision. [Sections 5(4), 20; CPIO, Construction Work]
  • Certified Copies of Court Documents
    SC: “42. … … In the absence of inherent inconsistency between the provisions of the RTI  Act and other law, overriding effect of RTI Act would not apply.
    (ii) The information to be accessed/certified copies on the judicial side to be obtained through the mechanism provided under the High Court Rules, the provisions of the RTI Act shall not be resorted to.” – (Secs. 2, 4(b), 6(2), 8(1)(a) to (j), 19, 22, 31; Disclosure of Information; Certified Copies of Court Documents)-  SC Judgment dated 04.03.2020 – Chief Information Commissioner v. High Court of Gujarat and Another >>>  RTI – Court Judgements
  • CIC Decision dated 21.02.2020 on the Second Appeal by Mr. Amit Khera v. CPIO, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Delhi. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties and in the light of the decisions cited in the Decision, the Commission instructed the Respondent (HPCL) to disclose the broad outcome of the investigation redacting information exempted under Section 8 (1) of the RTI Act, 2005 to the Appellant as also suo moto disclose the same on their website. – [Sections 2(f), 2(j), 8(1)(d); Investigation Report]
  • CIC Decision dated 10.02.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Ajay Kumar v. CPIO, Northern Central Railway, Agra.  CIC: “7. Further, this Commission observes that the reply dated 21-03-2018 on point no. 2 is evasive in nature wherein the then CPIO did not apply his mind while replying to the RTI application and therefore, the CPIO is hereby issued a warning for future to be careful and not to contravene the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.* [Sections 19(3), 20; Warning to CPIO, Recruitment]
  • CIC Decision dated 06.02.2020 on the Second Appeal by Mr. Rana Ranjan v. CPIO, National Insurance Company Ltd., Bhavnagar, Gujarat – [Sections 2(f), 8(1)(j); Leave Record]

2019

2018

  • CIC Decision dated 24.12.2018 – Mr. R.S. Rai v. CPIO, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Jabalpur  – CIC: “The Appellant could not substantiate his claims regarding mala fide denial of information by the Respondent or for withholding it without any reasonable cause.” [Sections 2(f), 20; Leave Record, Result Analysis]
  • CIC Decision dated 21.12.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Sounder Rajan v. CPIO, IDBI Bank Limited, Mumbai – CIC: The Commission, however, notes that the Notice for Hearing served upon the appellant was returned undelivered to the Commission with the remark “Deceased”. In view of the death of the appellant and the Commission’s Circular F. No.2/Management regulation2007/CIC-MR dated 18.06.2018, the Commission directs the respondent to publish the information sought vide point nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of the RTI application, as per the available records, suo-motu on their website …..” [Sec. 2(f), 4, 20; FD Account]
  • CIC Decision dated 19.12.2018 – Nirmal Singh Dhiman v. CPIO, Deptt. of Ex-Servicemen, New Delhi – CIC: “In the event, the averred letters and corresponding noting(s) remain untraceable, Commission directs the CPIO to file an appropriate affidavit to this effect stating the efforts made in tracing out the information and the factum of non-receipt of letters and unavailability of file noting(s). The said affidavit should be sent to the Commission with its copy duly endorsed to the Appellant.” [Section 2(f); File Notings]
  • CIC Decision dated 08.11.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal v. CPIO, Min. of Youth Affairs & Sports, New Delhi – The CIC directed for complimentary passes for hockey matches being put in public domain [Sections 6(3), 7(6), 8(1)(d), (e) & (j), 8(2); File Notings, Complimentary Passes, Hockey India League]
  • CIC Decision dated 02.11.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Sandeep Singh Jadoun v. PIO, DGEAT – CIC issued show-cause notice to RBI governor for non-disclosure of wilful defaulters’ list [Sections 2(f), 4(1)(b),(c),(d), 8(1)(a),(d),(e) & (h), 8(2), 19(8), 22; NPA]
  • Differently-Abled
    SC: “Additionally, we think it appropriate to ask the authorities to explore any kind of advanced technology that has developed in the meantime so that other methods can be introduced. We are absolutely sure that if the petitioner would point out, the cognizance of the same shall be taken. We are also certain that the authority shall, with all sincerity and concern, explore further possibilities with the available on-line application/mechanism.” – SC Judgment dated 27.09.2018 – Aseer Jamal Vs. Union of India & Ors.
  •  CIC Decision dated 05.09.2018 on the Appeal filed by R.P. Verma Vs. CPIO, Ordnance Factory, Raipur, Dehradun – CIC: The CPIO was directed to place this order before their competent authority to pass a speaking order ….. Appellant was warned against the misuse of RTI Act in future and was advised to make judicious use of his right to information. [Appointment, Misuse of RTI]
  • RTI
    Delhi High Court has held as under:-
    “… … the CPIO being custodian of the information or the documents sought for, is primarily responsible under the scheme of the RTI Act to supply the information and in case of default or dereliction on his part, the penal action is to be invoked against him only. The Appellate Authority is not the custodian of the information or the document. It is only a statutory authority to take a decision on an appeal with regard the tenability or otherwise of the action of the CPIO and, therefore, there is a conscious omission in making the Appellate Authority liable for a penal action under Section 20 of the RTI Act and if that be the scheme of the Act and the legislative intention, we see no error in the order passed by the learned writ Court warranting reconsideration.” [Sections 19(1), 20 of the RTI Act] –   Delhi HC Judgment dated 29.08.2018 – R.K. Jain Vs. Union of India
  • CIC Decision dated 06.08.2018 on the Appeal filed by Mr. K.S. Jain Vs. CPIO, Dte. Gen. of Vig., Customs & Central Excise, New Delhi – The Appellant was not able to contest the submissions of the Respondent or to establish the larger public interest in disclosure which outweighs the harm to the protected interests. The Commission observed that the said matter pertained to exemption claimed u/s 8 (1) (h) and not Section 8 (1) (j). The Commission also observed that the applicant therein sought information in the context of his own suspension pending disciplinary action, whereas in the present instance, the Appellant had sought information regarding a third party. [Sections 8(1)(h), 8(1)(j); Public Interest, 3rd Party]
  • CIC Decision dated 06.08.2018 on the Appeal filed by Ms. Rashi Agrawal Vs. CPIO, SPMCIL, New Delhi, CPIO, Indian Security Press, Nashik – CIC: “… … it is evident that the transfer of RTI application u/s 6 (3) to the concerned PIO was not made by the Respondent (SPMCIL, New Delhi) vide its initial reply dated 29.07.2016 and that no reply had been furnished by the Respondent (ISP Nashik) subsequent to the transfer of points 03 and 05 of the RTI application by FAA, SPMCIL, vide letter dated 06.09.2016 which was a grave violation of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission, therefore instructs the CMD, SPMCIL, to depute an officer of a senior rank to seek the explanation to the show cause notice from the concerned CPIOs and furnish the details sought by the Complainant …..” [Sections 6(3), 20(1); Processing of RTI Application/1st Appeal]
  • CIC Decision dated 30.07.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. CPIO, Min. of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, New Delhi – The CIC was of the opinion that a token amount of Rs.1,000/- should be paid as compensation to the appellant u/s 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act for the detriment caused to him and that this amount of Rs.1,000/- is to be paid by the public authority, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change as compensation to the appellant u/s 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act for the detriment caused him for the delay caused. [Sections 2(f), 19, 19(8)(b); File Notings, Compensations to Complainant]
  • CIC Decision dated 11.07.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri S.P. Sinha Vs APIO, Min. of Shipping, MMD, Mumbai – The Hon’ble Commission directed the concerned CPIO to disclose the sought for information after obtaining consent of the third parties. Regarding Point No.5 of the RTI application, the respondent CPIO was directed to fix a joint inspection of relevant records on a mutually convenient date and at mutually convenient time and place and thereafter to provide certified copies of records as selected by the appellant free of charge u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act. [Sections 7(6), 8(1)(j), 11(1) of the RTI Act; DPC; File Notings, Third Party Information]
  • CIC Decision dated 04.07.2018 on the Appeal,Complaint filed by Shri Hans Raj Chug Vs. PIO, Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi –  As per the CIC decision, the Commission, inter alia, found that the objection of third party(ies) was not legally tenable considering that information sought was not personal in nature. Thus the reply of the PIO and the FAA were set aside. It has been further observed by the Hon’ble Commission that the FAA had skipped the analysis of the queries vis-a-vis the responses, though he is supposed to exercise his expertise based on domain knowledge. Hence, the Commission remanded this case back to the FAA for complete and proper adjudication of the issues and ensuring that information shall be provided to the appellant upon obtaining the same from the relevant custodians of information, invoking [Section 5(4) of the RTI Act; First Appellate Authority; Third Party Information]
  • CIC Decision dated 27.06.2018 on the Appeal,Complaint filed by Mr. R. Natarajan Vs. PIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare – The CIC observed as under:-
    “The society is a creation of MCI, housed in the MCI building for extending ease of functioning. In garb of functional autonomy, the parent body MCI cannot be said to have abrogated its right to access information from the society.”
    “The process of bestowing national honours cannot be kept away from public scrutiny. Any practice facilitating opacity will go on to diminish the sanctity of the honour and its past recipients.”
    The CPIO, MCI was accordingly directed to access information from Secretary, Dr. B.C. Roy National Award Fund and furnish the same to the appellant. [Dr. B.C. Roy National Award]
  • CIC Decision dated 25.06.2018 on the Appeal filed by Balkrishna Porwal Vs. PIO, Department of Posts – As per the CIC Decision, by denying the information the appellant was not only harassed by the public authority, but also by the CPIO, and that while public authority denied him the documents which he was entitled under SHW Act of 2013, the CPIO denied them under RTI Act besides wrongfully invoking Section 8(1) (d) and (g). For the reasons stated in its decision, Hon’ble Commission concluded that denial of information to the appellant was without any reasonable cause, and hence liable for maximum penalty of Rs. 25,000 under section 20 of RTI Act, Hon’ble Commission also found it as a fit case to recommend the public authority to initiate disciplinary action against the CPIO in view of the analysis, in the above-referred decision. [Sections 8(1)(d) & (j) and 20; Section 16 of SHW Act of 2013; Inquiry Report; Sexual Harassment; File Notings]
  • CIC Decision dated 25.06.2018 on the Appeal filed by Ajay Kumar Vs. CPIO, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Lucknow – The CIC observed  that  the  1st appellate  authority  order  dated  13-06-2017  was  not  proper,  wherein,  the  1st appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation. In fact, the RTI application was never received by the CPIO. Therefore, calculation of timelines done by the 1st appellate authority was without application of mind. The 1st appellate authority was advised to adhere to the provisions of the RTI Act/Rules while disposing of 1st appeal(s). 
    The Deputy Registrar was directed to send complete RTI application file to the CPIO for taking necessary action. [First Appellate Authority (FAA)]
  • CIC Decision dated 18.06.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Neeraj Sharma Vs. CPIO, Rajya Sabha Sectt., New Delhi – The  CIC was  of  the  view  that  the  delay  of more  than  5  days  in transferring  the  application  had  been  duly  explained  by  the  respondent and the  appellant was  provided  a  reply well  within  the stipulated  period  of  time. The Commission did not find any reasons to impose penalty on the CPIO. [Sec. 6(3); CPIO)]
  • CIC Decision dated 31.05.2018 on the Appeal filed by Hitender Vs. CPIO, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi – The Commission was of the opinion that the complainant (who was an Australian citizen with the OCI card) could not be treated as Indian citizen for the purpose of seeking information u/Section 3 of the RTI Act. Moreover, the RTI Act, 2005 does not have any provisions for furnishing information to overseas citizen of India. It is applicable to Indian citizen(s) only. [Overseas Citizen of India]
  • CIC Decision dated 07.05.2018 on the Appeal,Complaint filed by Mr. M. Dinesh Vs. PIO, Bureau of Immigration,IB (MHA) – It was, inter alia, observed by Hon’ble Information Commissioner that he was left with no doubt that a man preparing for his self defense in penal proceeding exercises his basic human right. Any impediment in the same would invariably be a breach of human right. The term ‘violation’ as preceding the term ‘human right’ in proviso to Section 24 of the RTI Act had to be understood in a broader manner so as to cover any past or ongoing violation of human rights.
    The appellant was seeking information about his own travel details to prove his innocence in a criminal proceeding. The information sought was crucial to the appellant for a fair opportunity of self defence. The Hon’ble Commission was not considering the culpability or innocence of the appellant in the criminal case set up against him; but declining a fair opportunity to arrange for material of self defence would certainly breach the human right of appellant. Furthermore, there was no impediment in terms of exceptions carved out in Section 8 of the RTI Act prohibiting dissemination of information sought. Accordingly, the Commission directed the PIO, Bureau of Immigration, Intelligence Bureau/MHA to provide complete information sought within four weeks of receipt of the order. [Sections 8 & 24; Human Rights; Self Defence]
  • CIC Decision dated 11.07.2017 on the complaint filed by Shri Saurabh Bindal Vs. Delhi Lawn Tennis Association(uploaded on CIC website on 19.04.2018– The issue before the bench of the Central Information Commission was to decide whether Delhi Lawn Tennis Association is a public authority per section 2(h) of RTI Act, 2008. In the light of the reasons stated in the Order and in order to avoid multiple litigation, the bench refrained from passing an order at that stage. The matter was adjourned sine die and it was open to the parties to agitate the matter before the Commission again after the superior courts have pronounced their decision. [Section 2(h); Delhi Lawn Tennis Association is or is not a Public Authority under the RTI Act]
  • CIC Decision dated 19.04.2018 on the Appeal filed by Ashok Pandit Vs. CPIO, State Bank of India, Maheshkhunt, Khagaria, Bihar – CIC: “The copy of Land Possession Certificate (LPC) and land receipts of the borrowers is personal information of the third parties i.e. the borrowers, which is held by the Bank in a fiduciary capacity, the disclosure of which  has  no  relationship  to  any  public  interest  and  would  cause  an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the third parties. Hence, the disclosure of the information sought is exempted under Section 8(1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act. However, the total number of KCC loans sanctioned from 05.08.2016 till date should be disclosed.” [Section 8(1)(e) and (j); Land Possession Certificate]
  • CIC upholds PMO’s decision not to disclose Aadhaar details of PM [Section 8(1)(j); Personal Information] CIC Decision dated 19.02.2018 on Appeal filed by Soni S. Eramath Vs. CPIO, Prime Minister’s Office, New Delhi 
  • SC: “Weighing the need for transparency and accountability on the one hand and requirement of optimum use of fiscal resources and confidentiality of sensitive information on the other, we are of the view that information sought with regard to marks in Civil Services Exam cannot be directed to be furnished mechanically. Situation of exams of other academic bodies may stand on different footing. Furnishing raw marks will cause problems as pleaded by the UPSC as quoted above which will not be in public interest.” (Emphasis Added.) (Sections 8,9,11) –  SC Judgement dated 20.02.2018 – Union Public Service Commission, etc. Vs. Angesh Kumar & Ors. Etc. >>> RTI-Court Judgements
  • Delhi HC: “Section 8 of the Act provides for exemption from disclosure of certain information and none of the provisions of Section 8 provide for blanket exemption that entitles the respondent to withhold all notings on a file.”, ” …. the reasoning, that the notings or information generated by an employee during the course of his employment is his information and thus has to be treated as relating to a third party, is flawed.” [Sections 2(f),8(1)(e),11(1),19(3); File Notings, Third Party Information] –  Delhi HC Judgement dated 12.02.2018 – Paras Nath Singh Vs. Union of India >>> RTI-Court Judgements
  • CIC Decision dated 22.01.2018 on the Second Appeal,Complaint filed by Shri Rajender Saxena Vs. PIO,EE, Citi Zone, North Delhi Municipal Corporation – CIC: “Perusal of the records of the case reveal that the FAA has passed a non-speaking and summary order without specifying how the PIO’s order is incomplete and unsatisfactory. The case is remanded back to the FAA to adjudicate over the matter and decide the same on merits, giving specific directions to the PIO to furnish the deficient information, if any.” [FAA, CPIO]
  • CIC Decision dated 18.01.2018 on the Complaint filed by A. Gopi Krishna Vs. CPIO, Syndicate Bank, Regional Office, Visakhapatnam – CIC: “The Commission, therefore,
    directs the FAA, Syndicate Bank, Regional Office, Visakhapatnam, to inquire into the matter as to whether the RTI application was received in the branch and, if so, what action was taken on the RTI application. The FAA shall also, if required, take appropriate departmental action against the officers responsible for the misplacement of the RTI application. A copy of the inquiry report along with the action taken report may be provided to the Commission as well as to the appellant within a period of six weeks. …”  [FAA, CPIO, Departmental Action for Misplacement of RTI Application]

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

SELECTED CIC DECISIONS (DATE-WISE)

(a) CIC DECISIONS (From 01.01.2016 Onwards), (b) CIC DECISIONS (From 01.01.2015 To 31.12.2015), (c) CIC DECISIONS (From 01.10.2014 To 31.12.2014), (d) CIC DECISIONS (From 01.01.2014 To 30.09.2014), (e) CIC DECISIONS (From 01.10.2013 To 31.12.2013), (f) CIC DECISIONS (01.07.2013 To 30.09.2013), (g) CIC DECISIONS (From 15.02.2013 To 30.06.2013), (h) CIC DECISIONS (From 01.10.2012 To 15.10.2012), (i) CIC DECISIONS (01.07.2012 To 30.09.2012), (i) CIC DECISIONS (01.04.2012 To 30.06.2012), (k) CIC DECISIONS (01.01.2012 To 31.3.2012), (l) CIC DECISIONS (01.10.2011 To 31.12.2011)

(a)

  CIC Decision dated 16.08.2021 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Saurav Das Vs. CPIO, Department of Health & Family Welfare (1.9 MiB, 151 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 13.08.2021 on the Second Appeal/Complaint filed by Shri Shyamlal Yadav Vs. PIO, CPV Division, Ministry of External Affairs (729.2 KiB, 141 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 17.05.2021 on the Complaint filed by Shri Aniket Gaurav Vs. PIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (15.8 MiB, 337 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 23.03.2021 on the Second Appeal/Complaint filed by Shri Venkatesh Nayak Vs. CPIO, Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, New Delhi (138.3 KiB, 484 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.02.2021 on the Second Appeal filed by Jitendra Kumar vs. CPIO, O/o Income Tax Officer, Aligarh, UP (151.8 KiB, 623 hits)

  Delhi HC Judgement dated 05.02.2021 - Amit Kumar Shrivastava Vs. Central Information Commission, New Delhi (489.9 KiB, 712 hits)

  Delhi HC Judgement dated 22.01.2021 - Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta (Erstwhile CPIO) Union Bank of India & Ors. Vs. Central Information Commission & Anr. (889.7 KiB, 789 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 28.12.2020 on the Second Appeals filed by Deeksha Chaudhary Vs. CPIO, Air India Ltd., New Delhi (1.2 MiB, 782 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 21.12.2020 on the Second Appeal by Vihar Durve Vs. CPIO, State Bank of India, Mumbai (140.3 KiB, 1,365 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.11.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Rahmat Bano Vs. Office of Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhawan, Jodhpur, Rajasthan (157.9 KiB, 891 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.11.2020 on the Complaint filed by Varun Krishna Vs. CPIO, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Mumbai (150.7 KiB, 924 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 30.10.2020 on the Second Appeal/Complaint by Shri Kuldeep Kumar Baranwal v. CPIO, Prime Minister's Office, New Delhi (489.0 KiB, 1,053 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.09.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Mahendra Singh Vs. PIO/SDM (Narela), Naya Bans, Delhi through Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal, Consultant of PIO (695.0 KiB, 981 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 26.08.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Smt. Meeta Agrawal Vs. CPIO, DGM(G) & Nodal PIO, North Central Railway, RTI Cell, Subedarganj, Allahabad (787.5 KiB, 1,061 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 23.07.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Saurav Das Vs. CPIOs, ICMR, and Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi (277.4 KiB, 1,104 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 20.07.2020 on the Second Appeal/Complaint by Smt. Savitri Devi Vs. PIO, NDMC, Narela Zone, New Delhi (195.7 KiB, 1,108 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 10.07.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Smt. Basavantamma Vs. CPIO, Office of the Income Tax Officer, Bengaluru (818.8 KiB, 970 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 24.06.2020 on the Second Appeal by Shri Baljeet Singh Vs. CPIO, Central University of Haryana, Mahendergarh (Haryana) (815.2 KiB, 1,181 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 22.06.2020 on the Second Appeal by Mr. R.K. Jain Vs. CPIO, Office of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax Settlement Commission, Mumbai/Kolkata/New Delhi/Chennai (584.0 KiB, 1,185 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.06.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Venkatesh Nayak Vs. CPIO, Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi (312.0 KiB, 929 hits)

  CIC Order dated 03.06.2020 on the Appeal filed by Priti Ranjan Das on behalf of the HDFC Bank Vs. CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (160.6 KiB, 954 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 01.05.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Anil Sood Vs. CPIO & Nodal Officer, Office of Central Govt. Health Scheme. R.K. Puram Sector 12, New Delhi-22 (1.4 MiB, 1,728 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 24.04.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Smt. Kairun BiBi Vs. CPIO, Steel Authority of India, Dhanbad (530.5 KiB, 1,102 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 23.04.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Varun Krishna Vs. CPIO & Dy. GM (Legal), Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., New Delhi (1.8 MiB, 1,128 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 22.04.2020 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Mohit Kumar Gupta Vs. CPIO, University of Delhi (884.2 KiB, 1,085 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 19.03.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Ajay Manda Vs. CPIO, Ch. Charan Singh National Institute of Agriculture Marketing, Jaipur (260.7 KiB, 1,198 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 17.03.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Mr. D.T. Eshwaran Vs. CPIO, Central Govt. Employees Welfare Housing Organization, New Delhi (500.9 KiB, 1,103 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 21.02.2020 on the Second Appeal by Mr. Amit Khera v. CPIO, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Delhi (253.6 KiB, 1,749 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 10.02.2020 on the Second Appeal filed by Ajay Kumar v. CPIO, Northern Central Railway, Agra (122.5 KiB, 1,367 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.02.2020 on the Second Appeal by Mr. Rana Ranjan v. CPIO, National Insurance Company Ltd., Bhavnagar, Gujarat (221.4 KiB, 1,496 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 20.12.2019 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Kripalani M. v. CPIO, Office of Pr. Commissioner of Customs, Menezies Aviation Cargo Terminal, Bangaluru (Full Bench Decision) (257.7 KiB, 1,462 hits)

  Delhi High Court judgment dated 17.12.2019 - Election Commission of India Vs. Central Information Commission and Anr. (364.3 KiB, 1,842 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.12.2019 on the Complaint filed by Neeraj Sharma v. CPIO, National Payments Corporation of India, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (1.0 MiB, 1,444 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.12.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Priti Ranjan Das Vs. CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (136.5 KiB, 1,841 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 29.11.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui v. CPIO, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (456.2 KiB, 1,459 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 27.11.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Shiv Kumar Kanoi Vs. CPIO, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Mumbai (151.9 KiB, 1,807 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 27.11.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Anand Nallan Vs. CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (158.7 KiB, 1,793 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 07.11.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Rakesh Sharma Vs. Asstt. Secretary & CPIO, Central Board of Secondary Education, Regional Office, Allahabad (520.3 KiB, 2,120 hits)

  Madras HC Judgment dated 16.10.2019 - The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai Vs. The Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, Chennai (234.3 KiB, 2,325 hits)

  Delhi HC Judgment dated 10.10.2019 - Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr Vs. Krishan Kumar (463.3 KiB, 2,292 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 09.09.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Vipin Jain v. CPIO, UCO Bank, Indore (150.0 KiB, 2,510 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 01.08.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Nikhil Kumar Singh v. CPIOs, Central Board of Secondary Education (176.0 KiB, 2,904 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 29.07.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Ms. Renu Garg v. CPIOs, Delhi Police (136.5 KiB, 2,823 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 02.07.2019 on the Second Appeal file by Commodore Lokesh K. Batra V. CPIO, Deptt. of Personnel & Training, New Delhi (146.3 KiB, 3,030 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 28.06.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Mandeep V. CPIO, Bureau of Immigration, New Delhi, CPIO, IB, New Delhi (641.0 KiB, 3,033 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 12.06.2019 on the second Appeal filed by Ujwala Kokde V. CPOI, Ministry of Home Affairs, Judicial Division, New Delhi (718.8 KiB, 3,064 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 22.05.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Ms. Nutan Thankur vs. CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (729.1 KiB, 3,320 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 17.05.2019 on the Second Appeal filed by Gopal Kumar Jha vs. CPIO, State Bank of India, Patna (3.2 MiB, 3,482 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 29.04.2019 on the Appeal filed by Shri Manoj Kumar v. CPIO, Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption Branch, Patna (160.6 KiB, 3,639 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 26.04.2019 on the Complaint filed by Monish Gulati v. CPIO, Ministry of Civil Aviation, New Delhi (177.6 KiB, 3,632 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 25.04.2019 on the Appeal filed by D. Sounderraj v. CPIO, Air India, Air Transport Services Ltd., Mumbai (174.4 KiB, 3,656 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 26.03.2019 on the Appeal filed by Nutan Thakur v. CPIO, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi (164.3 KiB, 4,017 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 11.03.2019 on the Appeal filed by Shri Ashok Rameshbhai Mistry v. CPIO, Dena Bank, Surat (130.2 KiB, 4,013 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 07.03.2019 on the Appeal filed by Shri Vipin Yadav v. PIO, Office of the Land Acquisition Collector (South-West), GNCTD (484.0 KiB, 3,971 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 15.02.2019 on the Appeal filed by Shri R.P. Rohilla v. PIO, Dte. General of Health Services, New Delhi (125.4 KiB, 4,229 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 13.02.2019 on the Appeal filed by Ms Pushpa Devi v. CPIO, Central Coalfield Limited, Jharkhand (590.4 KiB, 4,205 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 12.02.2019 on the Appeal filed by Shri Razaak K. Haider v. CPIO Election Commission of India, New Delhi (666.2 KiB, 3,952 hits)

  Delhi HC Judgment dated 16.01.2019 - Ehtisham Qutubuddin Siddique v. CPIO Intelligence Bureau (370.6 KiB, 4,666 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 15.01.2019 on the Appeal filed by Mr. Kantilal B. Chavda v. CPIO, Central University of Gujarat, Gandhinagar, Gujarat (225.6 KiB, 4,819 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 10.01.2019 on the Complaint filed by Shri S.S. Chawla v. Director,CPIO, Central Vigilance Commission, New Delhi (186.8 KiB, 4,589 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 24.12.2018 - Mr. R.S. Rai v. CPIO, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Jabalpur (173.2 KiB, 4,791 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 21.12.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Sounder Rajan v. CPIO, IDBI Bank Limited, Mumbai (128.8 KiB, 4,691 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 19.12.2018 - Nirmal Singh Dhiman v. CPIO, Deptt. of Ex-Servicemen, New Delhi (148.8 KiB, 4,737 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 08.11.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal v. CPIO, Min. of Youth Affairs & Sports, New Delhi (321.5 KiB, 5,460 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 02.11.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Sandeep Singh Jadoun v. PIO, DGEAT (523.3 KiB, 5,683 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.09.2018 on the Appeal filed by R.P. Verma Vs. CPIO, Ordnance Factory, Raipur, Dehradun (153.6 KiB, 5,816 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.08.2018 on the Appeal filed by Mr. K.S. Jain Vs. CPIO, Dte. Gen. of Vig., Customs & Central Excise, New Delhi (175.6 KiB, 5,025 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.08.2018 on the Appeal filed by Ms. Rashi Agrawal Vs. CPIO, SPMCIL, New Delhi, CPIO, Indian Security Press, Nashik (165.0 KiB, 4,674 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 30.07.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. CPIO, Min. of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, New Delhi (483.5 KiB, 4,621 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 11.07.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri S.P. Sinha Vs APIO, Min. of Shipping, MMD, Mumbai (60.6 KiB, 4,772 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 04.07.2018 on the Appeal,Complaint filed by Shri Hans Raj Chug Vs. PIO, Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi (288.3 KiB, 4,595 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 27.06.2018 on the Appeal,Complaint filed by Mr. R. Natarajan Vs. PIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (484.7 KiB, 4,948 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 25.06.2018 on the Appeal filed by Balkrishna Porwal Vs. PIO, Department of Posts (192.5 KiB, 5,090 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 25.06.2018 on the Appeal filed by Ajay Kumar Vs. CPIO, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Lucknow (44.7 KiB, 5,828 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 18.06.2018 on the Appeal filed by Shri Neeraj Sharma Vs. CPIO, Rajya Sabha Sectt., New Delhi (55.6 KiB, 5,816 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 31.05.2018 on the Appeal filed by Hitender Vs. CPIO, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi (58.4 KiB, 5,832 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 07.05.2018 on the Appeal/Complaint filed by Mr. M. Dinesh Vs. PIO, Bureau of Immigration,IB (MHA) (362.6 KiB, 4,777 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 11.07.2017 on the complaint filed by Shri Saurabh Bindal Vs. Delhi Lawn Tennis Association(uploaded on CIC website on 19.04.2018) (12.2 MiB, 6,233 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 19.04.2018 on the Appeal filed by Ashok Pandit Vs. CPIO, State Bank of India, Maheshkhunt, Khagaria, Bihar (62.4 KiB, 6,328 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 19.02.2018 on Appeal filed by Soni S. Eramath Vs. CPIO, Prime Minister's Office, New Delhi (57.2 KiB, 6,508 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 22.01.2018 on the Second Appeal,Complaint filed by Shri Rajender Saxena Vs. PIO,EE, Citi Zone, North Delhi Municipal Corporation (161.1 KiB, 7,403 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 18.01.2018 on the Complaint filed by A. Gopi Krishna Vs. CPIO, Syndicate Bank, Regional Office, Visakhapatnam (64.4 KiB, 7,249 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.12.2017 on Appeal filed by Madhu Vs. PIO & Sr. DMM, DRM Office, Northern Railway, New Delhi (484.7 KiB, 7,545 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.12.2017 on the Appeal filed by Om Prakash Sharma Vs. PIO, Department of Posts (69.2 KiB, 7,567 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.12.2017 on the Appeal filed by Shri Ajay Kumar, Gurgaon Vs. National Institute of Technology, Patna (32.3 KiB, 7,327 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 20.11.2017 on the Complaint filed by Mr. Shailesh Gandhi Vs. The CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Central Office Building, Mumbai (Full Bench Decision) (697.7 KiB, 7,527 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 13.11.2017 on the Complaints filed by Shri R.K. Jain and Ms. Ita Bose against Indian Banks Association, Mumbai (1.1 MiB, 7,779 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 20.10.2017 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Ramraj Sonkar Vs. CPIO, Branch Manager, SBI, Kanpur Nagar (60.5 KiB, 5,465 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 17.10.2017 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Yogesh Chandra Vs. CPIO, Office of SE (Elect.). BSNL, New Delhi (59.8 KiB, 5,487 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.10.2017 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Y.N. Prasad Vs. Ahlmad Evening Court (216.2 KiB, 7,258 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.09.2017 on the Second Appeal/Complaint filed by Shri Shailesh Gandhi, Shri Madhukar Ganpat Kukde and Shri Nimish S. Agarwal Vs. CDR Cell, IDBI Tower, Mumbai (Full Bench Decision) (16.9 MiB, 5,504 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 14.09.2017 on the Appeal filed by Shri R.B. Patil Vs. PIO, Department of Posts (51.8 KiB, 7,761 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 04.09.2017 on the Second Appeal filed by Shri Ashwani Kumar Avasthi Vs. The CPIO, SBI, Mumbai & Director/GM, IBPS, Mumbai (Full Bench Decision) (9.0 MiB, 5,433 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 08.08.2017 on the Appeal file by Sh. RK Jain, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, High Court of Madras, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (358.6 KiB, 7,351 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 28.07.2017 on the Appeal filed by Ms. Krishna Sharma vs. PIO, Department of Posts, Supdt. of Post Offices, Gwalior (67.4 KiB, 7,646 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 28.07.2017 on the Appeal filed by Munna Ahmad vs. PIO, Dargah Committee, Ajmer (60.0 KiB, 7,104 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.06.2017 on the Second Appeal filed by Nammi Bano Vs. National Commission for Women (136.5 KiB, 7,886 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 07.06.2017 on the Appeal filed by Mohd. Amin, J&K Vs. CPIO, TCIL, New Delhi (66.5 KiB, 7,301 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 18.05.2017 on the Complaint filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (286.0 KiB, 7,443 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.04.2017 on the Second Appeal filed by Mrs. Gunmala Jain, Lalitpur, UP Vs. CPIO, Sr. Supdt., Jhansi, UP (61.2 KiB, 7,558 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.04.2017 on the Second Appeal filed by Sucheta Sureshkumar Vs. PIO, EPFO, Mumbai (61.1 KiB, 8,006 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 30.03.2017 on Second Appeal filed by Amrika Bai V. PIO, EPFO, Raipur (84.2 KiB, 8,063 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 08.03.2017 on the Appeal filed by Insad, New Delhi, Vs. Dy. P.O., Min. of External Affairs, R.K. Puram, New Delhi (62.8 KiB, 7,998 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 09.02.2017 on Appeal filed by Shri Shrigopal Soni Vs. PIO, National Science Centre (51.3 KiB, 8,906 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.02.2017 on Appeal filed by Shri Gopal Rao Gudi Vs.PIO, National Council of Science Museum (58.4 KiB, 8,858 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 20.01.2017 on Appeal filed by Mr. Ashwani Kumar Gupta, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh Vs. CPIO, Office of the CLC (C), Raipur, Chhattisgarh (56.7 KiB, 5,055 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 13.01.2017 on Appeal filed by Shri Shanker Goel, New Delhi (39.5 KiB, 4,724 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 04.01.2017 on the Appeal filed by Shri Devraj, Distt. Dharwad, Karnataka vs. CPIO, South Western Railway, Bangalore (51.4 KiB, 8,839 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 04.01.2017 on the Appeal filed by Mr. Ankur Jindal, Delhi, vs. CPIO, West Central Railway, Kota, Rajasthan (61.9 KiB, 8,138 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 29.12.2016 on the Appeal filed by Shri Pradeep B. Sharma, Indore vs. State Bank of India, Jabalpur/Bhopal (36.9 KiB, 8,649 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 27.12.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Harinder Dhingra Vs. PIO, Ministry of Environment & Forests, New Delhi (141.4 KiB, 7,883 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 05.12.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Prashant Katela Vs. CPIO, Railway Board, New Delhi (51.4 KiB, 8,073 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 17.11.2016 on Appeal filed by Mrs. Gayatri Devi, Distt. Patna, Bihar Vs. CPIO, Office of GM, Personnel Branch, Vaishali, Bihar (53.5 KiB, 8,714 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.11.2016 on Appeal filed by Mr. Hukma Raj Badala, Pali, Rajasthan Vs. CPIO, North Western Railway Division Office, Ajmer (66.3 KiB, 8,279 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 15.11.2016 on Appeal filed by Mr. Narayan Prasad, Bikaner, Rajasthan Vs. CPIO, DRM Office, Bikaner, Rajasthan (51.5 KiB, 8,144 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 01.11.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Y.K. Mall Vs. PIO, KVS, New Delhi (90.8 KiB, 7,910 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 01.09.2016 on Appeal filed by A.B.S.J. Rao (ESM), Kakinada District, AP Vs. CPIO, NCC Group Hq., Kakinad District, A.P. (54.9 KiB, 8,444 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 31.08.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Joginder Singh, Tihar, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Punjab & Sind Bank, Rajendera Place, New Delhi (169.9 KiB, 8,781 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.08.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Tolendra Kumar Baghmar, Chhattisgarh Vs. CPIO, Dena Bank, Raipur (211.0 KiB, 8,672 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 16.08.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Sham Sundar, Faridkot, Punjab Vs. CPIOs at Mumbai and Chandigarh, NABARD (219.2 KiB, 8,361 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 22.07.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Bhramanand Mishra Vs. PIO, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Lucknow (517.0 KiB, 9,920 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 21.07.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Gulab Singh Rana, GM, Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai Vs. CPIO, Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai (805.4 KiB, 10,976 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 11.07.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Vivek Duggal Vs. CPIO, Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board, N. Delhi (Div. Bench Decision) (307.1 KiB, 8,992 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 28.06.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Nanik Premchand Rajwani, Distt. Thane Vs CPIO, Union Bank of India, Mumbai (Division Bench Decision) (335.8 KiB, 8,971 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 24.06.2016 on Appeal filed by Ex Nb Sub U.S. Maurya, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Records Signals (92.3 KiB, 8,629 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 24.06.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Banarasi Rai, Madya Pradesh Vs. CPIO, CBI, Madhya Pradesh (338.0 KiB, 8,516 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 15.06.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Chayan Ghosh Chowdhury, Lucknow Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi (211.9 KiB, 6,737 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 09.06.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Arun Kumar Agarwal, Bangalore Vs. Security & Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Mumbai (Full Bench Decision) (171.2 KiB, 6,963 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.06.2016 on Appeal filed by Ms. Monika Singh Vs. Family Welfare Deptt., Govt. of NCT of Delhi (291.4 KiB, 8,934 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.06.2016 on Appeal filed by Mr. Onkar Nath, Allahabad Vs. CPIO, Ordnance Factory Board, Kolkata (86.3 KiB, 9,215 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 26.05.2016 on Appeal/Complaint filed by Shri Gurmeet Singh, Delhi Vs. Safdarjang Hospital & VMMC, New Delhi (85.1 KiB, 8,996 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 13.05.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Gaurav Sethi Vs. University Grants Commission (256.5 KiB, 9,031 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 06.05.2016 on Complaint filed by Shri S.C. Agrawal Vs. Constitution Club of India (Full Bench Decision) (252.0 KiB, 8,745 hits)

  सीआईसी निर्णय दिनाकित 23.03.2016 - श्री अशोक कुमार, नन्द नगरी, दिल्ली Vs सी जी एच एस, लक्ष्मी नगर, दिल्ली (156.5 KiB, 9,538 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 22.03.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Rameshwar Das Bhankhar Vs. Kendrya Vidyalaya Sansthan, N. Delhi (293.6 KiB, 9,026 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 12.03.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Hemant Dhage Vs. Department of Legal Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi (656.2 KiB, 9,709 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 10.03.2016 on Appeal filed by Nirmal Kanta Vs. Laxmi Bai College, Delhi University (300.9 KiB, 7,122 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 08.03.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Bipin Kumar Vs. Bhakra Beas Management Board, Nangal (213.5 KiB, 6,969 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 07.03.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri P. Muruesan, Turicorin Vs. Tuticorin Port Trust (58.4 KiB, 4,744 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 24.02.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri Anil Sood Vs. Sub Divisional Magistrate (Election), Govt. of NCT of Delhi (368.4 KiB, 9,316 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 23.02.2016 on Complaint/Appeal filed by Shri Dinesh Chandra Vs. Medical Council of India, New Delhi (44.9 KiB, 9,159 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 08.02.2016 on Appeal filed by Mr. Hemant Kumar Agarwal, Sarguja, Chhattisgarh Vs. CPIO & Supdt. of Post Office, Raigad (55.0 KiB, 9,388 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 08.02.2016 on Appeal filed by Shri S. Poovendran, Salem Distt. Vs. CPIO, Southern Railway, Chennai (315.1 KiB, 7,000 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 15.01.2016 - Abne Ingty vs. CPIO, Delhi University, New Delhi (809.4 KiB, 9,674 hits)

(b) CIC Decisions (From 01.01.2015 To 31.12.2015)

  CIC Decision dated 16.12.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Maniram Sharma, Distt. Churu, Rajasthan Vs. Min. of Communication & IT, NIC, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (534.3 KiB, 9,438 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 11.12.2015 on Appeal from Smt. Mukesh Devi, Distt. Alwar Vs. CPIO, Office of DG, CISF Camp, New Delhi (296.6 KiB, 9,772 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 09.12.2015 on Appeal from Dr. A.L. Agarwal Vs. Delhi University (280.1 KiB, 9,971 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 30.11.2015 on Appeal from Dr. D. Dhaya Devadas & Shri V. Sundaram Vs. CPIO, Indian Bureau of Mines, Chennai (Full Bench Decision) (648.9 KiB, 7,822 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 27.11.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Nirmal Kumar Agarwal, Kheri (UP) Vs. CPIO, Department of Posts, Kheri (48.3 KiB, 7,673 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 27.11.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Kunjan Tripathi, Distt. Kanpur (Dehat) Vs. CPIO, Department of Posts, Kanpur (55.2 KiB, 7,783 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 09.11.2015 on Appeal from Shri R.K. Jain Vs. Delhi University (250.2 KiB, 7,732 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 09.11.2015 on Appeal from Mr. A. Bidyadhar, S.P.M. Sumandala, Ganjam (Odisha) Vs. Department of Posts, Berhampur-760001 (46.1 KiB, 5,235 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 21.10.2015 on Appeal from Mr. David George Thomas Vs. Ministry of Environment & Forests (264.7 KiB, 7,579 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 15.10.2015 on Appeal from Shri Durga Prasad Kushwaha, Katni Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jabalpur (84.4 KiB, 8,000 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 23.09.2015 on Appeal from Indian Technomac Company Ltd., New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Bank of India, Janpath, New Delhi (402.8 KiB, 7,719 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 11.09.2015 on Appeal from Shri Biswamber Nayak Vs. Batra Hospital & Medical Research Centre, New Delhi (519.8 KiB, 7,059 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 07.09.2015 on Appeal from Shri Sultan Singh Vs. PIO, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi (473.1 KiB, 7,115 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 13.08.2015 on Appeal from Shri Sunhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. PIO, Min. of Environment, Forests & Climate Change, New Delhi (259.0 KiB, 8,298 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 10.08.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Chandratan, Ahmedabad Vs. CPIO, Office of Commissioner, Income Tax Department, Surat (89.1 KiB, 8,506 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 03.08.2015 - Ms. Poonam Kumari, Ghaziabad Vs. CPIO, Staff Selection Commssion, New Delhi (441.6 KiB, 8,000 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 15.06.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. CPIO & Dy.DG, Deptt. of Posts, New Delhi (56.6 KiB, 6,204 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 03.06.2015 on Appeal filed by Rakhee Marwah Vs. PIO, SDM (Saket), New Delhi (256.3 KiB, 10,570 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 29.05.2015 on Appeal filed by Shri H.K. Sehgal Vs. Delhi Jal Board (247.6 KiB, 5,852 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 30.04.2015 on Appeal from Surender Vishwakarma Vs. Department of Justice, GOI, New Delhi (248.6 KiB, 10,663 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 28.04.2015 on Appeal from Mohit Hasija Vs. PIO, Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology (253.7 KiB, 640 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 13.04.2015 on Appeal from Ms. Jyoti Arora Vs. Pusa Polytechnic, Delhi (249.7 KiB, 10,493 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 10.04.2015 on Appeal from Ms. Jyoti Jeena Vs. Institue of Human Behaviour & Allied Sciences, Delhi (525.4 KiB, 11,448 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 31.03.2015 on Appeal from Shri Shantaram Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai (136.5 KiB, 10,645 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 19.03.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Dharampal, Gurgaon Vs. CPIO & Supdt. of Post Offices, Gurgaon (44.1 KiB, 10,459 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 19.03.2015 on Appeal from Dr. Ram Kumar, Jaipur Vs. Controller of Communication Acts, Deptt. of Telecommunications, Shimla (44.9 KiB, 10,598 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 04.03.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Jitendra Anandrao Chauhan, Kolhapur Central Prison Vs. Department of Posts, New Delhi (47.6 KiB, 10,040 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 03.03.2015 on Appeal from Mr. Baladevan Rangaraju Vs. PIO, Delhi Commission for Women, GNCTD, New Delhi (212.9 KiB, 11,908 hits)

  Decision dated 02.03.2015 on Appeal from Dr. Amal Kumar Bhattacharya, Vadodara Vs. Medical Council of India, New Delhi (53.5 KiB, 12,065 hits)

  Decision dated 26.02.2015 on Appeal from Shri Anbuvendhan, Chennai Vs. the CPIO, National Commission for Scheduled Castes, New Delhi (128.6 KiB, 11,863 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 20.02.2015 on Appeal from Suresh Chander Gupta Vs. Ministry of Environment & Forests, New Delhi (491.9 KiB, 10,742 hits)

  Decision dated 18.02.2015 on Appeal from Shri Shyam Mohan Parashar, Faridabad Vs. Dte. of Training and Technical Education, Delhi (258.2 KiB, 11,862 hits)

  Decision dated 05.02.2015 on Complaint from Shri Pradeep Sharma Vs. Social Welfare Officer (respondent) (350.5 KiB, 11,970 hits)

  Decision dated 03.02.2015 on Complaint from Shri Roshan Lal Vs. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Delhi (253.0 KiB, 11,977 hits)

  Decision dated 02.02.2015 on Complaint from Shri Roshan Lal Vs. Deptt. of Health & Family Welfare, GNCTD, Delhi (352.1 KiB, 10,048 hits)

  Decision dated 02.02.2015 on Appeal from Shri SKT Sherman Vs. RCS, GNCTD, New Delhi (352.4 KiB, 12,234 hits)

  Decision dated 02.02.2015 on Appeal from Dr. Satya Prakash, Delhi Vs. Lalit Kala Akademi, New Delhi (207.4 KiB, 12,056 hits)

  Decision dated 30.01.2015 on Appeal from Shri N.B. Deshmukh, Thane Vs. CPIO Air India Ltd., Mumbai (42.1 KiB, 11,981 hits)

  Decision dated 27.01.2015 on Appeal from Shri Harsh Vardhan Nayyar, New Delhi Vs. NDMC, New Delhi (54.2 KiB, 12,002 hits)

  Decision dated 27.01.2015 on Appeal from Mr. M. Mahadevappa Vs. CPIO & DGM (HR/Admn.), BSNL, Mysore (52.6 KiB, 8,978 hits)

  Decision dated 21.01.2015 on Appeal from Ms. Harpreet Kaur Vs. Delhi Subordinate Selection Board, Delhi (454.9 KiB, 12,313 hits)

  Decision dated 16.01.2015 on Appeal from Sh. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. Department for the Welfare of SC/ST/OBC, GNCTD, Delhi (469.0 KiB, 10,622 hits)

  Decision dated 15.01.2015 on Appeal from Shri Gurmeet Singh, Kanpur Vs. CGHS, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (122.8 KiB, 580 hits)

  Decision dated 14.01.2015 on Complaint from Sh. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. National Green Tribunal (365.9 KiB, 12,030 hits)

  Decision dated 08.01.2015 on Complaint from Ms. Sakshi Jain Vs. GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi (351.0 KiB, 10,436 hits)

  Decision dated 07.01.2015 on Appeal from Shri S.N. Shukla, Lucknow Vs. Department of Justice, Govt. of India, New Delhi (474.1 KiB, 12,100 hits)

  Decision dated 02.01.2015 on Appeal from Shri Subhash Chandra Agarwal Vs. PIO, Dy. Land & Development Officer, Min. of Urban Development, New Delhi (45.4 KiB, 539 hits)

  Decision dated 01.01.2015 on Appeal from Shri Rohit Sabharwal, President, Coucil of RTI Activists, Ludhiana Vs. CPIO, DGM, BSNL, Ludhiana (73.9 KiB, 761 hits)

(c) CIC Decisions (From 01.10.2014 To 31.12.2014)

  Decision dated 31.12.2014 on complaint from Shri Ashutosh Nagar Vs. National Green Tribunal (474.6 KiB, 851 hits)

  Decision dated 19.12.2014 - Shri Jai Prakash Deep Vs. CPIO, India Oil Corporation Ltd., Bhopal (331.9 KiB, 720 hits)

  Decision dated 17.12.2014 - Mr. Francis Assis Fernandes, Indore Vs. CPIO & Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices, Ujjain (52.4 KiB, 12,050 hits)

  Decision dated 12.12.2014 - Shri Ram Naresh Vs. Dte. of Education Hqrs., GNCTD, Delhi (351.1 KiB, 610 hits)

  Decision dated 12.12.2014 - Shri O.P. Nahar Vs. Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi (352.7 KiB, 684 hits)

  Decision dated 11.12.2014 - Shri Satinder Nath Sood Vs. CPIO, United Bank of India Regional Office, New Delhi (209.0 KiB, 600 hits)

  Decision dated 11.12.2014 - Shri Ashwini Vs. DTC, New Delhi (252.0 KiB, 652 hits)

  Decision dated 01.12.2014 - Attar Singh Kaushik Vs. Education Deptt., GNCTD, Delhi (258.6 KiB, 11,874 hits)

  Decision dated 26.11.2014 - Shri Rohit Sabharwal Vs. Delhi Fire Service, GNCTD, Delhi (334.1 KiB, 761 hits)

  Decision dated 25.11.2014 - Shri V.K. Jha Vs. Tis Hazari Court, Delhi (317.5 KiB, 840 hits)

  Decision dated 25.11.2014 - Mr. R.K. Jain Vs. Department of Legal Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi (265.2 KiB, 11,856 hits)

  Decision dated 25.11.2014 - Mr. R.K. Jain Vs. Department of Legal Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi (271.0 KiB, 803 hits)

  Decision dated 12.11.2014 - Mr. R.K. Jain Vs. Department of Legal Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi (433.5 KiB, 6,735 hits)

  Decision dated 05.11.2014 - Sardar Ranjit Singh, Lucknow Vs. CPIO, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., NOIDA (309.5 KiB, 591 hits)

  Decision dated 03.11.2014 - Shri Chander Prakash Vs. AGM (HR), DGM (HR) & Ors., Airport Authority of India, Delhi (80.2 KiB, 844 hits)

  Decision dated 03.11.2014 - Mr. Inala Satyanarayana Murthy, Machilipatnam, A.P. Vs. CPIO & Supdt. of Post Offices, Machilipatnam (50.8 KiB, 661 hits)

  Decision dated 22.10.2014 - Shri Prem Raj Vs. Delhi Jal Board, GNCTD (310.6 KiB, 716 hits)

  Decision dated 17.10.2014 - Shri M.K. Gupta, Delhi Vs. PIO, Jt. Dir. (Gr.Cell), CGHS, New Delhi (44.9 KiB, 629 hits)

  Decision dated 10.10.2014 - Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Jal Board (208.1 KiB, 11,814 hits)

(d) CIC Decisions (From 01.01.2014 To 30.09.2014) 

  Decision dated 16.09.2014 - Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal, Delhi Vs. CPIO, Delhi & Distt. Cricket Association, Land & Development Officer, Min. of UD, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (86.4 KiB, 490 hits)

  Decision dated 20.08.2014 - Dr. Srinivas Vyas Vs. Ayurvedic and Unani Tibbia College & Hospital, GNCTD, New Delhi (387.7 KiB, 12,024 hits)

  Decision dated 17.07.2014 - Shri Ashutosh Pandey, Bhopal Vs. UPSC, New Delhi (74.4 KiB, 491 hits)

  Decision dated 17.07.2014 - Shri Sudhir Goyal, Dehradun Vs. PMO, New Delhi (129.0 KiB, 646 hits)

  Decision dated 25.06.2014 - Mr. R.C. Jain Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, GNCTD, Delhi (450.2 KiB, 9,154 hits)

  CIC Decision dated 19.06.2014 on the Appeal filed by Lt. Gen. S.S. Dahiya Vs. CPIO, Appellate Authority, Air Hqrs., New Delhi (233.9 KiB, 6,072 hits)

  Decision dated 09.06.2014 - Smt. Walia Nasreen, Lucknow Vs. CPIO, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi (295.2 KiB, 590 hits)

  Decision dated 05.06.2014 - Mr. S.P. Dogra, Ambala Cantt. Vs. CPIO & Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices, Deptt. of Posts, Ambala (67.5 KiB, 652 hits)

  Decision dated 23.05.2014 - Ms. Meenu Kumari Vs. Delhi State Service Selection Board, Delhi (256.9 KiB, 683 hits)

  Decision dated 21.05.2014 - Mr. Patel Shankarlal Ambalal Vs. CPIO & Supdt. of Post Offices, Godhara (63.0 KiB, 6,322 hits)

  Decision dated 15.05.2014 - Shri K.P. Singh Vs. U.P.S.C., New Delhi (199.4 KiB, 690 hits)

  Decision dated 15.05.2014 - Shri Hardeep Singh Sawhney Vs. Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi (198.6 KiB, 6,068 hits)

  Decision dated 15.05.2014 - Shri Anil Kumar Khabya, Bhopal Vs. DCIT, Bhopal (13.4 KiB, 781 hits)

  Decision dated 12.05.2014 - Mr. Patel Hasmukhbai Maganbhai, Godhdra Vs. Supdt. of Post Offices, Godhra (64.5 KiB, 593 hits)

  Decision dated 05.05.2014 - Ch. Rama Krishna Rao Vs. Naval Shipyard, Port Blair (Full Bench Decision) (223.9 KiB, 1,145 hits)

  Decision dated 02.05.2014 - Shri Gaikwad Shahurao Vishwanthrao, Parbhani, Maharashtra Vs. CPIO, Maharashtra Gramin Bank, Nanded, Maharashtra (210.2 KiB, 705 hits)

  Decision dated 24.04.2014 - Shri Dipak J. Gandhi Vs. Supreme Court (52.2 KiB, 6,231 hits)

  Decision dated 24.04.2014 - Shri Rakesh Gupta Vs. Kendriya Bhandar (216.9 KiB, 778 hits)

  Decision dated 17.04.2014 - Ramesh Kumar Vs. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Delhi (214.0 KiB, 668 hits)

  Decision dated 16.04.2014 - Mrs. Usha Devi, Gandhinagar, Jammu Vs. CPIO, Deptt. of Posts, Office of PMG, Jammu (50.6 KiB, 677 hits)

  Decision dated 03.04.2014 - Sh. Arun Kumar Sinha, Kolkata Vs. CPIO, National Library, Govt. of India, Kolkata (310.4 KiB, 897 hits)

  Decision dated 03.04.2014 - Mr. S. Dhanabalan, Veppur, Perambalur District Vs. CPIO, Office of Postmaster General, Tiruchirapalli (47.9 KiB, 559 hits)

  Decision dated 12.03.2014 - Shri Omprakash Kashiram Vs. Prime Minister's Office (209.9 KiB, 788 hits)

  Decision dated 12.03.2014 - Shri Anil Kumar Jain, Rohini, Delhi-85 (13.4 KiB, 846 hits)

  Decision dated 10.03.2014 - Mr. R.K. Jain Vs. U.P.S.C. (69.6 KiB, 626 hits)

  Decision dated 10.03.2014 - Mr. Rajan Saluja Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (59.5 KiB, 840 hits)

  Decision dated 19.02.2014 - Mr. Anand Mohan Vs. Deptt. of Admn. Reforms & PG Grievances (64.1 KiB, 625 hits)

  Decision dated 18.02.2014 - Pramod Ganpat Sawant Vs. DOP&T, New Delhi (395.6 KiB, 859 hits)

  Decision dated 13.02.2014 - R.K. Prasad Vs. Central Vigilance Commission, New Delhi (317.1 KiB, 758 hits)

  Decision dated 11.02.2014 - Mr. Ajay Kumar Vs. Central Excise, Guwahati (70.1 KiB, 803 hits)

  Decision dated 29.01.2014 - Shri Bhagwan Chand Saxena Vs. Export Inspection Council of India (213.0 KiB, 727 hits)

  Decision dated 27.01.2014 - Shri Girish Nautiyal Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., NOIDA (200.5 KiB, 1,073 hits)

  Decision dated 27.01.2014 - Mr. Kaushal Vs. Delhi Police, East District (71.0 KiB, 961 hits)

  Decision dated 16.01.2014 - Ms. Surekha K.J., Kolkata Vs. Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (240.6 KiB, 701 hits)

  Decision dated 09.01.2014 - Smt. Geeta Ghai, Delhi Vs. Dte. General of Lighthouses & Lightships, NOIDA (197.5 KiB, 785 hits)

  Decision dated 07.01.2014 - Ms. Jyoti Seherawat Vs. Home (General) Department, Govt. of Delhi (322.2 KiB, 6,892 hits)

  Decision dated 07.01.2014 - Mr. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. Ministry of Coal (106.9 KiB, 2,029 hits)

(e) CIC Decisions (From 01.10.2013 To 31.12.2013)

  Decision dated 24.12.2013 - First Appellate Authority (RTI), PAO (Ors), BEG, Roorkee, Uttarakhand (103.9 KiB, 4,686 hits)

  Decision dated 23.12.2013 - Shri D. Selvaraj, Namakkal Vs. Income Tax Officer & DIT, Chennai (241.8 KiB, 540 hits)

  Decision dated 03.12.2013 - Shri Rajiv Kapur Vs. Delhi Police, South East District, Delhi (213.5 KiB, 877 hits)

  Decision dated 22.11.2013 - Shri Rambir Singh, New Delhi Vs. Office of Additional District Magisrate, GNCT, New Delhi (93.8 KiB, 582 hits)

  Decision dated 15.11.2013 - Shri Sanjiv Chaturvedi Vs. Central Vigilance Commission, New Delhi (98.7 KiB, 848 hits)

  Decision dated 15.11.2013 - Harkrishan Das Nijhawan Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (96.5 KiB, 729 hits)

  Decision dated 13.11.2013 - Shri Hariprasad Moon Vs. Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd., Mumbai (96.3 KiB, 732 hits)

  Decision dated 13.11.2013 - Shri Chandran Nair, Ahmedabad Vs. DCIT (Vig.) & Addl. CIT, Ahmedabad (242.9 KiB, 801 hits)

  Decision dated 11.11.2013 - Dr. Rajiv Bhandari, Panchkula Vs. Office of the Director of Higher Education, UT, Chandigarh (93.4 KiB, 593 hits)

  Decision dated 07.11.2013 - Smt. Tapati Bhattacharjee Vs. Office of Dy. Conservator of Forests, Port Blair (95.2 KiB, 604 hits)

  Decision dated 23.10.2013 - Shri V.K. Pandey, Kolkata Vs. LIC of India, Kolkata (91.7 KiB, 862 hits)

  Decision dated 15.10.2013 - Shri Deepak Khullar, New Delhi Vs. South Delhi Municipal Corporation (91.3 KiB, 600 hits)

  Decision dated 14.10.2013 - Shri Rakesh Agarwal, New Delhi Vs. Transport Department (GNCT), Delhi (305.7 KiB, 4,641 hits)

  Decision dated 08.10.2013 - Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs (95.7 KiB, 763 hits)

(f) CIC Decisions (From 01.07.2013 To 30.09.2013) 

  Decision dated 27.09.2013 - Dr. Bijaya Kumar Samantaray Vs. Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata (202.9 KiB, 1,053 hits)

  Decision dated 26.09.2013 - Shri Amit Bhargava Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs & Bureau of Immigration, IB (242.7 KiB, 1,041 hits)

  Decision dated 17.09.2013 - Shri Amanullah Khan, Pune Vs. Tax Recovery Officer & AO, Pune (240.1 KiB, 1,501 hits)

  Decision dated 04.09.2013 - Shri Paras Nath Singh Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs (217.6 KiB, 973 hits)

  Decision dated 27.08.2013 - Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs (Full Bench Decision) (63.1 KiB, 1,044 hits)

  Decision dated 26.08.2013 - Dr. P.K. Srivastava, Distt. Una, H.P. Vs. CPIO, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi (209.6 KiB, 914 hits)

  Decision dated 26.08.2013 - Shri Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, Distt. Sultanpur (UP) Vs. US, Staff Selection Committee, New Delhi (210.6 KiB, 792 hits)

  Decision dated 14.08.2013 - Shri K. Madhavan, Chennai Vs. CPIO, Deptt. of Personnel & Training, New Delhi (205.9 KiB, 817 hits)

  Decision dated 12.08.2013 - Shri M.Yogeshwar Raj Vs. Air India (211.1 KiB, 678 hits)

  Decision dated 07.08.2013 - Shri Balbeer Krishan Arora, Farukhabad Vs. CPIO, Office of AG-I, Uttar Pradesh (207.8 KiB, 579 hits)

  Decision dated 05.08.2013 - Subhash Chandra Agrawal & Dr. M. Haroon Siddiqui Vs. IFFCO (Full Bench Decision) (403.9 KiB, 1,503 hits)

  Decision dated 05.08.2013 - Shri S. Joseph Balasundar, Chennai Vs. CPIO, UPSC, New Delhi (210.6 KiB, 864 hits)

  Decision dated 02.08.2013 - Dr. K. Padma Priya, Asstt. Professor, JNTU College of Engg., Pulivendula, A.P. Vs. FAA, AICTE, New Delhi (104.6 KiB, 703 hits)

  Decision dated 02.08.2013 - Shri Amit Agarwal, Delhi Vs. ITO, Ward 25(1), Range 37, New Delhi (85.1 KiB, 919 hits)

  Decision dated 31.07.2013 - Shri S.S. Upathyaya, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, The Ahoka Hotel, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi (211.5 KiB, 565 hits)

  Decision dated 31.07.2013 - Shri Kuldeep Yadav, Beri, Distt. Jhajjar, Haryana Vs. CPIO, Institute of Hotel Management, Pusa, New Delhi (208.1 KiB, 568 hits)

  Decision dated 24.07.2013 - Shri S.A.A. Abbasi, Ghaziabad Vs. CPIO, Prasar Bharati, New Delhi (209.9 KiB, 586 hits)

  Decision dated 24.07.2013 - Shri Ashish Ranjan, Delhi Vs. CPIO, Staff Selection Commission, New Delhi (210.9 KiB, 724 hits)

  Decision dated 22.07.2013 - Shri Vishwas Bharmburkar, Ahmedabad Vs. CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat, New Delhi (208.8 KiB, 764 hits)

  Decision dated 19.07.2013 - Shri L.V. Raju Vs. Northern Coalfields Ltd. (215.4 KiB, 615 hits)

  Decision dated 18.07.2013 - Shri Ashok Kumar Joshi Vs. ITI Ltd., Gonda (201.7 KiB, 610 hits)

  Decision dated 17.07.2013 - Dr. S. Chellappa, Hyderabad Vs. CPIO, CBI, Hyderabad (209.9 KiB, 671 hits)

  Decision dated 11.07.2013 - Shri Ram Manohar Vs. Delhi Police (204.4 KiB, 853 hits)

  Decision dated 10.07.2013 - Mr. Perarivalan Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi (87.2 KiB, 1,677 hits)

  Decision dated 08.07.2013 - Shri Amarjit Sen, Kolkata Vs. CPIO, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi (209.9 KiB, 583 hits)

  Decision dated 08.07.2013 - Dr. Jitendra Nath Gupta, Delhi Vs. Coordinating Officer, Monitoring Committee, Supreme Court, New Delhi (13.4 KiB, 644 hits)

  Decision dated 05.07.2013 - Shri B.Bharathi, Puducherry Vs. PIO, Madras High Court, Chennai (306.4 KiB, 846 hits)

  Decision dated 05.07.2013 - Shri Jayant Rakshit, Kolkata Vs. CPIO, Prasar Bharati, Doordarshan Kendra, Kolkata (207.3 KiB, 674 hits)

  Decision dated 04.07.2013 - Lt. Col. (Retd.) R. Bansal Vs. Army Welfare Housing Organisation (AWHO) (Full Bench) (229.1 KiB, 1,578 hits)

(g) CIC Decisions (From 15.02.2013 To 30.06.2013) 

  Decision dated 26.06.2013 - Shri Manoj Arya, R.K. Puram, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Cabinet Sectt., New Delhi (211.0 KiB, 881 hits)

  Decision dated 26.06.2013 - Shri Rednam Deepak, Visakhapatnam Vs. CPIO, Cabinet Sectt., New Delhi (212.1 KiB, 815 hits)

  Decision dated 26.06.2013 - Shri Satya Prakash Mishra, Lucknow Vs. CPIO, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow (207.2 KiB, 555 hits)

  Decision dated 14.06.2013 - Shri Shyam Sunder Singh Vs. National Human Rights Commission (198.7 KiB, 902 hits)

  Decision dated 14.06.2013 - Shri V.N. Mathur Vs. Delhi Police, South East District (213.0 KiB, 733 hits)

  Decision dated 13.06.2013 - Shri Kamal Sharma, Agra Vs. ACIT, Kanpur (64.6 KiB, 744 hits)

  Decision dated 03.06.2013 - Shri S.C. Aggarwal, Shri Anil Bailwal Vs. Parliament of India (Full Bench Decision) (257.0 KiB, 1,957 hits)

  Decision dated 29.05.2013 - Shri Pradip Shankar Choughule Vs. Mumbai Port Trust, Mumbai (221.5 KiB, 718 hits)

  Decision dated 29.05.2013 - Shri Sanjay Badekar, Mumbai Vs. LIC of India, Mumbai (91.3 KiB, 622 hits)

  Decision dated 29.05.2013 - Mr. M. Vellaipandi, STQC IT Centre, Chennai Vs. CPOI & Director, STQC Dte. under Min. of Comm. & IT, New Delhi (53.8 KiB, 696 hits)

  Decision dated 20.05.2013 - Shri Arun Kumar Aggarwal Vs. PMO / Deptt. of Revenue / Min. of Law (Full Bench Decision) (108.3 KiB, 676 hits)

  Decision dated 20.05.2013 - Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs. Ministry of Mines, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (52.3 KiB, 629 hits)

  Decision dated 20.05.2013 - Shri Bhanu Pratap, Moradabad Vs. US & CPIO, SSC, New Delhi (210.7 KiB, 675 hits)

  Decision dated 10.05.2013 - Ms. Medha Rani, Chandigarh Vs. CPI, CBI, Chandigarh (208.2 KiB, 736 hits)

  Decision dated 09.05.2013 - Shri J.S. Singhal, ASW(E), AIR, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Prasar Bharati, New Delhi (207.6 KiB, 539 hits)

  Decision dated 08.05.2013 - Shri S. Kumar Minz, Ghaziabad Vs. CPIO, All India Radio, Patna (210.0 KiB, 771 hits)

  Decision dated 07.05.2013 - Shri P.S. Jadon, Lok Vihar Vs. CPIO, CVC, New Delhi (208.5 KiB, 725 hits)

  Decision dated 07.05.2013 - Shri Natraj Saha, Birbhum Vs. CPIO, CVC, New Delhi (210.1 KiB, 508 hits)

  Decision dated 01.05.2013 - Shri Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, Distt. Sultanpur, UP Vs. CPIO, SSC, Allahabad (304.1 KiB, 671 hits)

  Decision dated 01.05.2013 - Shri Saurabh Pandey, Chapra, Saran Bihar Vs. US, SSC, New Delhi (210.7 KiB, 746 hits)

  Decision dated 01.05.2013 - Shri Ajit Kumar, Patna Vs. Dy. Director, SSC, Allahabad (213.1 KiB, 643 hits)

  Decision dated 29.04.2013 - Shri Nitesh Kumar Tripathy, JNU, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, President' Sectt., New Delhi (212.2 KiB, 735 hits)

  Decision dated 26.04.2013 - Shri Jagjit Singh, Gurgaon Vs. CPIO, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi (212.2 KiB, 760 hits)

  Decision dated 12.04.2013 - Shri Rednam Deepak Vs. Ministry of Shipping, New Delhi (194.6 KiB, 744 hits)

  Decision dated 12.04.2013 - Shri Harishankar Tiwari Vs. Minsitry of Law & Justice, New Delhi (194.1 KiB, 814 hits)

  Decision dated 11.04.2013 - Shri R.P. Pandeya, New Delhi Vs. CBDT, New Delhi (68.5 KiB, 688 hits)

  Decision dated 21.03.2013 - Shri R. Govindarajan, Tirrupur Vs. CPIO, CVC, New Delhi (210.2 KiB, 807 hits)

  Decision dated 21.03.2013 - Shri R.A. Gupta, Sr. Manager, Bank of Baroda (208.4 KiB, 824 hits)

  Decision dated 15.03.2013 - Shri Ravinder Singh Negi Vs. New India Assurance Co. (90.4 KiB, 863 hits)

  Decision dated 20.02.2013 - Shri Subhash Chandra Agarwal, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Lok Sabha Sectt., New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (123.9 KiB, 875 hits)

  Decision dated 19.02.2013 - Shri Rishipal Singh, Distt. Haridwar, Uttarakhand vs. ITO(Inv.)(HQ) & Addl. Director of IT (Inv.), Lucknow (74.3 KiB, 495 hits)

  Decision dated 19.02.2013 - Shri Rishipal Singh, Distt. Haridwar, Uttarakhand vs. ITO(Inv.)(HQ) & Addl. Director of IT (Inv.), Lucknow (74.3 KiB, 597 hits)

  Decision dated 15.02.2013 - Shri Ajay Pal, Bawal, Rewari, Haryana Vs. Under Secretary, SSC, New Delhi (303.8 KiB, 629 hits)

  Decision dated 15.02.2013 - Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma, Indira Enclave, P.O. Mehubala, Dehradun Vs. CPIO, Office of the Principal AG (Audit), Uttarakhand, Dehradun (207.1 KiB, 605 hits)

(h) CIC DECISIONS (From 01.10.2012 To 15.10.2012) 

  Decision dated 10.10.2012 - Shri Manish Kumar, Varanasi Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. (87.4 KiB, 625 hits)

  Decision dated 09.10.2012 - Shri Shankar Chandra Das Gupta, Kolkata Vs. IRDA, Hyderabad (443.5 KiB, 797 hits)

  Decision dated 08.10.2012 - Shri Madhav B. Karmakar Vs. Deptt. of Financial Services, New Delhi (87.7 KiB, 660 hits)

  Decision dated 05.10.2012 - Shri Partha Mandal, Delhi Vs. CPIO, UPSC, New Delhi (209.0 KiB, 612 hits)

(i) CIC DECISIONS (01.07.2012 To 30.09.2012) 

  Decision dated 28.09.2012 - Shri Shiv Shankar Tiwari, Faridabad Vs. DOPT, New Delhi (331.0 KiB, 673 hits)

  Decision dated 14.09.2012 - Shri Mohinder Singh Sidhu Vs. Dte. Gen. of Vigilance, Customs & Excise, New Delhi (195.6 KiB, 789 hits)

  Decision dated 12.09.2012 - Shri M. Shiva Shankar, Hyderabad Vs. LIC of India, Hyderabad (86.9 KiB, 596 hits)

  Decision dated 12.09.2012 - Shri Sunil Kumar, Ghaziabad Vs. CPIO, UPSC, New Delhi (207.4 KiB, 592 hits)

  Decision dated 31.08.2012 - Shri Ram Naresh Vs. Ministry of Law & Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi (195.3 KiB, 703 hits)

  Decision dated 31.08.2012 - Shri Naresh Kumar, Gurgaon Vs. CPIO, Deptt. of Personnel & Training, New Delhi (207.7 KiB, 811 hits)

  Decision dated 31.08.2012 - Shri Ravi Malpani, Ratlam, M.P. Vs. SSC, New Delhi (204.9 KiB, 715 hits)

  Decision dated 21.08.2012 - Shri B.D. Gupta Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs (239.6 KiB, 622 hits)

  Decision dated 21.08.2012 - Shri Harendra Singh, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, SSC, New Delhi (208.5 KiB, 647 hits)

  Decision dated 14.08.2012 - Shri Syed Idramudin, Nizamabad Vs. Appellate Authority, Regional Passport Office, Secunderabad (331.0 KiB, 703 hits)

  Decision dated 31.07.2012 - Shri Prakash Singh, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, CBI (ACB), New Delhi (207.0 KiB, 777 hits)

  Decision dated 31.07.2012 - Shri K. Thankshinamurthy, Madurai Vs. CPIO, CBI, Chennai (206.7 KiB, 877 hits)

  Decision dated 31.07.2012 - Shri Jagdish Prasad, Ranchi Vs. CPIO, CBI, Ranchi (204.8 KiB, 748 hits)

  Decision dated 31.07.2012 - Shri K. Nagraj, IPS, Tripura Vs. CPIO, New Delhi (209.3 KiB, 603 hits)

  Decision dated 31.07.2012 - Ms. Manju, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, CBI, New Delhi (207.4 KiB, 695 hits)

  Decision dated 30.07.2012 - Shri Manish Kumar Singh, Ghaziabad Vs. CPIO, UPSC, New Delhi (306.3 KiB, 634 hits)

  Decision dated 30.07.2012 - Shri U.N.L. Das, Bihar Vs. CPIO, Staff Selection Commission, New Delhi (206.1 KiB, 671 hits)

  Decision dated 06.07.2012 - Mr. Mukesh Agarwal, Chhota Udepur, Distt. Vadodara Vs. PIO&CGM, RBI, Mumbai (95.6 KiB, 1,314 hits)

(j) CIC DECISIONS (01.04.2012 To 30.06.2012)

  Decision dated 15.06.2012 - Mr. Sanjay Mukund Thatte, Jalgaon Vs. CPIO, Allahabad Bank, Mumbai (52.2 KiB, 902 hits)

  Decision dated 15.06.2012 - Mr. A.K. Pandya, Ahmedabad Vs. CPIO & Dy. Zonal Manager, Bank of India, Ahmedabad (62.9 KiB, 856 hits)

  Decision dated 15.06.2012 - Dr. Kamal Saini Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi (195.8 KiB, 593 hits)

  Decision dated 15.06.2012 - Shri J.K. Sharma Vs. Delhi Police (199.5 KiB, 666 hits)

  Decision dated 15.06.2012 - Shri Gyanendra Vs. Delhi Police (195.6 KiB, 802 hits)

  Decision dated 01.06.2012 - Mr. Vipan Kumar Gupta, Ludhiana Vs. CPIO & DGM, Andhra Bank, Zonal Office, Lucknow (58.0 KiB, 925 hits)

  Decision dated 01.06.2012 - Mr. S. Kandasamy, Manager, Pallavan Grama Bank, Irudhukottai, Tamilnadu Vs. PIO & GM, Pallavan Grama Bank, Salem, Tamilnadu (62.5 KiB, 740 hits)

  Decision dated 30.05.2012 - Mr. Tek Chand Kotwal, Rohini, Delhi Vs. PIO & RPO, Regional Passport Office, New Delhi (51.4 KiB, 589 hits)

  Decision dated 28.05.2012 - Shri Narinder Jain Vs. Delhi, EOW, Crime Branch (194.4 KiB, 895 hits)

  Decision dated 24.05.2012 - Mrs. Shakuntala Jayant, Pandav Nagar, Delhi Vs. PIO, MCD, New Delhi (51.5 KiB, 728 hits)

  Decision dated 24.05.2012 - Mr. Ramesh Sawant, Mumbai Vs. Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies, Mumbai (89.8 KiB, 641 hits)

  Decision dated 24.05.2012 - Mr. Dinbandhu Sarkar, National Library, Kolkata Vs. National Library, Kolkata (76.6 KiB, 669 hits)

  Decision dated 24.05.2012 - Mr. Harinder Dhingra, Gurgaon Vs. PIO & US, Min. of Environment & Forests, New Delhi (57.7 KiB, 563 hits)

  Decision dated 24.05.2012 - Mr. Amardeep Gulati, Shahdara, Delhi Vs. PIO, AIIMS, New Delhi (53.0 KiB, 592 hits)

  Decision dated 24.05.2012 - Shri Nitin Nayyar, Mohali Vs. CPIO, CBI, New Delhi (209.7 KiB, 727 hits)

  Decision dated 24.05.2012 - Shri D.P. Ojha, DGP (Retd.), Patna Vs. CPIO, CBI, Ranchi (207.6 KiB, 817 hits)

  Decision dated 15.05.2012 - Shri Vijay Gupta Vs. Delhi Police (216.0 KiB, 1,056 hits)

  Decision dated 30.04.2012 - Mr. Hassan Singh Mejie, Chandigarh Vs. PIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (52.4 KiB, 662 hits)

  Decision dated 30.04.2012 - Ms. Sumaira Abdulali Vs. PIO & Addl. Director, Min. of Environment & Forests, New Delhi (63.7 KiB, 872 hits)

  Decision dated 04.04.2012 - Shri Prafulla Jojo Vs. Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi (194.3 KiB, 1,054 hits)

  Decision dated 03.04.2012 - Shri Ram M. Apte, Balgaum Vs. CPIO, High Court of Karnakatak, Bangaluru (204.9 KiB, 997 hits)

  Decision dated 03.04.2012 - Shri Bindeshwar Shah, Sitamarhi, Bihar Vs. CPIO, High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad (207.2 KiB, 686 hits)

(k) CIC DECISIONS (01.01.2012 To 31.3.2012)

  Decision dated 09.03.2012 - Shri Abhi Ghosh, Kolkata Vs. Air India Ltd., New Delhi (207.7 KiB, 762 hits)

  Decision dated 09.03.2012 - Shri Ankur Mutreja, New Delhi Vs. Dte. of Census Operations, New Delhi (213.3 KiB, 669 hits)

  Decision dated 07.03.2012 - Shri Kamaldev Thakur, East Champaran, Bihar Vs. Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Motihari, Bihar (297.8 KiB, 662 hits)

  Decision dated 06.03.2012 - Shri N. Srinivas, Hyderabad Vs. CPIO, Staff Selection Commission, Chennai (298.2 KiB, 696 hits)

  Decision dated 22.02.2012 - Shri Gopal Singh, Distt. Sitamarhi, Bihar Vs. CPIO, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office, Muzaffarpur (304.9 KiB, 767 hits)

  Decision dated 22.02.2012 - Shri Manoranjan S. Roy, Mumbai Vs CPIO, Mumbai DRT No.2, Mumbai (302.0 KiB, 721 hits)

  Decision dated 22.02.2012 - Shri S.P. Goyal Vs. Office of the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai (195.4 KiB, 916 hits)

  Decision dated 21.02.2012 - Dr. Gyan Prakash Mishra, Distt. Balia, UP Vs. CPIO, Allahabad High Court, UP (303.3 KiB, 779 hits)

  Decision dated 21.02.2012 - Shri R.D. Batra, Secy. Citizen Rights Association II, Ghaziabad, UP Vs. CPIO, Allahabad High Court Court, UP (205.1 KiB, 689 hits)

  Decision dated 21.02.2012 - Shri Arup K. Ghosh Vs. Mumbai Port Trust, Mumbai (237.6 KiB, 781 hits)

  Decision dated 07.02.2012 - Mr. Manzoor Ahmed, Srinagar Vs. PIO & Program Executive, Prasar Bharti, Srinagar (48.2 KiB, 647 hits)

  Decision dated 07.02.2012 - Shri Radhakrishnan B. Toshawara Vs. Office of Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Surat-II (179.4 KiB, 669 hits)

  Decision dated 07.02.2012 - Shri Rajendra Prasad Gupta Vs. Office of Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow (187.1 KiB, 820 hits)

  Decision dated 30.01.2012 - Mr. Vinod K. Jose, New Delhi Vs. PIO & DS, Min. of Information & Broadcasting, New Delhi (79.4 KiB, 1,107 hits)

  Decision dated 30.01.2012 - Mr. Akshay Pant, Port Blair Vs. PIO, A&N Administration, Port Blair (60.6 KiB, 823 hits)

  Decision dated 19.01.2012 - Mr. Tarun Nag, Kolkata Vs. PIO, Central Drugs Laboratory, Kolkata (56.4 KiB, 865 hits)

  Decision dated 19.01.2012 - Mr. A.L. Makhijani, President, Forum for Good Governance, Delhi Vs. CMO, CGHS, New Rajendra Nagar, New Delhi (47.3 KiB, 781 hits)

  Decision dated 12.01.2012 - Shri J.C. Kataria & Shri Mani Ram Sharma Vs. High Courts of AP, Gauhati, Gujarat, HP, Jharkhand, Rajasthan & other High Courts (427.5 KiB, 796 hits)

  Decision dated 12.01.2012 - Shri D.K. Aggarwal, Moradabad Vs. PIO, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (55.1 KiB, 654 hits)

(l) CIC DECISIONS (01.10.2011 To 31.12.2011)

  Decision dated 29.12.2011 - Mr. S.D. Shastri, Jaipur Vs. PIO, Ministry of I&B, New Delhi (36.2 KiB, 717 hits)

  Decision dated 29.12.2011 - Mr. K. Karthirmathiyon, Secy., Coimbatore Consumer Cause, Coimbatore Vs. PIO & JS, Medical Council of India, New Delhi (44.4 KiB, 857 hits)

  Decision dated 29.12.2011 - Mr. Subhash Chandra Agrawal, Delhi Vs. PIO & Director (RTI), Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi (53.4 KiB, 844 hits)

  Decision dated 23.12.2011 - Mr. S.P. Goyal, Mumbai Vs. PIO & DGM, Indian Overseas Bank, Chennai (49.1 KiB, 713 hits)

  Decision dated 23.12.2011 - Mr. Yadwinder Singh, Amritsar Vs. PIO, Punjab & Sind Bank, Amritsar (57.3 KiB, 806 hits)

  Decision dated 23.12.2011 - Mr. R.C. Gupta, Gautam Nagar, New Delhi Vs. PIO & HOD, Dr. RML Hospital, New Delhi (48.3 KiB, 667 hits)

  Decision dated 16.12.2011 - Smt. Jaylakshmi, Hubli Vs. PIO & AGM, Syndicate Bank HO, Manipal (49.9 KiB, 809 hits)

  Decision dated 16.12.2011 - Smt. Jaylakshmi, Hubli Vs. PIO & DGM, Corporation Bank HO, Mangalore (49.5 KiB, 953 hits)

  Decision dated 16.12.2011 - Mr. Lakhpat Tanwar, Lab Oncology Unit, AIIMS, New Delhi Vs. PIO & AO, AIIMS, New Delhi (55.4 KiB, 603 hits)

  Decision dated 16.12.2011 - Mr. Sukhjit Singh Walia, Patiala Vs. PIO & Dir. (RTI), Min. of External Affairs, New Delhi (47.5 KiB, 790 hits)

  Decision dated 30.11.2011 - Shri Murlidhar, Patna Vs. CPIO, Staff Selection Commission, New Delhi (286.2 KiB, 727 hits)

  Decision dated 30.11.2011 on Appeal from Shri Sarpal Singh Vs. National Commission for Cement & Building Materials, Ballabhgarh (192.4 KiB, 1,014 hits)

  Decision dated 28.11.2011 - Mr. Dharamveer Singh, New India Assurance, Aligarh Vs. National Commission for Scheduled Castes (140.0 KiB, 756 hits)

  Decision dated 24.11.2011 - Mr. Harinder Dhingra, Gurgaon Vs. Asstt. IG, Min. of Environment & Forest, New Delhi (90.6 KiB, 767 hits)

  Decision dated 24.11.2011 - Mr. Sanat Kumar, Vill.+Post Kerma, Distt. Muzaffarpur, Bihar Vs. PIO, United Bank of India, Kolkata (63.3 KiB, 840 hits)

  Decision dated 24.11.2011 - Mr. Ramesh Kumar Anand, Steno., PGIMER, Chandigarh Vs. CPIO, PGIMER, Chandigarh (44.6 KiB, 1,052 hits)

  Decision dated 11.11.2011 - Mr. Veer Sain, Jaipur Vs. PIO & GM, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai (70.2 KiB, 668 hits)

  Decision dated 09.11.2011 - Mr. Adishwar Jain Vs. Office of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) (223.8 KiB, 636 hits)

  Decision dated 09.11.2011 - Mr. K.R. Basu, Tirunelveli-7 Vs. PIO & CGM, Indian Bank, Chennai (52.7 KiB, 902 hits)

  Decision dated 04.11.2011 - Mrs. Ambika Sudhakaran, Palakkad, Kerala Vs. PIO, Bank of India, New Delhi (35.5 KiB, 668 hits)

  Decision dated 04.11.2011 - Mr. Nemi Chand Jain, Jaipur Vs. PIO & DGM, United Bank of India, Guwahati (37.8 KiB, 754 hits)

  Decision dated 04.11.2011 - Mr. D.S. Jolly, Motia Khan, New Delhi Vs. PIO & Chief Manager, Punjab & Sind Bank, Rajendra Place, New Delhi (59.1 KiB, 878 hits)

  Decision dated 04.11.2011 - Mr. Rahul Agarwal, Delhi Vs. PIO & AGM, Syndicate Bank, Head Office, Manipal, Karnataka (62.0 KiB, 957 hits)

  Decision dated 04.11.2011 - Mr. G.B. Chandulal, Rajkot Vs. PIO & GM, Dena Bank, Mumbai (39.3 KiB, 813 hits)

  Decision dated 04.11.2011 - Mr. V.M. Shirvalkar, Thane Vs. PIO, Reserve Bank of India, Central Office, Mumbai (96.5 KiB, 1,033 hits)

  Decision dated 03.11.2011 - Shri S. Mukherjee Vs. Eastern Coalfields, Dhanbad (455.6 KiB, 606 hits)

  Decision dated 02.11.2011 - Shri Suraj Prakash Bakshi, Delhi Vs. Public Grievances Commission, New Delhi (207.0 KiB, 558 hits)

  Decision dated 02.11.2011 - Shri Ved Prakash Singhal, Nangloi Vs. Office of Principal Judge, Family Courts, Dwarka, New Delhi (207.3 KiB, 753 hits)

  Decision dated 31.10.2011 - Mr. T. Arumugam, Alwarpet, Chennai Vs. PIO, Min. of Health & Family Welfare, RRIUM, Chennai (48.5 KiB, 814 hits)

  Decision dated 21.10.2011 - Mr. Nitin Bajaj, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi Vs. CPIO & Asstt. Professor, AIIMS, New Delhi (48.8 KiB, 924 hits)

  Decision dated 21.10.2011 - Capt. P.K. Anchal, Bhiwani Vs. CPIO & Chief Manager, Dena Bank, Panchkula (65.4 KiB, 977 hits)

  Decision dated 21.10.2011 on Appeal from Mr. Ashokumar M Pandya, Ahmedabad Vs. PIO & Dy. General Manager, Bank of India, Ahmedabad (55.4 KiB, 922 hits)

  Decision dated 21.10.2011 on Appeal from Ms. Bimla Prakash, Delhi Vs. CPIO & DGM, Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office, Chennai (59.6 KiB, 1,060 hits)

  Decision dated 21.10.2011 - Sh. D.K. Pandey, Jamshedpur Vs. PIO, Passport Office, Ranchi (62.6 KiB, 846 hits)

  Decision dated 21.10.2011 - Sh. D.K. Bindra, New Delhi Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi (13.4 KiB, 693 hits)

  Decision dated 12.10.2011 - Mr. Ashwini Kumar Avasthi, Aligarh Vs. PIO & DGM, Vijay Bank, Bangaluru (57.6 KiB, 1,065 hits)

  Decision dated 12.10.2011 - Mr. K.G. Krishnamoorthy, Mayiladuthari Vs. PIO, Indian Bank, Chennai (55.4 KiB, 680 hits)

  Decision dated 12.10.2011 - Mr. Veer Sain, Jaipur Vs. CPIO & General Manager, RBI, Mumbai (71.8 KiB, 874 hits)

  Decision dated 10.10.2011 - Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. (BSE) Vs. Security and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) (Full Bench Decision) (70.8 KiB, 707 hits)

  Decision dated 05.10.2011 - Mr. L.S.R. Murthy, Hyderabad Vs. PIO&AGM, UCO Bank, Hyderabad (47.1 KiB, 834 hits)

  Decision dated 05.10.2011 - Mr. Chandrakant C. Anandpara, Chairman, Consumer Care Forum, Mumbai Vs. PIO, Bank of India, Walkeshwar Branch, Mumbai (48.1 KiB, 725 hits)

  Decision dated 05.10.2011 - Mr. Santosh Yadav, NOIDA Vs. Director & FAA, Min. of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi (37.8 KiB, 862 hits)

  Decision dated 05.10.2011 - Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Gupta, Unnao, UP Vs. PIO & US, Staff Selection Commission, New Delhi (163.2 KiB, 877 hits)

  Decision dated 05.10.2011 - Mr. Harinder Dhingra, Gurgaon Vs. CPIO & US and Secretary, Min. of Environment and Forests, New Delhi (194.6 KiB, 951 hits)

(m) Important Decisions of CIC Compiled by ISTM, New Delhi (July, 2010)

  Important Decisions of CIC Compiled by ISTM, New Delhi (July, 2010) (3.5 MiB, 592 hits)

II. CIC Decisions (Full Bench) IFFCO is not a Public Authority

  Decision dated 05.08.2013 - Subhash Chandra Agrawal & Dr. M. Haroon Siddiqui Vs. IFFCO (Full Bench Decision) (403.9 KiB, 1,503 hits)

AWHO is a Pubic Authority

  Decision dated 04.07.2013 - Lt. Col. (Retd.) R. Bansal Vs. Army Welfare Housing Organisation (AWHO) (Full Bench) (229.1 KiB, 1,578 hits)

Others

  Decision dated 03.06.2013 - Shri S.C. Aggarwal, Shri Anil Bailwal Vs. Parliament of India (Full Bench Decision) (257.0 KiB, 1,957 hits)

  Decision dated 20.05.2013 - Shri Arun Kumar Aggarwal Vs. PMO / Deptt. of Revenue / Min. of Law (Full Bench Decision) (108.3 KiB, 676 hits)

  Decision dated 20.05.2013 - Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs. Ministry of Mines, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (52.3 KiB, 629 hits)

  Decision dated 20.02.2013 - Shri Subhash Chandra Agarwal, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, Lok Sabha Sectt., New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (123.9 KiB, 875 hits)

  Decision dated 10.10.2011 - Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. (BSE) Vs. Security and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) (Full Bench Decision) (70.8 KiB, 707 hits)

  Decision dated 26.08.2011 - Mr. Manish Bhatnagar, Delhi Vs. SPIO & Addl. Director, Deptt of Woman & Child Development, NCT of Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (92.7 KiB, 959 hits)

  Decision dated 24.08.2011 - Shri Ajay Kumar Agarwal, New Delhi Vs. CPIO, CBI, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (206.6 KiB, 629 hits)

  Decision dated 31.01.2011 - Shri Z.U. Alvi Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs, GOI (Full Bench Decision) (79.9 KiB, 589 hits)

  Decision dated 15.10.2010 - Shri Shanmuga Patro Vs. Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (Full Bench Decision) (73.2 KiB, 932 hits)

  Decision dated 29.09.2010 - Brig. (Retd.) Ujjal Dasgupta (Dr. B. Malhotra-Representative Appellant) Vs. CDAC; Advocate for RAW, Director & CPIO, Cab. Sectt. (Full Bench Decision) (184.1 KiB, 781 hits)

  Decision dated 28.09.2010 - Shri V.R. Chandran Vs. Directorate of Enforcement (Full Bench Decision) (349.5 KiB, 627 hits)

  Decision dated 14.07.2010 - Ms. Bindu Khanna, New Delhi Vs. Dte. of Education, GNCT, New Delhi (Full Bench Decision) (76.9 KiB, 608 hits)

  Decision dated 10.06.2010 - Shri Manohar, Shri J.K. Routray & Shri Gurbax Singh Vs. AGs of Goa, Orisaa and Punjab (362.4 KiB, 907 hits)

Go to Decisions of Central Information Commission – Section-Wise RTI – Court judgements

Note:- It may be noted that the information in this website is subject to the Disclaimer of Dtf.in. If you have a complaint with respect to any content published in this website, it may kindly be brought to our notice for appropriate action to remove such content as early as possible or publish the latest/updated content/event, if any, at info[at]dtf.in.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.0/5 (143 votes cast)
Selected Decisions of Central Information Commission (CIC), 4.0 out of 5 based on 143 ratings

Check Also

Sexual Harassment of Women

SEXUAL HARASSMENT: Bombay High Court: Guidelines to Protect Identities of Parties Involved …

Bombay High Court: Guidelines to Protect Identities of Parties InvolvedMumbai: Holding hand once is not …

Sign in to browse DTF.in for FREE!

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.0/5 (143 votes cast)
Selected Decisions of Central Information Commission (CIC), 4.0 out of 5 based on 143 ratings