https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243248 The Commission found both the CPIO and Asstt. Registrar responsible for delays in providing information under the RTI Act. They were directed to show cause why a penalty of Rs. 250 per day should not be imposed on them for the delays. The CPIO was faulted for delayed action on the RTI application and subsequent delays in providing access to files, while the Asstt. Registrar failed to ensure timely availability of files for inspection. The Commission stressed the significance of prompt handling of RTI requests to maintain transparency and accountability in governance. en-us Mon, 10 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jan 2014 06:37:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243248 The Commission found both the CPIO and Asstt. Registrar responsible for delays in providing information under the RTI Act. They were directed to show cause why a penalty of Rs. 250 per day should not be imposed on them for the delays. The CPIO was faulted for delayed action on the RTI application and subsequent delays in providing access to files, while the Asstt. Registrar failed to ensure timely availability of files for inspection. The Commission stressed the significance of prompt handling of RTI requests to maintain transparency and accountability in governance. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243248