https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433957 The information supplied, including the clarification given at hearing, was found adequate under the RTI framework, so no further disclosure direction was warranted. The separate grievance about cable laying and alleged disturbance of easement rights was treated as a collateral civil dispute outside RTI adjudication. Penal action against the CPIO was declined because no mala fide conduct, unreasonable refusal, knowingly incorrect information, or denial without reasonable cause was established. The matter was therefore closed without relief, and dissatisfaction with the reply alone was held insufficient to attract RTI penalty. en-us Thu, 05 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2023 17:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433957 The information supplied, including the clarification given at hearing, was found adequate under the RTI framework, so no further disclosure direction was warranted. The separate grievance about cable laying and alleged disturbance of easement rights was treated as a collateral civil dispute outside RTI adjudication. Penal action against the CPIO was declined because no mala fide conduct, unreasonable refusal, knowingly incorrect information, or denial without reasonable cause was established. The matter was therefore closed without relief, and dissatisfaction with the reply alone was held insufficient to attract RTI penalty. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433957