Rohas Legal AI: Public

View saved version →

---
name: government-contract-reviewer
description: >-
  Review contracts with governments, public bodies, state-owned entities, and
  public funders for authority, procurement-document hierarchy, fiscal and
  public-law constraints, audit, transparency, integrity, performance, change,
  termination, and disputes. Use for government contracts, concessions, grants,
  framework agreements, purchase orders, and post-award amendments.
---

# Government Contract Reviewer

Treat the tender, award, approvals, bid, clarifications, and signed instrument as
one transaction. Apply the law and procurement regime of the identified entity
and jurisdiction; do not assume private-contract norms resolve public authority.

## Intake

Obtain the jurisdiction, contracting entities and public status, procurement
route, funding source, tender and addenda, bid and clarifications, award or letter
of acceptance, draft agreement, schedules, authorisations, approvals, guarantees,
amendments, performance history, and the client's commercial priorities.

## Review method

1. Build a document hierarchy and record conflicts, incorporation language,
   missing documents, versions, dates, and signatures.
2. Verify legal capacity, statutory or constitutional authority, delegated
   signing power, mandatory form, appropriation or funding conditions, approvals,
   and conditions precedent. For India, test Article 299 requirements where
   applicable rather than assuming an official's signature binds the Government.
3. Reconcile scope, specifications, deliverables, milestones, acceptance,
   dependencies, service levels, pricing, taxes, invoicing, payment certification,
   retention, securities, and price adjustment with the tender and accepted bid.
4. Review change control, variations, extensions, delay allocation, liquidated
   damages, force majeure, change in law, relief events, suspension, step-in,
   termination for default or convenience, compensation, and transition support.
5. Test representations, compliance warranties, conflicts, anti-bribery and
   integrity duties, beneficial ownership, sanctions or debarment, subcontracting,
   local-content or preference commitments, audit, records, access, and inspection.
6. Review confidentiality alongside transparency, freedom-of-information, public
   records, legislative or audit disclosure, data protection, cybersecurity, IP,
   publicity, and open-data duties. Do not promise secrecy a public body cannot give.
7. Assess indemnities, liability caps and exclusions, insurance, title and risk,
   guarantees, sovereign or governmental immunity, governing law, escalation,
   expert determination, arbitration or courts, seat, enforcement, and notices.
8. Separate clauses that need drafting changes from procurement deviations that
   may require formal approval, re-tendering, or may not lawfully be negotiated.
9. Verify current statutes, financial rules, procurement manuals, circulars,
   standard bidding documents, and authority-specific terms as of the review date.

## Output

Provide the transaction and authority map, document hierarchy, executive risk
summary, clause-by-clause findings with source and consequence, missing approvals
and evidence, proposed redlines or negotiation language, procurement-deviation
register, and a signing or implementation checklist.

## Guardrails

Do not infer authority, funding, waiver of immunity, or permission to depart from
the awarded tender. Flag jurisdiction-specific public-law and enforceability issues
for qualified local counsel and distinguish legal risk from commercial preference.

Referenced files: 1

View saved version →

---
name: pil-drafter
description: >-
  Assess and draft public interest litigation in India under Article 32 or
  Article 226, establishing genuine public injury, standing, maintainability,
  respondents, evidence, disclosures, and workable relief. Use for proposed PILs,
  pre-filing merits checks, writ petitions, and PIL defect or filing checklists.
---

# India PIL Drafter

Run a maintainability screen before drafting. Apply the current Constitution,
Supreme Court or relevant High Court rules, PIL guidelines, roster and filing
requirements on the filing date.

## Intake

Obtain the proposed petitioner and credentials, affected class, public injury,
geography, impugned action or inaction, public authorities, rights and duties,
supporting records, prior representations and responses, related proceedings,
personal interests or litigation, urgency, requested relief, and filing forum.

## Assessment and drafting method

1. Identify the precise public harm, affected class, public element, legal duty,
   constitutional or statutory breach, and evidentiary basis. Separate fact,
   allegation, inference, expert opinion, and unavailable proof.
2. Choose the forum deliberately: test Article 32 fundamental-right jurisdiction
   against the broader Article 226 jurisdiction and territorial cause of action.
   Check alternative remedies, delay, standing, and forum-specific PIL rules.
3. Verify that the matter is genuine public interest rather than a private,
   political, publicity, commercial, service, property, or collateral dispute.
   Check the court's current accepted and excluded PIL subject categories.
4. Establish the petitioner's bona fides and nexus to the issue. Collect every
   disclosure required by the chosen court, including identity, occupation,
   income, personal interest, funding, related litigation, prior efforts, and the
   absence of personal gain, private motive, or oblique reason.
5. Identify necessary and proper respondents, their legal duties, territorial
   connection, prior notice, response, and any affected parties entitled to be heard.
6. Develop grounds tied to pleaded facts and current primary authority. Verify
   every quotation, holding, neutral citation, provision, amendment, and rule.
7. Frame enforceable relief that respects institutional competence. Explain the
   legal source, responsible authority, measurable action, timing, and monitoring;
   justify interim relief through urgency, prima facie case, balance, and harm.
8. Draft the synopsis, list of dates, parties, jurisdiction, maintainability and
   bona-fides sections, facts, grounds, representations, prayers, interim prayers,
   declarations, verification, affidavit, applications, and annexure index in the
   forum's prescribed form.
9. Run a filing audit against current court rules, PIL guidelines, default lists,
   court fees, service, paper-book, redaction, translation, and e-filing requirements.

## Output

Provide the maintainability opinion first. If viable, provide a court-ready draft,
authority table, allegation-to-evidence map, respondent and relief matrix, annexure
plan, disclosure schedule, and filing-defect checklist. If not viable, explain the
proper representation, statutory remedy, ordinary writ, appeal, or other route.

## Guardrails

Do not manufacture standing, public injury, urgency, beneficiaries, or evidence;
use PIL to bypass an individual remedy; expose protected identities unnecessarily;
or present an unverified allegation as fact. Require Indian counsel to settle and
file the petition under the chosen court's current rules.

Referenced files: 1

View saved version →

---
name: policy-note-drafter
description: >-
  Draft decision-ready policy notes, cabinet notes, executive briefs, and options
  papers with authority, evidence, consultation, fiscal and regulatory impacts,
  implementation, risk, approvals, and monitoring. Use when officials need a
  neutral proposal for ministerial, cabinet, committee, or agency decision.
---

# Policy Note Drafter

Match the note to the decision-maker's mandated template and procedure. Distinguish
analysis from advocacy, verified facts from assumptions, and approval from advice.

## Intake

Obtain the jurisdiction, decision-maker, decision sought, sponsoring authority,
problem definition, evidence, affected groups, current legal and policy baseline,
options already considered, consultation record, costs and funding, implementation
owners, deadlines, sensitivities, classification, and required concurrences.

## Drafting method

1. State the exact decision requested, why it is needed now, the legal authority,
   scope, excluded matters, and consequences of no decision.
2. Present a short, sourced background and baseline. Quantify the problem where
   possible and label uncertainty, data limitations, forecasts, and disputed claims.
3. Define evaluation criteria before comparing the status quo and credible options.
   Use consistent dimensions: legality, effectiveness, cost, distributional impact,
   feasibility, timing, reversibility, administrative burden, and risk.
4. Analyse constitutional and statutory authority, rulemaking or legislative need,
   federal or intergovernmental issues, equality, rights, privacy, competition,
   environment, procurement, state-aid or subsidy, and judicial-review exposure as
   applicable. Identify the current legal advice required; do not invent clearance.
5. Set out fiscal costs, revenue effects, workforce and systems needs, procurement,
   delivery dependencies, stakeholder effects, accessibility, and transition.
6. Summarise interdepartmental, public, expert, regulator, finance, and legal
   consultation accurately. Record each material objection and the response without
   implying concurrence where none exists.
7. Recommend one option with reasons. Include implementation stages, accountable
   owners, instruments, milestones, communications, risk controls, indicators,
   evaluation date, reporting, and review or sunset mechanism.
8. For an India Cabinet or Cabinet Committee note, use the current Cabinet
   Secretariat handbook, Transaction of Business requirements, consultation and
   circulation instructions, confidentiality controls, and approval sequence.
9. Finish with a clear approval paragraph, unresolved issues, required concurrences,
   annexures, and a pre-submission compliance check.

## Output

Provide the executive summary, decision sought, background, authority, objectives,
options table, impact and consultation analysis, recommendation, implementation
and monitoring plan, risk register, approval text, source register, assumptions,
open issues, and annexure list in the required house style.

## Guardrails

Do not fabricate evidence, consensus, costs, legal authority, consultation, or
approval. Protect classified, cabinet, personal, commercially sensitive, and
legally privileged material and verify current procedural instructions before use.

Referenced files: 1

View saved version →

---
name: rti-appeal-drafter
description: >-
  Analyse and draft first and second appeals under Section 19 of India's Right to
  Information Act, 2005, including delay, deemed refusal, exemptions, severability,
  third-party process, burden, and relief. Use after an RTI response, non-response,
  excess fee, incomplete disclosure, or First Appellate Authority order.
---

# India RTI Appeal Drafter

Choose the remedy before drafting. Distinguish a Section 19(1) first appeal, a
Section 19(3) second appeal, and a Section 18 complaint; they differ in forum,
record, powers, limitation, and suitable relief.

## Intake

Obtain the application, proof and date of filing, fee, transfer notices, PIO reply
and enclosures, dispatch and receipt dates, First Appellate Authority appeal and
order if any, later disclosures, the information still missing, prejudice, delay
explanation, public-interest facts, and the applicable Central or State authority.

## Analysis and drafting method

1. Build a procedural chronology and calculate the statutory response and appeal
   dates under the current Act and applicable rules. Identify deemed refusal,
   defective transfer, delayed supply, and any condonation needed.
2. Map every original request item to the response, disclosure, exemption, fee,
   omission, or redirection. Do not enlarge the application through the appeal.
3. Test whether the cited exemption applies to the particular record and time.
   Address reasons, public-interest override where available, partial disclosure
   and severability, third-party procedure, and information already public.
4. Challenge unsupported denials, generic exemption recitals, failure to decide
   item by item, unreasonable form or fee, incomplete or illegible records, failure
   to transfer, and failure to provide appellate particulars.
5. For a first appeal, state jurisdiction, timeliness, facts, itemised grounds, and
   precise disclosure or procedural relief. Do not ask the First Appellate Authority
   to exercise penalty powers reserved to an Information Commission.
6. For a second appeal, comply with the current Commission's form, annexures,
   service, verification, pagination, and limitation rules. Address the public
   authority's Section 19(5) burden and request only relief within Commission powers.
7. If the real complaint concerns refusal to accept an application, absence of a
   PIO, obstruction, or another Section 18 ground, explain the complaint route and
   whether a disclosure remedy still requires the Section 19 appeal path.
8. Verify current PIO, First Appellate Authority, Central or State Information
   Commission jurisdiction, portal, address, fee, rules, practice directions, and
   filing status as of the drafting date.

## Output

Provide the remedy-selection note, limitation calculation, issue matrix, filing-
ready appeal or complaint, indexed annexure list, service and filing instructions,
and a request-item-to-relief schedule. State missing evidence and assumptions.

## Guardrails

Do not confuse complaint and appeal, invent receipt dates, enlarge the original
request, claim penalty as automatic, or quote superseded rules or contacts. Preserve
proof of submission and require current forum requirements to be checked before filing.

Referenced files: 1

View saved version →

---
name: rti-application-drafter
description: >-
  Draft focused applications under India's Right to Information Act, 2005 for
  identifiable existing records held or controlled by the correct public authority.
  Use to convert a research objective, grievance, transaction, or event into an RTI
  request, inspection demand, certified-copy request, or electronic-record request.
---

# India RTI Application Drafter

Ask for records, not explanations or new analysis. Apply the current RTI Act and
the rules, fees, forms, portals, and language arrangements for the responsible
Central, State, legislative, judicial, or other competent authority.

## Intake

Obtain the applicant's citizenship and contact details, objective, event and date
range, likely public authority and record custodian, known file or reference
numbers, desired record form, urgency, BPL status, submission route, and facts
supporting any life-or-liberty claim.

## Drafting method

1. Define the information outcome and research proactive disclosures, published
   records, retention schedules, and the authority's subject allocation first.
2. Identify the public authority that holds or controls each record. Distinguish
   it from a body that merely regulates, funds, or may be able to obtain the record.
3. Convert questions into narrow record descriptions using subject, creator or
   recipient, record type, date range, file number, transaction, and custodian.
   Request existing notes, orders, registers, correspondence, reports, contracts,
   minutes, data extracts, or certified copies rather than reasons or opinions.
4. Split unrelated record sets where that improves routing and search. Avoid vague
   requests for "all records," interrogatories, grievance argument, and accusations.
5. Select inspection, samples, certified copies, or electronic form deliberately.
   Specify accessible formats where needed without demanding creation of a new record.
6. Anticipate Sections 8 and 9, third-party process under Section 11, severability
   under Section 10, and exempt organisations under Section 24. Narrow personal,
   fiduciary, commercial, security, copyright, and investigation-sensitive material;
   state a supported public-interest case where legally relevant.
7. Include transfer under Section 6(3) only as a fallback, the statutory response
   route, applicable fee or BPL proof, and a substantiated life-or-liberty basis if used.
8. Verify the current PIO, filing portal or address, payment method, word limit,
   language, fee, and authority-specific Central or State rules on the filing date.

## Output

Provide a filing-ready application with numbered record requests, delivery form,
fee or BPL statement, and applicant details, plus a routing note, source-to-request
map, exemption and narrowing notes, filing instructions, and deadline tracker.

## Guardrails

Do not invent file numbers or custodians, assert life or liberty without evidence,
request the PIO to answer hypotheticals or create information, or include more
personal data than filing requires. Explain that RTI obtains records and is not a
substitute for grievance redressal, discovery, or legal advice.

Referenced files: 1

View saved version →

---
name: tender-compliance-checker
description: >-
  Check a public or private tender, RFP, RFQ, auction, or bid for eligibility,
  responsiveness, technical and commercial evidence, forms, securities, portal
  mechanics, and deadlines. Use to build a bid compliance matrix, run a red-team
  submission audit, identify exceptions, or make a documented bid/no-bid decision.
---

# Tender Compliance Checker

Treat the issued tender, schedules, standard terms, corrigenda, clarifications,
portal instructions, and incorporated policies as one controlled document set.
Never assume a missing form or deviation can be cured after the deadline.

## Intake

Obtain the complete tender package, all addenda and pre-bid answers, procurement
portal record, authority and jurisdiction, bid structure, bidder and affiliates,
consortium or subcontractors, credentials, technical solution, pricing, securities,
submission deadline and timezone, and internal owners and approvals.

## Checking method

1. Create a document register with issue dates, versions, hierarchy, addenda,
   incorporated documents, conflicts, and bidder acknowledgements.
2. Extract every requirement into a traceable matrix: source and clause, exact
   requirement, mandatory or evaluative status, pass condition, evidence, form,
   owner, dependency, due date, response location, and review status.
3. Test eligibility and exclusion criteria, registrations, licences, experience,
   turnover and net worth, similar contracts, conflicts, litigation disclosures,
   debarment, sanctions, beneficial ownership, integrity, tax and labour compliance.
4. Check consortium, joint-venture, affiliate, OEM, key-personnel, subcontractor,
   local-presence, local-content, MSE, startup, preference, and reciprocity rules
   against the exact definitions and evidence requirements.
5. Reconcile specifications, scope, deviations, deliverables, methods, staffing,
   milestones, service levels, acceptance, warranties, implementation, and proofs.
6. Audit pricing schedules and BOQ for currency, taxes, arithmetic, units, discounts,
   escalation, omissions, conditional pricing, signatures, locks, and consistency
   with the technical offer without altering protected source workbooks casually.
7. Verify bid security or declaration, performance security commitments, powers of
   attorney, board approvals, declarations, notarisation, apostille, signatures,
   digital certificates, file formats, size limits, naming, encryption, and sealing.
8. Rehearse portal submission, access, uploads, signatures, payment, final submit,
   receipt capture, deadline and timezone. Keep a fallback and escalation plan.
9. For India public procurement, verify the latest applicable GFR compilation,
   goods, works, consultancy or non-consultancy manual, GeM or portal rules,
   preference orders, restrictions, vigilance guidance, and procuring-entity terms.
10. Separate curable gaps, material deviations, clarification questions, approval-
    dependent exceptions, and absolute blockers. Recheck every addendum before filing.

## Output

Provide the document register, compliance matrix, eligibility and evidence table,
deviation and clarification log, technical and commercial cross-check, submission
checklist, blocker report, owners and deadlines, and a reasoned bid/no-bid status.

## Guardrails

Do not mark compliance from narrative assurance alone, conceal a deviation, invent
credentials or certificates, or rely on a hoped-for post-bid cure. Preserve the
issued files and submission receipt, and escalate ambiguous mandatory conditions
before the clarification or bid deadline.

Referenced files: 1