Appeal No. 71/SIC/2012 Decided on 24/06/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISISON

Ground Floor, Shrama Shakti Bhavan, Patto Plaza, Panaji-Goa

Coram : Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No. 71/SIC/2012

Decided on 24/06/2014

Dr. Kalidas Prakash Vaigankar,

H.No. 138, Rua De Maria,

Sancoale, Cortalim,

Goa 403710 ---- Appellant

V/s

1. The Public Information Officer/Health Officer,

Primary Health Centre,

Candolim- Goa.

2. First Appellate Authority,

Directorate of Health Services,

Campal, Panaji – Goa. ---- Respondents

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application dated : -30.11.2011

PIO reply on : -23.12.2011

First Appeal filed on : -12.01.2012

FAA Order dated : -10.02.2012

Second Appeal filed on : -04.04.2012

1) This second appeal arises out of original RTI application dated .30/11/2011 made to the PIO of Director of Health Service (D.H.S), it was transferred to respondent No. 1, namely PHC Candolim who replied on 13/12/2011 (within time).

2) The applicant who was a medical doctor himself working under DHS, filed the first appeal on the ground that information was incomplete and misleading. The FAA has passed order in appeal number 02/2012 dated 10.02.2012. He held that the PIO Candolim should transfer application to PHC Pernem, and also to the Administration section of DHS to obtain replies from them latest by 17/02/2012 in a point wise manner.

3) Second appeal was filed on 04/04/2012. The information asked pertains to earn leave application and other service related matters, of the appellant.

Contd—2/-

---2----

4) The matter was heard finally on 24/06/2014. Appellant has agreed that the only information remains to be given is in respect of question no 1(b) 1(c) and 2 (b) 2(c).

5) The PIO has referred to his letter filed on 04/01/2013 and claim that all information has been given, hence the appeal may be closed.

6) I have perused reply filed on 04/01/2013 by the Health Officer of PHC Candolim in which she has enclosed copy of their letter dated. 06/09/2012, where

information regarding 1a & b as well as 2 a & b is given. As for question 1(c) and 2(c), through which the Appellant has asked for evidence of receipt and dispatch regarding his application dated 20/03/2008, I find that the same has been furnished long back. The Xerox copy of inward and dispatch registers has been filed by appellant himself along with his second Appeal Memo.

7) In view of the above, I find that information has been furnished, I do not find any merit in the prayer clause 3, asking for penalty. Appellant has not persuaded the matter except on 15/01/2014.

--O r d e r --

In view of above, the appeal is dismissed. Order declared in Open Court. Parties should be informed.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji-Goa