Page 2 or 3 of some order.-- Many spelling corrections needed
who was execcuting the work.The Assistant
Engineer and deemed PIO has also not discharged his duty under RTI
Act. However non -reply by both of them is not rhe cause of continued
water shortage.
Anwway , before issuing ny penalty
order,both PIO's must be given a chance to explain their position.
Hence I feel that there is need to issue
direction to present BDO of pernem that he may issue advisory note to
all the village Panchayat Officers working under him to be more
vigilant in replying to the RTI questions within 30 days it under
section 6 (3) within 6 days to the concerned dealing officers.
Now,no further information remains to be
received . In view of the preayer of the complainant a notice can be
issued to both PIO's under section 20(1) they can be given a
chance.Hence I direct registry to start new penalty case and issue
notices to both then village Panchayat officer for not transferring
the RTI application in time and the then Assistant Engineer for not
replying.
With this direction this complaint is
closed.Order declared in Open court.Inform the parties.Open separate
Penalty case and issue notices to then PIO and deemed PIO.
Sd/-
( Leena Mehendale )
Goa State Chief Information
commissioner
Goa State information Commission
Panaji-Goa.
Another unidentified page which could be part of this
received
the transferred RTI application late from the Village panchayat on 09/06/2009.
It is however evident that even if he had
received the transferred RTI application at a much delayed date he himself has
not taken care to give any reply to the Appellant .
As far as the RTI application is
concerened it is a little flawed though
the chagrin and anger of the common citizen is understandable when a
small government scheme does not get completed even after 4 years, resulting in continued water shorteage, However ,the Q1 does not fit in the definition of information
although it pertains to infficiency . It does not come not under the definition of information under section 2(f)
of the RTI Act. The 2nd question begins by asking what is the standing position
of work . This definitely falls under
definition of information and PIO should have answered it.
The deemed PIO has no doubt filed the
status of work before the Commission on
28/ 06 /2010 . He has not mentioned
whether proper water supply has started yet to the purpose of the
desiliting of Thank and counstruction
of side walls.
The Complainant remained present on
earlier dates but started absending after January2013 and continued to
remain absent till 05/08/ 2014 which
was the last date of hearing .An operative for dismissal was recorded in the
Rojnama . However after the closure of the hearing the complaint as well as the present Village Panchayat Officer appeared before me and Ifind that nothing more remains to be
supplied as far as the information asked is concerned .
Complainant has prayed for penalty
for the then Village Panchayat Officer of
Virnoda . The grounds stated at
para 6 is that the information sought from ,the secretary of Village Panchayat
was simple information and it was easily available in the records of the
Panchayat , but the secretary
intentionally refused to give information within 30 days ,hence,the Complainant
had to suffer mentally and monetarily .
This aspect is not fully correct . The mistake of the Village Panchayat Officer
lies is not transferring the application to the concerned Assistant Engineer
This Complaint out of RTI application filed on 23/01/2099
before the PIO Village Panchayat Virnorda ,Pernem ,Goa .The appellant claims
that she is the the affected person of shortage of Natural water supply from
the lake that has been repaired before 4 years and yet the work is not completed .
Hence the
information was asked for
1. Why is the said construction left incomplete?
2.At present what is the standing position of the said
construction,is it taken up as per plans sanctioned?
