हे पण केलेत आरलीनने पाठवावी सॉफ्ट कॉपी

पे 69-2010
अ 62-एस-2013
क 153-क-2012
क 73-क-2013
क-77-क-2013
क-75-क-2013
अ-230-क-2011
अ-231-क-2011
पे 34-2014
अ-69-क-2012
अ-37-क-2014
हे पण केलेत आरलीनने पाठवावी सॉफ्ट कॉपी

HC in WP 5269/2008 -- Property Returns upload from hard copy

HC in WP 5269/2008 -- Property Returns -- upload from hard copy

Property Returns - DoPT says yes , but after third party 

but after third party consent. CIC says third party consent only because of involvement of civil litigation

Nagpur bench of Bombay HC in WP 5269/2008.-- Whether propery return can be disclosed -- (CIC to dcide this preliminary point)

2ndly can CIC order if SIC can hear a case onr not ? 

Appeal No.119/SCIC/2013 Decided on 12/11/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

Ground Floor, Shrama Shakti Bhavan, Patto Plaza, Panaji – Goa.

CORAM: Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No.119/SCIC/2013

Decided on 12/11/2014

Shri. Kashinath Shetye

R/o. H.No. 102, Raj Excellency ,

Patto, Ribandar, Tiswadi-Goa. …..Appellant

V/s.

1) State Public Information Officer,

Executive Engineer (trg).,

Elect. Dept. Panaji-Goa

2) First Appellate Authority,

Superintending Engineer,

Elect. Department, Panaji-Goa ……Respondents

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application dated : - 26/02/2013

PIO reply on : - NIL

First Appeal filed on : - 27/05/2013

FAA Order dated : - 12/06/2013

Second Appeal filed on : - 06/09/2013

This appeal arises out the original RTI application dated 26/02/2013 made to PIO/ Executive Engineer (trg)., Elect. Dept. Panaji-Goa, asking for certified copies of information about Shri. Lyndon Monterio OSD of Power Minister.

When the matter came up for hearing on 12/11/2014 the authorized person of the appellant states that he is interested only in the question no. 13 of RTI application which is same as in his other RTI application being taken in Appeal No.113/SCIC/2013, hence he wishes to withdraw the present case. The same taken on record in the rojnama.

Hence the Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Order declared in Open Court. Inform the parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Panaji – Goa.

Appeal No: 06/SIC/2013 Decided on : 11/12/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISISON

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

Coram : Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No: 06/SIC/2013

Decided on : 11/12/2014

Shri. Savio Britto

R/o. H.No. P/10,

Portais Reis, Magos,

Bardez- Goa. ---- Appellant

V/s

Principal /Public Information Officer

Fr. Agnel H.S.S

Pilar- Goa. ---- Respondent

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application filed on : 16/07/2012

PIO reply dated : 07/11/2012

First Appeal filed on : NIL

FAA Order dated : 31/10/2012

Second Appeal filed on : 11/01/2013

1) This second appeal arises out of original RTI application dated 16/07/2012 made to PIO/Principal, Fr. H.S.S., Pilar, Goa regarding Minutes of Department Selection Committee and the interview held on 22/05/2012.

2) The second appeal was part heard earlier and finally on 11/12/2014, when Appellant and present PIO state that Appellant has now received all information. This second appeal can be closed as far as supply of information is concerned.

3) As for non supply of information in time by the then PIO the following is noticed-

As stated in the appeal memo “The minutes of Department Selection Committee of the interview held on 22/05/2012 for the post of Teacher Grade I in Economics alongwith interview performance sheet.”In application No. 1 and information on point 4 from application No. II was not supplied. Hence appellant pleads for penalty.

Contd---2/-

--2--

4) It has been mentioned by PIO Fr. Carlos Fernandes on 26/05/2014 that the appellant being overage cannot be appointed. However he has not explained why information as asked in RTI application was not given.

--- O R D E R---

In view of above, the second appeal is closed, as far as information is concerned. Order declared in Open Court. New penalty case Under Section 20(1) to start against the then PIO, Fr. Carlos Fernandes, to whom notice should be given through present PIO. Inform the parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji-Goa

Appeal No. 12/SCIC/2014 Decided on 02/01/2015

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

Ground Floor, Shrama Shakti Bhavan, Patto Plaza, Panaji – Goa.

CORAM: Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No. 12/SCIC/2014

Decided on 02/01/2015

Shri. Jagannath P. Shirodkar

B15, Madhuban Complex,

Tambdimati- Panaji – Goa. ---- Appellant

V/s

1.The Public Information Officer

Goa Gazetteer Department,

Junta House, 4^th Floor 3^rd lift

Panaji- Goa.

2. The First Appellate Authority

Executive Editor, Goa Gazetteer Department,

Junta House, 4^th Floor 3^rd lift

Panaji- Goa. ---- Respondents

O R D E R (Open Court)

Stated briefly the RTI application seeks to know archival details about the name of village “ Serula” before and during the occupation of Goa by Portuguese. When the case came up for final hearing, following was recorded in the Rojnama-

Both PIO and appellant is present. PIO is willing to give him xerox copies of a document entitled “ minutes of 15^th meeting of states Name Authority held on 26/02/1993 in chamber of Minister for Revenue” ( draft minutes as there appears no approval from Minister). He will give them with a covering letter in 15 days.

With this both agree to close the appeal. Hence closed. Declared in Open Court.

--- O R D E R---

According the appeal is closed. Order declared in Open Court. Inform parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

State Chief Information Commissioner

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji – Goa.

Appeal No. 16/SIC/2013 Decided on 09/05/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISISON

Ground Floor, Shrama Shakti Bhavan, Patto Plaza,

CORAM: Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No. 16/SIC/2013

Decided on 09/05/2014

Shri. Kalidas Krishna Bandodkar,

R/o. H.No.PMC W9/15/25,

Khadapabandh , Ponda , Goa. ………..….Appellant

V/s

1. Public Information Officer,

Directorate of Fire & Emergency Services,

St. Inez, Panaji, Goa. ………….Respondent No.1

2. Director/ First Appellate Authority,

Directorate of Fire & Emergency Services,

Panaji, Goa. ………….Respondent No.2

ORDER (Open Court)

RTI Application dated: - 06/11/2012

PIO replied on: - 26/11/2012

First Appeal filed on: - 18/12/2012

FAA Order dated: - 22/01/2013

Second Appeal filed on: - 30/01/2013

This second Appeal arises from the original RTI Application dated 06/11/2012 made to PIO/ Deputy Director, Directorate of Fire & Emergency Services, Panaji, Goa.

When the matter came up for hearing on 09/05/2014 the appellant submitted a letter to withdraw the case which state below,

“I would like to withdraw the matter since I am satisfied with information provided by the concern office.”

Hence, in view of above, the second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Order declared in Open Court. Inform the parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Panaji-Goa

Appeal No.17/SCIC/2013 Decided on :28/11/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISISON

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

Coram : Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No.17/SCIC/2013

Decided on :28/11/2014

Dr. (Ms) Kalpana V. Kamat

Caldeira Arcade, 1^st Floor,

Bhute Bhat, Mestawada,

Vasco-da-Gama, Goa ..….…..Appellant

V/s

1. The Asst. Public Information Officer,

Office of Asst. Engineer, Sub Div. II,

W.D.XXI(PHE), PWD,

Baina, Vasco-da-Gama

2. First Appellate Authority,

PWD, Altinho, Panaji, Goa. …… Respondent

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application filed on : 06/11/2012

PIO reply (Fee Intimation) : 07/12/2012

First Appeal filed on : 10/12/2012

FAA Order dated : 07/01/2013

Second Appeal filed on : 04/02/2013

This second appeal arises out of RTI application dated 06/11/2012 made before the PIO/Executive Engineer-XXI, PWD, Baina, Vasco-da-Gama regarding temporary sewage connection to alleged building coming up in chalta No. 227 and 228 of Pt Sheet No. 152 at Vasco Goa.

When the matter is taken up for hearing on 28/11/2014, the Appellant and PIO and APIO are present. They have brought 23 pages of correspondence including site regarding plan new permanent connection.

Appellant prays orally that once she receives these pages, this appeal may be closed. Accordingly, I have instructed the PIO to give has the above 23 pages.

Contd---2/-

--2--

Hence the appeal is closed as partly allowed and complied with.

• O R D E R-

The second Appeal is closed as partly allowed. Order Declared in Open Court. Inform the Parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji – Goa.

Appeal No.22/SIC/2013 Decided on :16/12/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

Ground Floor, Shrama Shakti Bhavan, Patto Plaza, Panaji – Goa.

CORAM: Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No.22/SIC/2013

Decided on :16/12/2014

Mr. Lambert P.A. Godinho

Son of Mr. Jose Maria de J.G. Godinho,

Age about 32 years,

C/o. Our Lady of Grace High School,

Bicholim, Goa ..….…..Appellant

V/s

1.Headmaster/ Public Information Officer,

O/o. Executive Engineer XVIII(Roads),

Our Lady of Grace High School,

Bicholim, Goa.

2. The Director of Education/ First Appellate Authority,

Directorate of Education,

Porvorim, Bardez, Goa. …… Respondents

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application filed on : 13/08/2012

PIO reply :12/09/2012

First Appeal filed on : 10/10/2012

FAA Order dated : 12/11/2012

Second Appeal filed on : 18/02/2013

1) This second appeal arises out of RTI application dated 13/08/2012 made before the PIO/ Headmaster, Our Lady of Grace High School, Bicholim, Goa regarding certified copies of Confidential report, allegations, log book for the year 2011-2012 and observation sheets by the Headmistress in respect he himself, Shri Sunil Nanodkar and Miss Coreen Dias for the year 2011-2012.

2) When the case came up on last date of hearing on 16/12/2014, Appellant and PIO (Martin Rodrigues, Headmaster) were present. Q. 4 was about observation sheets prepared by Headmistress when she was observing Mr. Lambert giving lessons to students. PIO claims the same is not available. The appellant does not want to agitate this point with a proviso as described below at para 4.

3) Appellant submits that he does not want to agitate even point No. 2 which is also claimed as not available with PIO, but with the same proviso.

Contd---2/-

--2--

4) Provided that both those information, which are claimed now as unavailable cannot be brought on record for any departmental action against the appellant on

any subsequent date without first informing it to the appellant by quoting reference of this appeal.

5) The PIO stated that he is aware that whatever is claimed as not available against Mr. Lambert today, cannot be used against him in future in a departmental case, expect as in proviso above stated.

6) This Appeal is closed as withdrawn on above condition at the oral request of Appellant.

• O R D E R -

The second Appeal is dismissed as conditionally withdrawn. Order Declared in Open Court. Inform the Parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

State Chief Information Commissioner

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji – Goa.

Appeal No. 24/SCIC/2013 Decided on 23/06/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

Ground Floor, Shrama Shakti Bhavan, Patto Plaza, Panaji – Goa.

CORAM: Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No. 24/SCIC/2013

Decided on 23/06/2014

Shri. Ashok J. Patil,

R/o. Khaluli, Kirlapal,

Dabal, Goa. ……… Appellant

V/s.

1.Secretary/ Public Information Officer,

O/o. Village Panchayat OF Kirlapal –Dabal ,

Kirlapal , Dabal, Dharbandora, Goa.

2. Block Development Officer/ First Appellate Authority ,

O/o. Block Development Office Dharbandora Block,

Dharbandora, Goa. ………..Respondents

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application filed on : 08/08/2012

PIO reply on : 18/09/2012

First Appeal filed on : 31/10/2012

FAA Order dated : Not on record

Second Appeal filed on : 30/01/2013

1) This second Appeal results from RTI application filed before PIO and Village Panchayat Officer,Kirlapal , Dabal on 08/08/2012. The appellant is Ex-Sarpanch of Village Kirlapal, asking information about monthly meeting of the Panchayat between period January 2012 to April 2012. Then he sent another letter dated 17/09/2012 which is the notice to the PIO for not providing information. The PIO has sent reply on 18/09/2012 which appellant claims to receive on 04/10/2012.

2) Hence First Appeal was made to Directorate of Panchayat on 29/09/2012. Another appeal was made to BDO and FAA on 31/10/2012. In between Director of Panchayat vide letter dated 10/10/2012 asked the appellant to approach the proper FAA namely the BDO Dharbandora.

3) Then the Second Appeal is filed on 30/01/2013 before the SCIC alleging negligence on part of the PIO and claiming that the FAA has failed to decide the appeal.

2/-

-2-

Notices were issued to the PIO respondent no.1 and FAA respondent no.2 to file their replies on 15/04/2013. The respondents continued to remain absent and also failed to file any reply.

Second notice was issued on 10/04/2014 in reply to which the present PIO and Village Panchayat Officer of Kirlapal, Dabal and the present FAA Mr. Satish Prabhu BDO, remained present on 23/06/2014. Full set of Second Appeal documents was given to present BDO by the Advocate Dessai for appellant. The advocate also stated that he waives action against earlier BDO/PIO but wants the present FAA to properly dispose off his first appeal. The present FAA orally undertook to dispose off the appeal dated 31/10/2012 within a month from today.

---- O R D E R----

In view of the above agreement, this Appeal is closed as allowed. Order declared in Open Court. Inform the Parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Panaji – Goa.

Appeal No. 30/SIC/2011 Decided on 15/10/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISISON

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

Coram : Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No. 30/SIC/2011

Decided on 15/10/2014

Joan Mascarenhas E D’Souza,

H.No. 315/4, Tropa Vaddo,

Sodiem, Siolim. ---- Appellant

V/s

1. The Public Information Officer/ Town Planner,

Shri. R.M. Borkar,

T & C.P. Department,

Mapusa, Goa.

2. First Appellate Authority,

Senior Town Planner (North)

Shri. James Mathew,

T & C.P. Department,

Mapusa, Goa. ---- Respondents

O R D E R (ORAL)

RTI application filed on : 03/09/2010

PIO reply : 01/10/2010

First Appeal filed on : 04/11/2010

FAA Order dated : 30/12/2010

Second Appeal filed on : 08/02/2011

This second appeal arises out of original RTI application dated 03/09/2010 made to PIO/Town Planner, T & C.P, Department , Mapusa, Goa regarding certified copies of TCP NOC, site inspection report, construction approval issued to the Tropa Church, Sodiem, Goa.

When the case came up for hearing on 06/08/2014. Appellant has filed a say stating that finally a reply is received but she insists on the following-

• The Respondent No. 1/PIO has failed to comply with the order of the FAA/Respondent No. 2.
• The untraceable file is a recent file and public property and attracts penal action for being misplaced.
• The object of the RTI Act is for accountability and transparency and not to generate unproductive work.
• The Respondent No. 1 & 2 may be directed to make necessary changes to the practices in relation in the maintenance, management and destruction of records.

Contd---2/-

--2--

• The Respondent No. 1 may be directed to pay an appropriate amount of fine towards the hardship, pain and agony and torture physical as well as mental as well as monetary loss caused to the Appellant, due to the unlawful and highhanded actions of the Respondent.
• The Appellant should be fully compensated by the Respondent No.1 for not supplying complete information in prescribed time limit and breach of her right.

The contention of the appellant may be justified however, a hearing must be given to the then PIO to explain his position about the delay or inadequacy.

The second appeal is partly allowed. A separate case should be started under section 20 (1) against the then PIO by name calling explanation as to why a penalty should not impose for not giving information in time. The then PIO should also explain why he should not be asked to compensate the Appellant as per provision of section 19 (8), (vi) (b). Registry to issue notice to then PIO by name. Order declared in Open Court. Inform the parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji – Goa.