Appeal No: 107/SIC/2012 Decided on: 11/08/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISISON

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

Coram : Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No: 107/SIC/2012

Decided on: 11/08/2014

Joan Mascarenhas E D’Souza,

H.No. 315/4, Tropa Vaddo,

Sodiem, Siolim, ---- Appellant

V/s

1. Assistant Director (South) Public Information Officer

O/o. Assistant Director of Transport,

Osia Commercial Arcade,

Complex, 2^nd floor, B Wing,

Margao, Goa.

2. Deputy Director (South )/The First Appellate Authority,

O/o.Dy. Director of Transport,

Osia Commercial Arcade

Complex, 2^nd floor, B Wing

Margao, Goa. ---- Respondents

O R D E R (Open Court)

1) This second appeal arises out of original RTI application dated 05/10/2011 made to PIO/Assistant Director (South ) Margao, Goa in respect of registration details of ambulances with the Directorate of Transport Margao.

2) The original RTI application claimed to have been sent on 05/10/2011 asked some question about ambulance registration at the Directorate of Transport, such as name of owner, Date of Registration, and the names of the Assistant Director with whom they are registered. This information is bound to appear on the website of the Public Authority namely the Director of Transport. Hence my first observation is that the Director of Transport should ensure that their website complies with requirement of sec (4) of RTI Act in general and the information about ambulances in particular.

3) Reply was sent on 25/11/2011, stating that the RTI application was inwarded on 09/11/2011 and that RTI applicant should specify the period pertaining to which the details of ambulances is required.

Contd---2/-

--2---

4) The appellant replied on 04/12/2011 mentioning the period as 1997 till date (i.e 2011). But no reply was given. The first appeal filed under No. 17/2012 was taken for hearing on 19/05/2012, but its outcome is not known.

5) The second appeal was filed on the ground that FAA has not passed any order. It also states that PIO did not give reply to his letter dated. 04/12/2012.

6) The second appeal was fixed for first hearing from 20/07/2012 onward and appellant remained absent continuously on all the 11 occasions till today except on 03/10/2012. Both PIO and FAA have also remained absent and not filed any reply, although the PIO was present once on 01/12/2012 to seek adjournment.

7) The appeal is dismissed for default with liberty to apply for reopening within 3 months from receiving this order. However direction is issued to PIO as well as to the FAA and Director of Transport to ensure that

• Information of Ambulances is made available on website as per requirement of sec(4) of the Act, within 2 months of getting this order.
• The then FAA is also instructed to remain careful and ensure that the proper order should be passed in first appeal and orders are communicated to appellant. He should maintain a register and of Appeals monitor it from time to time.
• All PIO and FAA from the office of Director of Transport should be more careful in future to file their reply to the notice sent from SCIC office.
• Director should ensure training of his officers as they did not appear responsive.

8) With above observation and direction to the office of Director of Transport, this appeal is closed. Order declared in Open Court. Inform the parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji-Goa