Appeal No.40/SCIC/2014 Decided on :12/11/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISISON

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

Coram : Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No.40/SCIC/2014

Decided on :12/11/2014

Shri Sarvesh Raghu Khandolkar

R/o. H.No. 151, Carmi Bhat,

Merces, Ilhas, Goa. ..….…..Appellant

V/s

1.Office Superintendent,

Administrative Branch,

DGP’s Office, PHQ,

Panaji, Goa.

2.The Superintendent of Police(HQ),

Police Head Quarters,

Panaji, Goa. ……. Respondent

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application filed on : 20/01/2014

PIO reply : 10/02/2014

First Appeal filed on : 18/03/2014

FAA Order dated : 02/04/2014

Second Appeal filed on : 07/05/2014

This second appeal arises out of RTI application dated 20/01/2014 made before the PIO/ Office Superintendent, Office of DGP, Administrative Branch, Panaji, Goa regarding certified copies of Complaint/ Note sheet regarding transfer of staff, inquiry conducted and details of members of Police Establishment Board.

The appellant was transferred from his earlier post to a new post vide order dated 07/06/2013. Hence under the RTI Act, he asked for-

i) Certified copy of allegation/complaint/application/Petition/Notesheet, Adverse Report, if any showing the Public interest towards the transfer of staff from Sr. No. 1 to 4.

ii) Certified copy of Preliminary Enquiry, Departmental Enquiry or Reports, if any towards the transfer of staff from Sr. No. 1 to 4.

iii) Name and Designation of officers, those who are the members of Police Establishment Board.

iv) Date, Time and Place of Meeting held of Police Establishment Board prior to the transfer order dated 07/06/2014.

Contd---2/-

--2--

v) Name and designation of officers (members of Police Establishment Board) who attended the meeting.

On 07/02/2014 the PIO of State Police Control Room gave Nil reply to question No. 1 and 2. Further, on 10/02/2014. The PIO of Administration Branch gave reply to the remaining three questions. I have perused them and they give the factual position.

A first appeal was filed in which para I to X states the chronology of events but no ground for filing the first appeal. Only at para VII, it was argued that since the Transfer order states that it is made in public interest the appellant desires to know what is the public interest. The appellant has been dismissed by FAA.

The same ground has been retained in the second memo also . It is therefore necessary to refer to question No. 1. From its wording it is clear that the applicant is under wrong impression that transfers should be made only if there is an allegation or complaint or adverse report. This impression is not correct. Government transfers are made from time to time in order to ensure that employees, by remaining at one place, should not get the opportunity for developing a vested interest in their post. This itself is treated as “Public Interest”. As such no elaborate public interest has to be brought on record before issuing transfer orders.

The above stated position is a long tradition in Government. I would have preferred if the First Appellate Authority could have clarified this philosophy adopted for transfers rather than simply agreeing that information has not been furnished because it is not available on records. It is true that no elaborate noting need to kept for each proposed case of transfer but this could have been stated at the level of FAA, which explains why the information could not have been in the file such an approach by FAA is recommended as it improves the team-spirit among the staff.

---O R D E R--

Presently the second appeal lacks merit. Hence dismissed. Order declared in Open Court. Inform the parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief Information Commissioner,

Goa State Information Commission

Panaji-Goa