Appeal 102/SCIC/2014 on 17/11/2014

GOA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

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

CORAM: Smt. Leena Mehendale, State Chief Information Commissioner

Appeal No. 102/SCIC/2014

Decided on 17/11/2014

Mr. Milagres Moraes

R/o H. No. 591, Colmorod, Navelim,

Salcete, Goa. ..….…..Appellant

V/s

1. The Public Information Officer,

The Senior Technical Examiner,

(The Then PIO, Mr. K. V. Sree Krishnan),

Technical Cell, Directorate of Vigilance,

Sera Building, Next to A.I.R.,

Altinho, Panaji - Goa.

2. The Chief Technical Examiner

Directorate of Vigilance,

Next to A.I.R., Sera Building,

Altinho, Panaji-Goa.

……..Respondents

O R D E R (Open Court)

RTI application filed on : 13/05/2014

PIO reply dated : 04/06/2014

First Appeal filed on : 13/05/2014

FAA Order dated : NIL

Second Appeal filed on : 29/09/2014

1. This second appeal arises out of RTI application dated 13/05/2014 made before the PIO/Senior Technical Examiner, Technical Cell, Directorate of Vigilance, Altinho, Panaji, Goa regarding certified copies of documents, note and findings pertaining to Complaint dated 12/03/2014 and action taken report.

(2) Briefly stated, the original application is made to PIO of Directorate of Vigilance who transferred it u/s 6(3) to another Officer who is part and parcel of the same Directorate. Instead the PIO should have called the information U/s 5. This shows lack of understanding by PIO.

Cont…..2

::2::

(3) The recipient did not answer. His plea was “Complaint not made to me”. This also shows complete lack of understanding by the recipient.

(4) Hence the FAA of Directorate namely Director of Vigilance is directed to take on record the first appeal dated 18/07/2014 which is available on the file of PIO and Respondent No. 1 Shri Kamat and hear it against both PIOs, namely the then Dy. Director and the then Senior Technical Examiner by treating the first Appeal as made within time. He should ensure that proper information as required under RTI Act is given to the appellant.

(5) He should pass his first appellate order within 1 month from today.

(6) The above directions are also stated in brief on the rojnama dated 17/11/2014 and the appellant has been allowed to carry a copy of rojnama and serve on FAA, so that he may proceed to carry on the direction, and hear the First Appeal.

(7) Appeal is partly allowed and remanded. The FAA and the Head of the Office should also take notice of the faulty actions of both the PIO’s and issue them suitable memos. A better training for both should also be arranged.

O R D E R

The second Appeal is partly allowed and remanded. Order declared in open Court. Inform the Parties.

Sd/-

(Leena Mehendale)

Goa State Chief information Commissioner,

Panaji-Goa.