Times of India: Panaji: Saturday, May 27, 2017.
Court cases
under the RTI Act see many twists and turns, but this curious case saw the Goa
Public Service Commission (GPSC) approach the high court of Bombay at Goa to
recover a sum of Rs 16 from an RTI applicant and in the process spending
several times the recovery amount.
Matters came
to a head after the Goa State Information Commission (GSIC) directed the public
service body to provide the RTI applicant information free of charge, prompting
the body to challenge the order before the high court. The case was filed in
2015.
However, the
high court advised top officials of the constitutional body to reflect on the
matter objectively so that its officers do not become over sensitive to the
directions issued by the GSIC.
The court, in
its May 15 order, noted that to recover a meagre amount of Rs 16 from the RTI
applicant, the public service body incurred expenses by way of typing and
stationery material, not to mention advocate fees and judicial time, and
further chastised the body saying that a litigation of such a nature between
institutions that are "extremely vital and important" particularly
when there was no question of any serious principle involved, "hardly
augurs to the functioning of both these institutions".
Justice M S
Sonak said: "It will be appropriate if the chairperson of the GPSC, or
some senior functionary, objectively reflected upon the present matter so that
the officers of the GPSC do not become over sensitive to the directions issued
by GSIC and propose petitions of the present nature."
The public
service body's argument was that they provided information to the applicant
within the prescribed time frame and that the lapse was on the part of the
education department's public information officer (PIO) and, hence, the
information commission's direction to it, to provide information to Kalpana
Kamat free, was in violation of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
Under the RTI
Act, an application is to be transferred, as soon as practicable, by one PIO to
another authority which has the information. At the most, five days can be
taken to transfer the application from one authority to the other, from the
date of the receipt of the RTI application.
The issue
arose over the time the education department PIO took to transfer the
application to the public service body.
Noting that
there was indeed a lapse on the part of the PIO, the high court held that after
taking into consideration the plight of the RTI applicant, the information
commission's direction to the public service body asking it to waive the fee of
Rs 16 towards furnishing of information was reasonable.
"Some
grace is naturally expected from the GPSC in a matter of such nature. Instead,
in the present case, the GPSC, perhaps, out of over sensitivity of certain
officials, has chosen to overact and institute the present petition in order to
insist that Kamat be directed to pay the fee," Justice Sonak said, and
added that if the body was seriously intent of recovering the sum, it should
have made the PIO of the education department the respondent in the case.
Dismissing
the petition, the high court observed: "The GPSC, in a matter of this
nature, has to not only keep in mind the perspective of the citizen who has
been hassled for receipt of information, but the GPSC, which is itself a
constitutional authority, has to be conscious of the legal status and the
position of the GSIC as well."