Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the State Information Commission's order dated 09.12.2024 which dismissed his appeal under the Right to Information Act, 2005 -- The Petitioner had sought specific information from the Inspector of Survey and Land Records, Pernem through application dated 01.09.2023 -- The Court found that the Public Information Officer failed to comply with Section 7(1) of the RTI Act by not communicating a decision within thirty days -- Instead, the PIO requested the Petitioner to inspect records, which did not constitute a proper decision -- The Court held that this failure entitled the Petitioner to receive the information free of charge under Section 7(6) -- The Court quashed the impugned order and directed the PIO to furnish all requested information within one week free of charge
Headnote
The High Court of Bombay at Goa quashed and set aside the order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the State Information Commission which dismissed the Petitioner's appeal under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) -- The Petitioner had sought specific information through application dated 01.09.2023 including certified copies of Demarcation Reports, plans, file noting, and orders from the Inspector of Survey and Land Records (ISLR), Pernem for the period from 01.01.2023 -- The Court held that the information sought was specific and ought to have been maintained in digital form by the public authority as mandated by Section 4(2) of the RTI Act -- The Public Information Officer (PIO) failed to communicate a decision within thirty days as required under Section 7(1) of the Act -- Instead, the PIO requested the Petitioner to inspect records and obtain certified copies, which did not constitute a proper decision under Section 7(1) -- The Court found that the PIO's communication dated 21.11.2023, which came after the thirty-day period, entitled the Petitioner to receive information free of charge under Section 7(6) -- The Court directed the PIO to furnish all information sought in the application dated 01.09.2023 within one week free of charge
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Information Commission erred in dismissing the Petitioner's appeal when the Public Information Officer failed to comply with the statutory timeframe under Section 7(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005
Final Decision
The Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the State Information Commission -- Rule was made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) -- The Court directed the PIO to furnish all information sought in application dated 01.09.2023 within one week free of charge
Law Points
- Right to Information Act
- 2005 (RTI) mandates public authorities to maintain records in digitized form accessible to public
- Section 4(2) requires public authorities to maintain records in catalogued and indexed manner facilitating easy access
- Section 6 provides for application procedure
- Section 7(1) mandates PIO to decide on information request within thirty days
- Section 7(6) entitles applicant to free information if PIO fails to comply with thirty-day timeframe
- Public Information Officer (PIO) must communicate clear decision on information request within statutory period
