Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
Aires Rodrigues

Governor and Raj Bhavan under the purview of RTI

Recommended Posts

Aires Rodrigues

Could anyone help me with some decisions and judgements to the effect that Governors and Raj Bhavans come within the ambit of RTI.

 

Many thanks,

 

Aires Rodrigues

Goa

XXXXXXXXXXXX - Deleted mobile number - posting against forum rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dr.s.malhotra

Governor's Secretariat is covered under the Act . It is a Public Authority under the Constitution .

Governor is the Competent Authority

S2(e) "competent authority" means—

(i) the Speaker in the case of the House of the People or the Legislative Assembly of a State or a Union territory having such Assembly and the Chairman in the case of the Council of States or Legislative Council of a State;

(ii) the Chief Justice of India in the case of the Supreme Court;

(iii) the Chief Justice of the High Court in the case of a High Court;

(iv) the President or the Governor, as the case may be, in the case of other authorities established or constituted by or under the Constitution;

(v) the administrator appointed under article 239 of the Constitution;

 

S.2 (h) "public authority" means any authority or body or institution of self- government established or constituted—

(a) by or under the Constitution;

(b) by any other law made by Parliament;

© by any other law made by State Legislature;

(d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government,

and includes any—

(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;

(ii) non-Government organisation substantially financed,

directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;

 

Just to give you an example , see this web site of Uttarakhand Govt you will find RTI Manuals :

http://governoruk.gov.in/pages/display/88-rti

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aires Rodrigues

It has now been revealed that Goa’s Raj Bhavan has been declining to furnish any information under the Right to Information Act.

I had by an application dated 29th November sought from Raj Bhavan under the Right to Information Act details of action taken on the complaints made by me to the Governor of Goa against Advocate General of Goa Mr. Subodh Kantak. I had also sought copies of noting sheets and correspondence pertaining to the processing of my complaints against the Advocate General.

In a letter to me dated 30th November, Special Secretary to Governor, Dr. N.Radhakrishnan declined to furnish the information, stating that information under RTI could not be furnished as the Governor of Goa is not a Public Authority and that an affidavit to this effect has been filed before the Bombay High Court at Goa.

This explanation given by the Raj Bhavan to avoid the RTI Act is not acceptable. I will, take immediate legal steps to ensure that the Goa Raj Bhavan immediately complies with the Right to Information Act

It is deplorable that the Governor of Goa as head of the State was himself scuttling an Act which was enacted to ensure transparency and accountability in the functioning of the administration.

I am surprised that the current Governor Dr. S.S.Sidhu who is a retired bureaucrat and not a politician has allowed the Raj Bhavan to breach the constitutional obligation of complying with the Right to Information Act.

With the exception of Goa all other Raj Bhavans are complying with the Right to Information Act. Instead of strengthening the RTI, the Goa Governor has allowed it to be weakened.

The Governor’s petition before the High Court is pertaining to a particular information sought by Leader of the Opposition Mr. Manohar Parrikar and it is no license or grounds for a blanket refusal by the Governor to comply with the RTI Act.

The State Information Commission by an order dated 30th July 2008 had directed the Raj Bhavan to furnish information sought by Mr. Manohar Parrikar on the reports sent by Governor to the Union Home Ministry on the political situation in Goa during the period from 24th July 2007 to 14th August 2007.

Within a week on 4th August 2008 the Raj Bhavan challenged the State Information Commission’s order before the High Court and on 5th August 2008 obtained an ex- parte stay order from having to furnish that information to Mr. Parrikar. Though the High Court had directed that the matter be expeditiously heard it has not come up for hearing for the last two years.

Incidentally the current Goa Governor Dr. S.S. Sidhu took over as Governor on 21st July 2008 and within a forthnight the Raj Bhavan took a decision not to furnish any information under the Right to Information Act.

Adv. Aires Rodrigues

T1 - B30, Ribandar Retreat

Ribandar - Goa - 403006

Mobile:

XXXXXXXXXXXX and xxx@yyy.zzz - Deleted mobile number and email id - posting against forum rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dr.s.malhotra

Comments from senior members are requested

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Two threads started by the same poster on the same subject have been merged

 

If the Raj Bhawan is not a Public Authority as defined in Sec 2(h) of the RTI Act, then why does it have a APIO, PIO and FAA?

Why has it suo mpotu disclosed information under Sec 4(1)(b) ?

 

 

Government of Goa ::: Right to Information - A Citizens Portal

 

Organisation

Objective/Mission The Raj Bhavan is the Official Residence of His Excellency the Governor. The functions and duties of the office are to carry out the day-to-day administration of the affairs of the Raj Bavan, and to assist His Excellency the Governor in his functions.

Officer Incharge Commissioner & Secretary to Governor

Address Raj Bhavan, Dona Paula, Goa

Location/City Dona Paula

Telephone 2453504

Email secretary.rbg@rajbhavangoa.org

Fax No 2453510

 

Duties & Powers of officers

Designation Name of Officer

H.E. the Governor His Excellency Dr. S.S. Sidhu

Commissioner & Secretary to Governor Shri Narendra Kumar, IAS

Special Secretary to Governor Dr. N. Radhakrishnan

 

Acts/Rules/Bye-Laws/Circulars/Policy/Instructions

Category Subject Reference No Reference Date More ...

Act Constitution of India

Act The Goa University Act, 1984, as amended, Statutes and Ordinances of Goa University, as amended

Instruction Standing Instructions/Guidelines issued by Government under various Rules/Acts.

Rule Goa Delegation of Financial Powers Rules, 1997

Rule The Central Civil Service Rules

Rule The General Financial Rules

Rule The Governor`s (Allowances & Privileges) Rules, 1987 as amended

 

etc

etc

etc

etc

 

PIO & APIO

PIO/APIO Designation Name of Officer

First Appellate Authority Shri Narendra Kumar, IAS, Commissioner & Secretary to Governor

Public Information Officer Dr. N. Radhakrishnan, Special Seccretary to Governor

Asstt. Public Information Officer Smt. Archana S. Torney, Section Officer

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sarbajit

Once again you people have not appreciated the precise language used by Goa Governor in the reply to applicant. They have stated that the GOVERNOR is not a public authority. This is absolutely correct. He is neither a "body" nor an "authority" etc.

 

It may be noted that the applicant had made complaints to the GOVERNOR (probably under some provision of law seeking sanction to prosecute) against a law officer.

 

The case of the Governor's Secretariat is different. This will turn out to be a body setup by the State Government for administrative purposes. The history of Goa is unique, Portugese then UT then State, so there will be all kinds of legal loopholes being exploited in that affidavit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jps50

RTI application should have been addressed to PIO, Governor's Secretariate and not to Governor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dr.s.malhotra
Could anyone help me with some decisions and judgements to the effect that Governors and Raj Bhavans come within the ambit of RTI.

 

Many thanks,

 

the original poster just wants to know whether Governor and Raj Bhawan are covered under RTI ? The answer is yes .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
prasad.dhirendra

I agrventee with Dr. Malhotra.Governor of astate is a public servent/a finer public servent a nobler public servent just as president/vice president/prime minister and other constitutional authoritys.He is oath bound to reply R.T.I. aplications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aires Rodrigues

I have today served a legal notice on Goa’s Governor Dr. S.S.Sidhu for the refusal of Raj Bhavan to furnish information under the Right to Information Act. Governor Sidhu has been given 48 hours to furnish the information sought by me or face legal proceedings.

By an application dated 29th November I had sought from Raj Bhavan under the Right to Information Act details of action taken on the complaints made by me to the Governor of Goa against Advocate General of Goa Mr. Subodh Kantak. I had also sought copies of noting sheets and correspondence pertaining to the processing of my complaints against the Advocate General.

By a letter ated 30th November, Special Secretary to Governor, Dr. N.Radhakrishnan declined to furnish the information, stating that information under RTI Act could not be furnished as the Governor of Goa is not a Public Authority and that an affidavit to this effect has been filed before the Bombay High Court at Goa.

In my legal notice to the Goa Governor today I have reiterated that the office of the Governor is a constitutional post within the definition of “Public authority” under section 2 (h) (a) of the Act and that Governors of all other States were complying with the provisions of the Right to Information Act.

In my notice I have drawn Governor Dr Sidhu’s attention that as the Governor of the State, it was proper and essential to furnish the information sought as a sign of transparency and good governance.

I have further told Dr. Sidhu that the Governor of a State is bound to ensure implementation of the provisions of the Right to Information Act and should lead by example himself by ensuring that information relating to the office of the Governor is furnished.Governor is bound as a Public authority to furnish the information sought under the Right to Information Act.

If a constitutional functionary himself contends that he is not a Public authority, and refuses to implement an Act of the Parliament it would lead to subversion of the rule of law.

Aires Rodrigues

Ribandar - Goa - 403006

Mobile: Not allowed on the forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sarbajit
I have today served a legal notice on Goa’s Governor Dr. S.S.Sidhu for the refusal of Raj Bhavan to furnish information under the Right to Information Act. Governor Sidhu has been given 48 hours to furnish the information sought by me or face legal proceedings.

 

Dear Aires

 

I am sure that you know that a Governor cannot personally face legal proceedings during his term in office.

 

Secondly , supposing that he ignores your legal notice, what can you do against him except file a Writ or suchlike and/or go crying to the media ?

 

Thirdly, the entire tone/tenor of your post is that you are posturing with hollow threats to solicit media / social attention.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sarbajit

Dear Aires

 

Thanks for yr thanks. I wanted to PM you but you dont have enough posts on this forum to be PMed. I wonder if you have seen the letter ex-CJI KGBalki wrote to Manmohan Singh. He has taken the stand that CJI is beyond purview of RTI Act because he is "defined" to be a competent authority" in the Act. This was forwarded by MMS to Moily for action.

 

The letters are publicly viewable including at "rti4empowerment" AT "googlegroups" as attachments in one of the recent posts. External links are not allowed on this forum so you'll have to g-search it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aires Rodrigues

Goa's Right to Information Forum has called for a meeting to discuss the issue of the refusal by Goa Governor Dr. S.S.Sidhu to comply with the RTI Act.

 

Forum President Mr. V.A Kamat has informed that the public meet will be held on Saturday Dec 18th at 10 am at the Goa Chamber of Commerce Hall, opposite Azad Maidan at Panaji.

 

Aires Rodrigues

Goa

XXXXXXXXXXXX - Deleted mobile number - posting against forum rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

All threads/posts by the same poster on the same subject/topic merged into one single thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by IBNS in washingtonbanglaradio.com on 18 December 2010:

Goa Guv under fire for not furnishing information under RTI |

 

Goa Guv under fire for not furnishing information under RTI

 

Panaji, Dec 18 (IBNS) A group of social activists has warned Goa Governor S S Sidhu from hoisting the national flag on the 62nd Republic Day on January 26, 2011 after he refused to furnish information under the Right To Information (RTI) stating he is not the “Public Authority”.

 

“If Governor Sidhu is not a public authority he should not hoist the national flag on behalf of the people of Goa on January 26,” Advocate Aires Rodrigues said on Saturday at a public meeting organized by the Goa RTI Forum.

 

The meeting in a resolution moved by Forum President V A Kamat unanimously demanded that the Governor should immediately furnish all information sought under the RTI. The meeting also demanded the speedy disposal of RTI related cases by all judicial forums.

 

Rodrigues strongly condemned Governor Sidhu for not complying with the RTI Act wherein he asked whether action was taken on complaints made by him against state Advocate General (AG) Subodh Kantak.

 

The RTI application also sought copies of all noting sheets and correspondence made by him to the Governor against the AG.

 

Raj Bhavan officials however declined to furnish information stating that the Governor is not a “Public Authority”.

 

“It is deplorable that the Governor as head of the State is himself scuttling the RTI Act which was enacted to ensure transparency and accountability in the functioning of the administration,” Rodrigues said adding that according to Government records, Raj Bhavan comes under RTI.

 

He stated that if the Governor continues to evade from his responsibility, ‘officials from the Raj Bhavan can be jailed.’

 

“Till date not a single state official has been fined or imprisoned for not complying with the RTI. But I can assure you that if the Governor continues with the attitude, officials from Raj Bhavan can be jailed,” he said.

 

Another activist Adv Satish Sonak demanded that Dr Sidhu should surrender all facilities given to him as a State Governor. “He should introspect whether he is a Public Authority or not. Is he a private constable guarding a place if not a Public Authority? Why is he taking fat salary? He should surrender the salary,” he said.

 

Sonak appealed that citizens should file complaints against Governor Sidhu before the newly constituted Goa Human Rights Commission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aires Rodrigues

It is deplorable that the Governor of Goa Dr. S.S.Sidhu as head of the State is himself scuttling the RTI Act which was enacted to ensure transparency and accountability in the functioning of the administration.

Though the Governor is a notified “Public Authority” under the Act he now claims he is not one. If the Governor is allowed to circumvent the RTI Act, the enforcement of the Act itself would collapse in the State of Goa.

If Governor Dr. Sidhu is not a public authority he should not hoist the national flag on behalf of the people of Goa this Republic day on 26th January. The people of Goa may also have to demand the recall of Governor Sidhu for violating the law by not complying and furnishing information under the RTI Act.

Aires Rodrigues

Goa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by UNI in newkerala.com on 21 December 2010:

Petition filed against Goa Governor by Adv Rodrigues - World News, 109699

 

Petition filed against Goa Governor by Adv Rodrigues

 

Pune, Dec 21 : A petition has been filed today before the Goa State Information Commission by Advocate Aires Rodrigues against Governor Dr S S Sidhu for his failure to comply with the provisions of the Right to Information Act.

 

The Special Secretary to the Governor Dr N Radhakrishnan has also been made a party in the petition. As the Goa Governor

has been claiming that he is not a public authority and does not come within the purview of the RTI Act, Rodrigues had last week served a legal notice on the Governor, giving him 48 hours to furnish information under the Right to Information Act.

 

In his petition, Rodrigues has stated that the office of the Governor is a constitutional post within the definition of 'Public authority', under section 2 (h) (a) of the RTI Act.

 

Rodrigues has stated that as the Governor has been notified as a public authority he was bound to furnish the information sought and the refusal was contrary to the RTI Act, unreasonable, malafide and without reasonable cause.

 

He has also stated that Governor had to furnish the information sought and cannot claim not to be a Public authority just because an affidavit has been filed before the High Court that he is not a public Authority.

 

Adv Rodrigues has further submitted in his petition that the Governor is bound to comply with all the provisions of the Right to Information Act. He has contended the governor should be penalised under section 20 of the RTI Act for not furnishing the information.

 

Rodrigues, through an application dated November 29, had sought from Raj Bhavan under the Right to Information Act details of action taken on the complaints made by him to the Governor against Advocate General of Goa Mr Subodh Kantak.

 

He had also sought copies of noting sheets and correspondence pertaining to the processing of his complaints against the Advocate General. In a letter to Rodrigues dated November 30, Special Secretary to Governor, Dr N Radhakrishnan declined to furnish the information, stating that information under RTI Act could not be furnished as the Governor of Goa is not a Public Authority and that an affidavit to this effect has been filed before the Bombay High Court at Goa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Atul Patankar

As reported at newkerala.com on 22 December 2010

 

Panaji, Dec 22 : Goa State Information Commission (GSIC) today issued notice to Goa Governor S S Sidhu directing him to personally appear before the commission on January 4, next year, in connection with the complaint filed against him by Advocate Aires Rodrigues for non complying with the Right to Information Act.

 

The Commission has also issued notice, directing the Special Secretary to the Governor N Radhakrishnan to also remain present.

 

The notice to Goa Governor follows the petition filed yesterday by Rodrigues against him for his failure to comply with the provisions of the Right to Information Act.

 

As the Governor had been claiming that he is not a public authority and does not come within the purview of the RTI Act, Rodrigues had last week served a legal notice on Dr Sidhu giving him 48 hours to furnish information under the Right to Information Act.

 

In his petition before the State Information Commission yesterday Rodrigues stated that the office of the Governor is a constitutional post within the definition of 'Public authority' under section 2 (h) (a) of the RTI Act.

 

Rodrigues has stated that as the Governor has been notified as a public authority he was bound to furnish the information sought and that the refusal was contrary to the RTI Act, unreasonable, malafide and without reasonable cause.

 

Rodrigues in his petition also sought that the Governor be penalised in terms of section 20 of the RTI Act for not furnishing the information sought.

 

Rodrigues by an application dated November 29 had sought from Raj Bhavan under the Right to Information Act details of action taken on the complaints made by him to the Goa Governor against Advocate General of Goa Subodh Kantak.

 

He also sought copies of noting sheets and correspondence pertaining to the processing of his complaints against the Advocate General.

 

In a letter to Rodrigues dated November 30, Dr Radhakrishnan declined to furnish the information, stating that information under RTI Act could not be furnished as the Governor is not a Public Authority and that an affidavit to this effect has been filed before the Bombay High Court at Goa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported in newkerala.com on 23 December 2010:

Caveat against Goa Governor filed in HC - World News, 110919

 

Caveat against Goa Governor filed in HC

 

Panaji, Dec 23 : A caveat was filed today against Goa Government Dr S S Sidhu the Bombay High Court in Goa after the Goa Information Commission summoned him for claiming that the Right to Infomation (RTI) act did nor apply to his office.

 

The caveat was filed by Mr Aires Rodrigues, an advocate, anticipating that the Governor may move the High Court against the notice issued by the Goa Information Commission, directing him to personally appear before it on Jan 4 in connection with the complaint filed against him for not complying with the RTI act.

 

Mr Rodrigues, in his caveat, prayed that no order be passed without notice to him on any petition that may be filed before the High Court by the Governor or his Special Secretary.

 

In 2008, as the Leader of Opposition Manohar Parrikar had not filed a caveat before the High Court, the Governor managed to get an ex-parte stay against the order of the Goa Information Commission.

 

The Commission, by an order dated July 30, 2008, had directed the Raj Bhavan to furnish information sought by Mr Parrikar under the RTI Act.

 

The Raj Bhavan moved swiftly and on August 4, 2008, challenged the State Information Commission's order before the High Court. On August 5, 2008, Raj Bhavan obtained an ex-parte stay order from having to furnish information to Parrikar. Though the High Court had directed that the matter be expeditiously heard, it has not come up for hearing for the last over two years.

 

Mr Parrikar had, under the RTI Act, sought a copy of the report sent by Governor to the Union Home Ministry on the political situation in Goa during the period from July 24, 2007 to August 14, 2007.

 

The Commission yesterday directed the Governor to personally appear before the commission at 1030 hrs on January 4, 2011, in connection with the complaint filed against him by Rodrigues for non-complying with the Right to Information Act.

 

Governor Sidhu has claimed that he is not a 'public authority' and does not come within the purview of the RTI Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ambrish.p

As reported in Dainik Jagran on 24/12/10

 

सूचना आयुक्त ने गोवा के राज्यपाल को किया तलब

 

पणजी, प्रेट्र : एक अप्रत्याशित आदेश में गोवा के सूचना आयुक्त ने राज्य के राज्यपाल एस.एस. सिद्धू को सूचना आयोग के समक्ष पेश होने के लिए समन जारी किया है। सूचना आयुक्त ने यह आदेश राजभवन द्वारा सामाजिक कार्यकर्ता ए. रोड्रिग्स को सूचना अधिकार (आरटीआइ) के तहत जानकारी देने से इंकार करने के बाद जारी किया। राज्यपाल को 4 जनवरी को सुबह साढ़े दस बजे राज्य सूचना आयुक्त के समक्ष निजी तौर पर पेश होने के लिए कहा गया है। रोड्रिग्स ने राज्य सूचना आयोग के पास शिकायत दर्ज कराई थी कि राजभवन ने उन्हें महाधिवक्ता से जुड़ी जानकारी का विवरण देने से इंकार कर दिया था। सूचना आयुक्त मोतीलाल केनी ने अपने आदेश में कहा, आप आयोग के समक्ष व्यक्तिगत तौर पर हाजिर हों। आपको चेतावनी दी जाती है कि यदि आप इस आदेश की अवहेलना कर उक्त तिथि को पेश नहीं हुए तो आपकी अनुपस्थिति में ही शिकायत पर फैसला कर दिया जाएगा।

 

Source: http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/epaper/article/index.php?page=article&choice=print_article&location=10&category=&articleid=104769172362648

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by IANS in newkerala.com on 25 December 2010:

Goa governor gets X-mas gift - copy of RTI Act - World News, 112206

 

Goa governor gets X-mas gift - copy of RTI Act

 

Panaji, Dec 25 : A ribbon-wrapped copy of the Right To Information Act (RTI) Act - that's one Christmas gift Goa Governor S.S. Sidhu might not forget for a long while.

 

Sidhu, who was summoned Wednesday by the Goa State Information Commission (GSIC) for denying information sought under the RTI to social activist Aires Rodrigues, was Saturday given the special gift - wrapped Christmas present.

 

"I sent him a copy of the RTI Act 2005. In the new year, the people of Goa would like to see Governor Sidhu perform his statutory duty of complying with the provisions of the Right to Information Act in order to ensure transparency and accountability at Raj Bhavan," Aires told IANS.

 

"The Raj Bhavan has officially received the copy," he said.

 

Sidhu has been issued summons by the registrar of the Goa State Information Commission (GSIC), Meena Naik Goltekar, to be present at the hearing of an appeal slated for Jan 4 at 10.30 a.m.

 

The summons follows an appeal made to the GSIC by Aires, whose earlier RTI application made to Sidhu was rejected by the governor's special secretary N. Radhakrishnan, on the claim that "the governor's office is not a public authority and hence does not come under the purview of the RTI Act".

 

In his RTI application of Nov 28, Aires asked for details of the action taken on the complaints he made to the governor against state Advocate General Subodh Kantak. The activist also sought copies of noting sheets and correspondence pertaining to the processing of his complaints against the advocate general.

 

"The governor himself has become a victim of the unsound legal advice given to him by (the) advocate general (AG) Mr. Subodh Kantak, who is costing the state exchequer over a crore of rupees a year. It was on Kantak's advice that he has refused to respond to my RTI query on the AG," Aires said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 04 January 2010:

Will guv appear before GSIC? - The Times of India

 

Will guv appear before GSIC?

 

PANAJI: All eyes will be on whether Goa governor S S Sidhu will appear before the Goa State Information Commission ( GSIC) when the Right to Information (RTI) Act case against him comes up for hearing on Tuesday.

 

While he has been summoned to appear before the commission's Patto office in Panaji at 10.30am, the Raj Bhavan plays host to the first lady of the country-President Pratibha Patil.

 

Efforts to elicit a comment from the Raj Bhavan proved futile.

 

The notice sent by the commission to the governor reads: "You are required to appear before this commission in person and not to depart hence without leave of the commission and you are hereby warned that if you shall, without just excuse, neglect or refuse to appear on the aforesaid date and time, the complaint will be decided in your absence."

 

The commission has also directed special secretary to the governor, N Radhakrishnan to remain present for the hearing.

 

About 10 days ago, Goa State Information Commission issued a notice to the governor directing him to personally appear before the commission's Shramshakti Bhavan office on January 4 at 10.30am. This was in connection with the complaint filed against him by RTI activist Aires Rodrigues.

 

Rodrigues filed the case against Sidhu after the Raj Bhavan took a stand that the governor is not a "Public Authority" as defined in the transparency law, and does not come within the purview of the RTI Act.

 

The social activist on November 29, had sought information in a case related to action taken against advocate general (AG) Subodh Kantak. He had also sought copies of noting sheets and correspondence pertaining to the processing of his complaints against the AG.

 

On November 30, Radhakrishnan wrote to Rodrigues refusing to furnish the information saying the governor of Goa was not a public authority.

 

Rodrigues then moved the Goa State Information Commission, headed by Motilal Keny, a retired sessions judge from Mumbai.

 

Rodrigues said he was refused information under the RTI Act on grounds that the governor wasn't a public authority and didn't come within the purview of the Act. He further held that the office of the governor was a constitutional post within the definition of "public authority" under Section 2 (h) (a) of the RTI Act.

 

Meanwhile, PWD personnel were seen resoling the Patto road leading to Shramshakti Bhavan on Monday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported by IANS in newkerala.com on 04 January 2010:

Goa Gov seeks 'immunity' in RTI case - World News, 117603

 

Goa Gov seeks 'immunity' in RTI case

 

Panaji, Jan 4 : Even as the Goa Governor

failed to personally appear before the Goa State Information Commission (GSIC) in connection with Right To Information (RTI) case against him on Tuesday morning, his counsel sought immunity under the Indian Constitution.

 

GSIC on December 22, 2010 had directed Governor S S Sidhu to personally appear before the commission on January 4, 2011 in connection with the complaint filed against him by Advocate Aires Rodrigues for non- compying with the RTI Act.

 

Governor Sidhu has been claiming that he is not a "public authority" and does not come under the purview of the RTI Act.

 

"The Governor enjoys privilege under article 361 of the Indian Constitution to absolve himself from the case filed against him with the commission," senior counsel Carlos Ferreira told reporters after appearing before the commission on Governor's behalf.

 

The Governor could not attend the case hearing as he is playing host to President Pratibha Patil during her four-day visit to Goa.

 

His Special Secretary Dr N Radhakrishnan appeared in person before the Bench in the same case.

 

Ferreira said the Governor should not be made party to the case since he has not signed the order vis-à-vis information under RTI.

 

Radhkrishanan who had signed the RTI reply copy to the lawyer-activist told the commission that the Governor is not the public authority.

 

The next date of hearing is slated on January 21.

 

Rodrigues, through an application dated November 29, 2010 had sought from Raj Bhavan under the RTI, details of action taken on the complaints made by him to the Governor of Goa against Advocate General of Goa Subodh Kantak.

 

He had also sought copies of noting sheets and correspondence pertaining to the processing of his complaints against the Advocate General.

 

In a reply letter to Rodrigues dated November 30, Special Secretary to Governor declined to furnish the information, stating that information under RTI could not be furnished as the Governor of Goa is not a Public Authority and that an affidavit to this effect has been filed before the Bombay High Court at Goa.

 

The activist has also filed a caveat before the High Court against the Governor for not complying with the RTI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Atul Patankar

As reported at deccanherald.com on 4 January 2010

 

Goa guv says he is not answerable to courts

 

S S Sidhu claims immunity under Article 361 of Indian Constitution

 

Governor S S Sidhu who had been directed to appear in person before the Goa State Information Commission on Tuesday over an RTI case said the governor’s office enjoyed the privilege of constitutional immunity and he was therefore not answerable to the courts in matters related to the execution of his duties.

 

“The governor has chosen to exercise his rights under Article 361 of the Constitution and he, therefore, cannot be called before any court or authority,” his counsel Carlos Ferreira said.

 

He also argued that the governor in any case had not passed any orders in the RTI application and no allegations had been made personally against him.

 

Sidhu who had been issued an order by Chief Information Commissioner Motilal Kenny to be present at Tuesday’s hearing was represented by his lawyers. His special secretary N Radhakrishnan appeared before the Commission.

 

Raj Bhavan in Goa is currently playing host to President Pratibha Patil on a three-day visit to the state.

 

In the first case of its kind, the Goa governor was hauled up by the quasi-judicial body after Raj Bhavan turned down an activist lawyer’s request under the Right to Information Act on the argument that the governor was not a “public authority” and his office was beyond the purview of the RTI Act.

 

Lawyer Aires Rodrigues who had filed an RTI application asking for details of a complaint against the state’s advocate general was told by Raj Bhavan that the governor was not covered by the RTI rules.

 

“Even the President of India complies with the RTI Act, why not the Governor of Goa?” Rodrigues told the Bench on Tuesday.

 

The lawyer who has initiated a string of public interest petitions wants strictures to be passed against the governor under Section 20 of the RTI Act. The next hearing of the case will take place on January 21.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
drsureshshah
Once again you people have not appreciated the precise language used by Goa Governor in the reply to applicant. They have stated that the GOVERNOR is not a public authority. This is absolutely correct. He is neither a "body" nor an "authority" etc.

 

It may be noted that the applicant had made complaints to the GOVERNOR (probably under some provision of law seeking sanction to prosecute) against a law officer.

 

The case of the Governor's Secretariat is different. This will turn out to be a body setup by the State Government for administrative purposes. The history of Goa is unique, Portugese then UT then State, so there will be all kinds of legal loopholes being exploited in that affidavit.

 

Any PA consists of no. of persons with head downwards.Can we separste person from body/authority?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • sidmis
      By sidmis
      IGP, SP issued notices by state information panel
      As reported in Navhind Times, NT NETWORK Tuesday, June 3, 2008
       
      MAPUSA The State information Commission has issued notices to the IGP, Mr Kishan Kumar and the superintendent of police (headquarters), Mr Allan D’sa on an appeal filed by the dismissed PSI, Mr Nerlon Albuquerque.

      The dismissed PSI filed an appeal before the State Information Commission after his request to Mr D’sa who is the public information officer and the IGP who is the first appellate authority was turned down.

      It may be recalled that Mr Nerlon was dismissed from service over the infamous Scarlette case based on an inquiry conducted by DySP, Mr Nilu Raut Desai wherein Mr Nerlon was indicted for improper investigations and treating the case as a mere suicide. Raising doubts over the authenticity and genuineness of the inquiry conducted against him without seeking his presence, Mr Nerlon had sent a notice to the SP (HQ) and IGP requesting them to furnish the inquiry report. His request was turned down.

      When contacted Mr Nerlon said that not taking his statement during the course of inquiry and now by not providing him the inquiry report clearly speaks about the malicious motives of the concerned officers and added that it is obvious that the enquiry is conducted in a biased manner with the sole intention of dismissing him.
      “It seems that the IGP is trying to safeguard interests of certain persons by not allowing a fair enquiry in the matter. Why else did he dismiss me and scuttle the process of the enquiry?” Mr Nerlon questioned.

      Reiterating his demand for a fair enquiry, Mr Nerlon stated that he wanted the enquiry to be conducted by an independent body given the fact that the police department would be pressurized under the influence of the IGP in conducting a biased enquiry.

      Mr Nerlon further challenged the IGP to show any significant investigation conducted in the case after the investigation was taken over from him. "In spite of several requests, why did the superiors not permit me to register an offence and arrest the accused?" he asked.

      The IGP allegedly has been pressurized by certain vested interests to dismiss me and I will not take this lightly,” Mr Nerlon added.
    • karira
      By karira
      As reported in bombaynews.net on 03 June 2008:
      Probe into 200 unnatural deaths in Goa await test report
       
      Probe into 200 unnatural deaths in Goa await test report
       
      Investigations into nearly 200 cases of unnatural death in Goa have been bogged down mainly on account of delays in receiving viscera test results of the bodies, conducted in laboratories outside the state.
       
      Cases have been pending from as far back as April 2006, M.K. Desai of the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Crime, Dona Paula, said in response to a Right to Information (RTI) query raised by this correspondent.
       
      This issue has repeatedly come up in Goa, but it did so more dramatically following the February 2008 death of British tourist Scarlett Keeling. The 15-year-old was found dead - suspected to have been drugged, raped and killed - on a North Goa beach.
       
      In the two-year period, Goa with a 1.4 million population found 197 cases pending, causing delays in investigations due to delays in these crucial viscera analyses.
       
      Viscera refer to the internal organs of the body, especially those within the chest or abdomen.
       
      In death cases where the precise cause and nature of death -- whether suicide or homicide -- is not yet determined, viscera tests are awaited till the precise cause of death is pinpointed.
       
      Medical texts say usually viscera to be preserved from the body includes the stomach with its full contents, about one foot of the upper part of the intestine, half or 500 gm of the liver, half of each kidney and the whole spleen.
       
      Currently, cases of Goa's viscera tests are being sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory at Vidhyanagari-Santa Cruz in Mumbai. Earlier, the these were sent to Hyderabad, where the large backlog is now visible.
       
      Foreigners' deaths, for obvious reasons, result in higher publicity. Nearly 32 of the 'viscera test pending' cases pertain to foreigners.
       
      Among the foreigners whose deaths are mostly still shrouded in mystery, due to viscera test pending status, are Maria Helstron, Richard Miler and Barbara Lane (October 2006), Den Ratliffo and Stuart Bell (February 2007), Frank Bringloc and Andrew White (March 2007), Olg Gorshkar, Joseph Yougert, James Elister, Bonny Dayhle, Aben Leonard, Maralin Bekwad, Sen Joseph, Otto Zizga, Has Jomsodi and Reic Harrison (all in Apr 2007).
       
      Other foreign cases involve Willhelmine Black, Denise Higgins and Berd Zerreben (June 2007), Alvdar Gaslin (July 2007), Flavia D'zulo and Brian Dowes (both September 2007), Karus Helmet (October 2007), and Weis F. Madas (December 2007).
       
      Likewise, cases of Evgeny Kuzmin, Gillian Frances Bell, Krister Lundh, Alexander Sokolov, Karl T. Milling, and Victor Pristavki (all six in Jan 2008) are among those whose names suggest a foreigner connection in the 'viscera report awaited' cases.
       
      Besides the above listed cases, the high-profile case of Scarlett Keeling, pending from March 18 this year, is the only one sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory at Vidyanagari in Mumbai.
       
      While the lack of testing facilities here is obviously delaying investigations in cases, some believe it is better to let the tests be carried out in central or out-of-state institutions to reduce the chances of results being manipulated locally.

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy