As per Proforma of ANNEXURE “B” of the
Maharashtra Right To Information Rules, 2005 - See Rule 5 (1)
APPEAL UNDER SECTION 19 (1) OF RTI ACT 2005
Date: 27.07.2010
From:
Nilesh Wankhede
District President,
Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Democratic Rights Forum,
“Ambedkar Sewa Sadan”,
Tilak Ward, Post-WARORA,
Distt. Chandrapur (Maharashtra)
PIN-442907.
To,
Shri G. K. Wagh
Deputy Secretary and Appellate Authority
Social Justice and Special Assistance Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032.
|
Particulars of the Public Information Officer
|
:
|
Mrs. Ujjwala P. Vaidya
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of receipt of the order appealed against
|
:
|
No response received from PIO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last date of filing the appeal
|
:
|
17.08.2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
The grounds for appeal
|
:
|
|
1. I, Nilesh Wankhede, a citizen of India, have submitted an Application dated 18.06.2010 under RTI Act 2005 for print-outs of records of attendance of public servants working in the secretariat of Social Justice and Special Assistance departments according to your advise which you have sent to me vide your office letter No. Asthapana-2010/Pr.Kr.164/Astha-1 dated 11.06.2010. A copy of your letter dated 11.06.2010 is enclosed herewith as Annexure-I and my application dated 18.06.2010 is enclosed as Annexure-II. It was your reply in response to my appeal dated 07.06.2010 wherein you have stated that the Directorate of Information Technology is not cooperating for technical assistance for copying of computerized data of attendance so I should make another application for printouts as the same will be given by your office. Accordingly I have sent this application dated 18.06.2010, however, the same also is not responded by your subordinate public servants.
HISTORY OF THE CASE
2. I have sent an Application dated 13.04.2010 under RTI Act 2005 to Public Information Officer, Directorate of Information Technology, GAD, Secretariat of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
3. In response to my Application under subject, I had received a reply on 02.05.2010 from Dr. santosh Bhogale, Under Secretary and Public Information Officer, Directorate of Information Technology, GAD, Secretariat of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 vide letter No. MaTaSa/Sandarbha-10/1883/Ka-39 dated 19.04.2010 wherein the PIO/DIT had informed me that my application has been forwarded to Public information Officer of Social Justice and Special Assistance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
4. The reply was expected from Public Information Officer, Social Justice and Special Assistance Department before 18.05.2010. However, no reply was received from concerned PIO even after a period of more than one month lapsed. Therefore, I have sent a reminder dated 30.05.2010 by FAX to Mrs. Ujjwala P. vaidya, Desk Officer & PIO of your office and a copy to you for information.
5. It is pertinent to bring up the attitude of Mrs. Ujjwala P. vaidya, PIO of your department that she never provides requisite information under one pretext or the other. My application dated 16.10.2010 is still unanswered for which I had to make another application dated 02.03.2010 and the same was also mishandled by her for which I have been forced to submit appeal. The most unfortunate is that my that appeal dated 09.04.2010 is pending with you even after a period of 02 months is lapsed.
6. CONDUCT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER
While observing the facts come out from the details in Para 3 above, it is proved that whatever action done by Mrs. Ujjwala P. vaidya, Public Information Officer and Desk officer is done with intention and it shows her intentional ignorance of duties assigned to him for public service.
It can be presumed that the PIO is disobeying the provision of RTI Act since she did not quote any section of the RTI Act 2005 and only tried to deny the access of the information under one pretext or the other and restricted the democratic rights of a citizen.
She has forgotten that he is a servant of citizens and acted like a dictator which is a RASHTRADROH in our democratic nation. She is holding a sensitive post of Desk Officer in public service and posted in Secretariat of the state and so it cannot be considered that she is not literate to the level to understand constitutional provisions. Therefore, her misconduct is unforgivable.
While observing her attitude toward public service it can be presumed the how he will be doing injustice to the assignments given to him for public service. Such public servants are the root cause of injustice to public as they misuse the powers of the post for doing corruption as well as to get shelter and gives burden to the nation and so they should be immediately not only thrown out of public service but necessary legal action should also be initiated against for their imprisonment for RASHTRADROH for misusing the powers of the post for disobeying their constitution duty which is against the nation and all the public money paid to them while in public service should also be recovered with fine and they should be declared “DISQUALIFIED” for public service.
|
Particulars of information
|
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(i) Nature and subject matter of the information required
|
:
|
Printout of computerized records of attendance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(ii) Name of the Officer or Department to which the information relates
|
:
|
Mrs. Ujjwala P. Vaidya, Public Information Officer and Desk officer, Social Justice and Special Assistance Department, Secretariat of Mantralaya of Maharashtra, Mumbai.
|
ORDER SOUGHT BY THIS APPEAL
1. In view of the facts as brought out above, I demand that the requisite information sought by me vide my application dated 18.06.2010 should be given to me as early as possible at free of cost as per provision of (6) of section 7 of RTI Act 2005.
2. Maximum possible penalty should be imposed in accordance with section 20 of RTI Act 2005 against Mrs. Ujjwala P. Vaidya, PIO & Desk officer following with disciplinary action to remove her out of public service immediately since she is very harmful while in public service for a democratic nation keeping in view the facts brought out above.
Subsequently, further legal action should also be initiated against her framing the charges of RASHTRADROH and all public money paid to her while in public service should be recovered from her with fine and she should be declared “DISQUALIFIED” for public service.
It should also be taken into consideration that why her educational and other qualification should not be re-examined since her integrity is fallen under doubt? Her all the qualification certificates produced by her while getting appointment in public service should also be seized till the outcome of her trial.
The court fees stamp valued Rs. 20/- affixed toward fees for appeal under RTI Act 2005. Please note that I cannot come personally so the information should be given to me by SPEED POST to avoid delay in communication. It is also to note that I have here submitted all the grounds needed at this stage and the same may be taken into account while deciding this appeal. Please note that the First Appellate Authority is not empowered to have any kind of hearing in which the presence of Appellant is mandatory.
Signature of Appellant
DA: Annexures I to II.
Copy forwarded for information and necessary action to;
Ms.Malini Shankar
Principal Secretary,
Social Justice Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
Mr. A.B.P. Pandey
Principal Secretary,
Information Technology Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
Mr.K.P. Bakshi
Principal Secretary,
General Administration Department (Service) (Ra.Va.Ka.)
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
Shri Jadhav
Dy. Secretary
Directorate of Information Technology,
Secretariat, Mumbai-32.
Dr. Santosh Bhogle
PIO & Underr secretary
Directorate of Information Technology,
Secretariat, Mumbai-32.
