PANJIM: The Goa State Information Commission (GSIC), Panjim has allowed a Right to Information (RTI) complaint filed by Roy C D’Souza against the Public Information Officer (PIO), First Appellate Authority (FAA) and other officials of the Goa College of Architecture, holding that the institution failed to effectively implement the provisions of the RTI Act despite the law being in force for over two decades.
State Information Commissioner Atmaram R Barve passed the order, while disposing of the complaint that arose from an RTI application filed by D’Souza on August 6, 2025.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
According to the order, the PIO had sought assistance from concerned officers under Sections 5(4) and 5(5) of the RTI Act to process the application. Although the complainant was permitted to inspect documents on several occasions, he alleged that complete information was not provided and subsequently filed a first appeal on September 16, 2025. When the appeal was not decided within the prescribed time, he approached the State Information Commission on January 9, 2026.
In its observations, the Commission described the case as highlighting a “collective failure” by the institution to correctly interpret and implement the RTI Act. It noted that while the PIO had followed the statutory procedure by seeking assistance from other officers, the overall handling of the request failed to ensure effective disclosure of information to the applicant.
The Commission also expressed concern over the institutional arrangement in which the College Principal was entrusted with responsibilities connected to both the PIO and the First Appellate Authority (FAA). It observed that such an arrangement creates an inherent conflict of interest and could adversely affect the impartial disposal of RTI appeals.
The order further stressed that appellate authorities should not be subordinate to the officials whose decisions they are expected to review and that records required for deciding appeals should not remain outside the PIO’s custody.
Allowing the complaint, the SIC directed the PIO, NeeleshJuwarkar to provide the complainant with a comprehensive inspection of all relevant records sought under the RTI application by September 30, 2026. The inspection is to be conducted with the assistance of the concerned staff and documented through written minutes signed by all participants.
The Commission also ordered that any fee collected from the complainant for providing the information be refunded.
In addition, the FAA has been directed to transfer all records that should ordinarily remain in the custody of the PIO through a properly indexed, catalogued and documented handover process within 15 days of the order.
Both the PIO and the FAA have been instructed to submit compliance reports before the Commission on October 7, 2026, failing which further proceedings may be initiated.
Further, the Commission has recommended that the Directorate of Technical Education (DTE), Government of Goa, restructure the RTI appellate mechanism for the institution. It suggested designating the Principal as the PIO while appointing a higher-ranking authority in the DTE as the First Appellate Authority to eliminate conflicts of interest and ensure greater impartiality in RTI proceedings.
No order as to costs was passed. The Commission clarified that any party aggrieved by the decision may challenge the order by filing a writ petition before the appropriate court, as no further appeal is available under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
