ffi' t T{trfl qtl sTfuo-rr ffirtPm -q'la RIGHT TO H INFORMATION UNACHAL PRADESH INFORMATION COMMISSION

BEFORE THE COURT OF DR.JORAM BEGI, STATE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

No.APlC-129/2020 Dated, ltanagar the 8th Decembe r,2020

Under Section 19(3) RTI Act, 2005 Appellant Respondent

Shri Mikre Taso, Shri Bajum Taba, Upper Colony, Likabali, The PIO-cum-DFO, Lower , O/o Divisional Forest Officer, . Vs Likabali, (m) 5s0997s426, , Arunachal Pradesh. & Shri Karba Riba

Dated of hearing held on : 8th Decembe r' 2O2O.

ORDER

Whereas, an appeal under Section 19(3) of RTI Act, 2005 has been received from Shri & Shri Karba Riba Mikre Taso, Upper Colony, Likabali, Lower Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, pro-cum-DFo, o/o Divisional Forest for non-furnishing of information, by shri Bajum Taba, the by the Appellants under officer, Likabali, Lower siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, as sought, section 6(1) of RTI Act, 2005 on 2OlO7l2O2O'

video audio conference on l-7th Whereas, the l-'t hearing was held through online / pro-cum-DFO, O/o Divisionar Forest officer, Likabali, November,2o2o. shri Bajum Taba, the pradesh, and the Appeilants Shri Mikre Taso, & shri Karba Riba, Lower Siang District, Arunachar UpperColony,Likabali,LowerSiangDistrict,ArunachalPradesh,appearedinthehearing shri Mikre Taso informed the Commission that the through video conferencing. The Rpp-ettant information to them. The Appellant informed that pro has furnished incomprete and misreading for the sr.no.v and photographs for building he is satisfied with the information furnished pro and informed the Commission that the information furnished for the sr.no. xii. The refuted projects were executed departmentaily with the by the Appeilants regarding the sought them in the Form A does not authority. so, the information as sought by approval from the on 28th was kept ready and intimated to the Appellants arise. However, repries and information information was handed over to the Appellants' August'2020. On 23'd September'2020 parties and going through hearing the arguments of both the whereas, the commission to give in Appeilant in the Form-A, directed the Plo detairs of information sought by the the sanction orders item wise for Sl.no' i, ii, iii, iv' vii' ix' & xi' Furnish writing to the Appellant for the physical for sr.no. viii, furnish Utilization certificate, vi, furnish detairs of MB for each work sr.no. geo-tag for sl.no'xii and drawing for photogr.aph for sl.no. x, furnish copy of achievement and pro to furnish all the reasonabre oppoitunity directed the the sr.no xiii. The commission giving information as directed above to the Appellant regibre, correct, comprete.and authenticated the pro has to ensure that the information free of cost on o,. o.rir" 5,h Decem ber,2020,and Contd..P..2 -2-

actually received by the Appellant, foiling which u/s 20(L) of the RTI Act 200s, penalty of Rs. 25, 000/- (Rupees twenty five thousond) onry shol! be imposed on the pro. Arso, u/s 20(2) disciplinary action sholl be recommended to the chief secretory, Govt. of A.p.. The commission asked the Appellant to receive information from the Plo and convey his satisfaction or dissatisfaction before the next date of hearing.

whereas, . the 2no hearing was herd through onrine video / audio conference on 8thDecember'2O2O.shri Bajum Taba, the plo-cum-DFo, o/o Divisional Forest officer. Likabali, Lower pradesh, siang District, Arunachal and the Appellants shri Mikre Taso, & Shri Karba Riba, Upper colony, Likabali, Lower siang District, Arunachal pradesh, appeared in the hearing through video conferencing. The PIO informed the Commission that all the information has been furnished to the Appellant as directed by the commission in the last hearing. The Appellant, shri Mikre Taso informed that the plo has furnished incomplete information for sl.no. i, iv, vi, vii, viii & ix as sought in the Form- A.

Whereas, the Commission on cross examination found that all the information has been furnished to the Appellant by the Plo. However, regarding the information sought at sl.no. vi. i.e. A copy of technical sanction (T s) of mentioned works in detoits, the Commission directed the PIO to bring all the Sanction Orders of the works in the next date of hearing for clarifying the queries of the Appellant. .,o,{ The next date of hearing is fixed on l2thJanuary'*O20 at 10:30 hrs.

Therefore, Shri Bajum Taba, The PIO-cum-DFO, O/o Divisional Forest Officer, Likabali, Lower Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh,is hereby summoned to appear before this Court in personon the scheduled date and time without fail.

50/- .(Dr.Joram Begi) State Chief Information Commissioner Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission Itanagar December,2020 Memo No.AP tc-Lzg| 2o2o I qZO Dated, ltanagar the I Copy to: 1. Shri Bajum Taba, The Plo-cum-DFO, O/o Divisional Forest officer, Likabali, Lower Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, 2. Shri Mikre Taso, upper colony, Likabali, Lower Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, 3. Shri Karba Riba, Upper colony, Likabali, Lower siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, !92(omputerProgrammer,APlC,ltanagar,touploadinAPlCWebsite' 5. Case file.

Registra r Arunachal Prad ion Commission !n$dd