N. P. S. VARDE Vs. GOA STATE INFORMATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. P. Wagle, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. M. Salkar, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent no.2 and Mr. V. Menezes, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4.

(2.) THE above petition seeks to inter-alia quash and set aside an order passed by respondent no.1 imposing fine of Rs.5000/- on the petitioner.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order on the ground that the information which was sought by respondent no.4 would come within the meaning of information under Section 2(f) of the Right to Information Act. The learned counsel further pointed out that the alleged information was in the nature of clarification which could not be issued to the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that in any event, the documents which were sought by respondent no.4 were not available in the file. The learned counsel thereafter pointed out that respondent no.1 has exceeded its jurisdiction to ascertain whether the petitioner who was the Member Secretary at the relevant time had powers to issue licence for revision of the plan issued in the name of the said hotel project. The learned counsel further submits that respondent no.1/commission had no jurisdiction to examine the powers of the petitioner in issuing such permission and as such, the question of imposing fine is totally misplaced. The learned counsel has thereafter taken me through the provisions of the Right to Information Act and inter-alia pointed out that as no information has been directed to be furnished to respondent no.4, the question of imposing fine of Rs.5000/- is totally without jurisdiction. The learned counsel further submits that there was no misleading of information by the petitioner and as such the impugned order passed by respondent no.1 imposing penalty/fine on the petitioner deserves to be quashed and set aside.