IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 812 OF 2009 PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, VILLAGE PANCHAYAT NAVELIM ... Petitioner Versus DOMNIC ROSARIO FERNANDES AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. C. A. Coutinho, Advocate for the Petitioner. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 16th July, 2010 P.C.: Heard. 2. The respondent no.1 has again chosen to remain absent. The contentions raised by the petitioner herein are twofold; (a) The respondent no.1 could not have filed the second appeal before approaching the first Appellate Authority i.e. BDO; and (b) The State Commissioner could not have directed the petitioner to give information which was not in possession of the petitioner. 3. The petitioner is a Public Information Officer of the Village Panchayat, Navelim in Salcete Taluka. By application dated 27/01/2009, the respondent no.1 sought information from the Public Information Officer of the Electricity Department at Aquem, Margao. The said information related to (a) Certified copy of the Application for Electrical Connection of Mr. Socorro Fernandes, resident of H.No.685/1, Fradilem, Navelim, Salcete, and (b) A copy of the NOC as submitted by him from the Village Panchayat, Navelim for electrical connection. As the said information was not provided to him by the Public Information Officer of the Electricity Department, the respondent no.1 approached the first Appellate Authority namely Superintending Engineer - II (N), Panaji, who by its order dated 20/04/2009 directed to transfer part of the information as regards (b) i.e. to submit a copy of NOC from Village Panchayat at Navelim obtained for electric connection LPT-216-2, as per Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005, within 5 days. 4. The respondent no.1 did not choose to approach the petitioner herein in terms of order dated 20/04/2009, in respect of the information which the petitioner was required to give within 5 days, but chose to file a second appeal, directly to the State Information Commission which by order dated 28/10/2009 allowed the appeal and directed the petitioner (as respondent No.2) to provide information as contained in the respondent no.1's application dated 27/01/2009 within 20 days from the receipt of the order and report compliance. As rightly submitted on behalf of the petitioner, in case the order of the first appellate authority i.e. the Superintending Engineer of the Electricity Department was not complied with, the next remedy of the petitioner would be to file an appeal to the BDO which has been identified as the appellate authority in terms of order dated 3/01/2007 issued by the Government. The State Information Commissioner could not have directed the petitioner to provide information to respondent no.1 which was not transferred to the petitioner and which in terms of order dated 20/04/2009, respondent no.1 was required to approach the Commissioner. In other words, as only the information as regards (b) was required to be given by the petitioner, the Commissioner could not have directed him to give the information as regards (a) which was required to be given by the authorities of the Electricity Department. 5. Considering the above, this Writ Petition succeeds. The order of the State Information Commission is hereby set aside, with no order as to costs. N. A. BRITTO, J. NH