LAHORE: Ordering deduction of two-month salary of an irrigation executive engineer as fine, the Punjab Information Commission has asked the department to proceed against him under the PEEDA (Punjab Employees Efficiency and Discipline Act) for not sharing information with an applicant and alsoignoring the commission`s warnings.

The commission has also asked irrigation department`s Faisalabad EXEN (Excavator Division) Abid Rashid to provide the requested information to the complainant latest by April 12, failing which it (the commission) may impose further (harsher) penalties in accordance with the information law.

The Faisalabad Accounts Office has been directed to deduct amount of the fine from the EXEN`s salary, deposit it in the relevant account and furnish a compliance report by May 3.

The action has been taken on acomplaint filed by one Muhammad Shafiq. Referring to at least eight letters sent to the official, the commission has stated that the complaint remained unresolved, despite its directions and the fact that each information request should (have to) be decided within 14 working days in accordance with the (Information) Act.

It says that the EXEN did not appear before the commission on eight dates of hearings fixed in the past despite the fact that the PIC ensured service of these notices through the offices of the irrigation secretary and Faisalabad deputycommissioner.

It says the EXEN failed to respond to multiple show-cause notices whereby he was required to explain why he had not provided the requested information to the complainant, despite the letters, why he had repeatedly failed to appear for hearings, and why it (the commission) should not proceed against him for delaying or obstructing access to information.

He also ignored the repeated warnings to the effect that, in case of non-appearance, the commission might pass ex-parte order in the matter and proceed against him under the law, it adds.

The commission says it was evident from the record that the official neither provided the requested information to the complainant, nor transferred the application to the relevant PIO in accordance with the law. He also ignored the letters which effectively meant refusal to submit any explanation to the commission about the delayed access to information, it adds.

`The overall perusal of the record makes it amply clear that you have acted in the instant matter with mala fide with the aim of delaying and obstructing access to infor-mation. Here it may also be noted that the requested information includes certified copies of cash book, logbook of machinery, MB cheque books, vouchers of petrol pumps, tenders register, stock register, work charge roll, and newspaper advertisements.

`This kind of information is essentially about the records relating to use of public resources, procurements and recruitment and its disclosure is not exempt under the law. People have a fundamental right to know how public funds or resources are maintained and utilised, and how official authority is exercised in the course of discharging public functions,` the commission concluded.