Central Information Commission
CIC/PB/C/2008/00860/AD
Dated November 6, 2008
Name of the Appellant : Dr.B.K.Khaitan
President
Faculty Association
All India Institute of Medical
Sciences
Ansari Nagar, New Delhi
Name of Public Authority : M/o Health & Family Welfare
All India Institute of Medical
Sciences
Ansari Nagar, New Delhi
Background
1. The RTI application was filed on 31.1.08. The Appellant, Dr.Lalit Dar
who is the General Secretary of the Faculty Association of the All India
Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi requested for the detailed report
prepared by a Committee headed by Dr.K.S.Yadav, member of the
Institute body, in which certain observations and recommendations
regarding past Faculty selections were made. The Appellant stated
that the report is being sought in the interest of the job security of 164
Faculty members. The CPIO replied on 7.4.08 stating that
Dr.K.S.Yadav had placed his report in the Governing Body meeting on
20.12.07 and that it would be given as and when it is available. The
Appellant wrote again to Mr. Attar Singh, the CPIO, stating that the
Faculty Association had asked for the Committee report and not for the
date on which it was placed before the Governing Body. He also
stated that the AIIMS administration has mischievously and without
intimation to the Faculty Association, filed the report in the Court and
has ignored the RTI request.
2. The Appellant preferred an appeal before the Central Information
Commission on 19.8.08 stating that the All India Institute of Medical
Sciences Administration is repeatedly flouting the provisions of the RTI
Act and has not been sharing reports of certain Committees which
have made recommendations directly involving the service conditions
of various Faculty members. The Appellant appealed to the
Commissioner to look into the matter and initiate appropriate action.
He further stated that the delay of 8 months may already have
irretrievably compromised the interests of many faculty members. He
said that the media reports say that the recommendations have
already been accepted in principle by the Governing Body and that he
fears that working conditions and welfare of a large number of faculty
members would be affected.
3. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner,
scheduled the hearing for November 6, 2008.
4. The respondents were represented by Shri Attar Singh, Chief
Admistrative Officer and CPIO and Shri M.K.Sharma, Administrative
Officer.
5. The Appellant, Prof.B.K.Khaitan was represented by Prof.M.K.Singh.
Decision
6. The CPIO stated that he was not aware that the report existed till
Sept.08, after it was tabled in the Governing Body meeting. He said
that he was not present at the meeting and had no information about
what went on in the meeting. He further stated that only the Ministry
of Health & Family Welfare knew about the report and that the Faculty
Association ought to have contacted the Ministry Officials for the
report.
7. The Appellant submitted that the Faculty has eventually received the
Committee Report and it was rather late for the Faculty to suggest
amendments. He insisted that the AIIMS administration has
mischievously and without intimation to the Faculty filed the report in
the Court.
8. The Commission noted that the statement made by the CPIO that he
was not aware about the Report till September ’08 has created
confusion in minds of the Faculty since in his letter dated 7.4.08 he
had clearly mentioned that the Report had been tabled in the
Governing Body meeting. This fact combined with the CPIO’s plea that
he did not possess the requisite authority to disclose the Report and
that only the high level officials of the Ministry of Health & Family
Welfare were authorized to do so, clearly suggests that the CPIO was
under pressure not to disclose the Report and that the information was
withheld from the Faculty Association of AIIMS willfully by the AIIMS
Administration without providing any reason (under the RTI Act) for
the non-disclosure. The whole episode, indeed, seems to be an
exercise in obfuscating the truth and to delay the disclosure of the
report till the AIIMS filed it in the Court.
9. The Commission holds that, in this case, of denial of disclosure of the
Report to the Faculty Association without giving any reason by the
AIIMS administration, the only ground on which the disclosure of the
information is to be determined is to consider whether the Public
Authority’s refusal to provide the Report to the Faculty attracts the
exemption under Section 8(1) (e) of the RTI Act (which exempts
disclosure of information except for reasons of the information sub
serving larger public purpose) or not. In this connection, the
Commission further holds that the Appellant’s plea that the denial of
disclosure of the Report would affect a number of serving Faculty
members of AIIMS suggests that there was a larger public purpose
which ought to have overridden the provision for exemption in Section
8 (1) (e) of the RTI Act. Determination of larger public interest ought
to have warranted disclosure of information by the CPIO and by the
Acting Director, AIIMS who was also the Member Secretary to the
Governing Body (as per the Appellant’s letter dated 6.11.08) but both
officials failed to keep this in mind and thereby violated the RTI Act.
10. The Commission would also like to draw the attention of the AIIMS
Administration and that of the CPIO and Appellate Authorities of the
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and of the Institute to Section
4(2) of the RTI Act which mandates every Public Authority to take
steps to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular
intervals, the provisions of which were not adhered to in this case.
11. The Commission, keeping the larger public interest in mind, directs the
Director, AIIMS to inquire into the matter of non-disclosure of the
Report to the Faculty Association, before the Governing Body
accepted the recommendations of the Committee set up by
Dr.K.S.Yadav, and fix the responsibility and share the inquiry report
with the Faculty Association with a copy to the Commission. The
inquiry to be completed within 20 days of receipt of this Order.
12. The appeal is thus disposed off.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(K.G.Nair)
Designated Officer
Cc:
1. Dr.B.K.Khaitan, President, Faculty Association, All India Institute of
Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi
2. Shri Attar Singh, CPIO, M/o Health & Family Welfare, All India Institute
of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority – RTI M/o Health & Family Welfare, All India
Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi
4. Officer incharge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC