Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/001486
Dated 23rd December, 2009
Name of the Applicant : DR. PUNITA KUMAR SODHI
Name of the Public Authority : M/O HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE
Background
1. The Applicant filed her RTI request on 22.08.09 with the Secretary, Department of
Administrative Reforms and Public Grievance, New Delhi referring to a letter dated
11.08.08 in response to her letter dated June 09, 2008 addressed to Mr. Debashish
Panda, JS, MHFW. She stated that in response to the memo issued to her dated
01.07.08 no material facts have been ever provided to her till date, implying falsehood
and harassment. In this connection she wanted the reply received by the Department
of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances from Mr. Debashish Panda, JS, MHFW
as also information about the action which would be initiated in this regard by the
Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances.
2. The PIO replied on 02.09.09 providing some information to the Applicant. Again on
23.09.09 the Deputy Secretary & CPIO informed the Applicant that information can not
be furnished to her in terms of Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Being aggrieved
with the reply, the Applicant filed an Appeal stating that due to alleged vigilance case
against her, she was denied permission to go abroad because of which she filed OA
1235/2009. The Tribunal had judged that despite several opportunities given to the
MHFW, the MHFW has remained evasive and could not bring any case/vigilance case
against her for the perusal of the Tribunal and thus she won the case and was given
permission to go abroad. The Applicant wanted to know the remedial measures taken
or details of enquiry conducted in response to letter from DAPG dated 11.08.08 and
the present status of her vigilance matter in MHFW after judgment of OA which has
been communicated to DARPG vide her letters dated 28.05.09 and 14.07.09. On not
receiving any reply, the Applicant filed her Second Appeal on 01.11.09 before the
Commission reiterating her request for the information.
3. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner scheduled the
hearing for 23rd December, 2009.
4. Mr. Arun Baroka, Director & CPIO and Mr.S.K. Gupta, U.S. represented the Public
Authority.
5. The Appellant was not present during the hearing.
Decision
6. The Respondent submitted that the RTI request was transferred by the CPIO
Department of DARPG to the Director/CPIO Ministry of Health & F.W. and added that
the letter which has been sought by the Applicant ie letter written by Mr. Debashish
Panda, JS, MHFW in respect of the harassment case, does not exist on record. In fact,
no such letter has been written by the JS, Mr. panda to DARPG. The Respondent also
added that the CPIO therefore wrote to the Applicant that information sought against
point 1 of her RTI request ie. letter from Shri Debashish Panda, JS, MHFW to the
Secretary, DARPG does not exist on record. With regard point 2, the question does
not merit an answer since the Appellant she is seeking information about action being
proposed to be taken and that the same is not covered by the definition of
‘information’ as given in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission holds
that available information has been provided to the Appellant and accordingly disposes
off the appeal.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Dr. Punita Kumari Sodhi
H.No. C-7/164
S.D.A.
P.O. Hauz Khas
New Delhi – 110 016.
2. The PIO
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
O/o the Dy. Secretary
Deptt. Of Health & Family Welfare
Nirman Bhawan
New Delhi.
3. The Appellate Authority
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
O/o the Dy. Secretary
Deptt. Of Health & Family Welfare
Nirman Bhawan
New Delhi.
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC