CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/AD/A/2011/001267/SG/14858
Appeal No. CIC/AD/A/2011/001267/SG
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Bajrang Lal Prajapat
Mohla
Hisar- 125042
Respondent : Mr. Ranendra Singh Negi
PIO & Under Secretary
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
Government of India
Nirman Bhawan
Delhi-110011
RTI application filed on : 24/11/2010
PIO replied : 05/01/2011
First appeal filed on : 27/01/2011 and reminder letter on
26/03/2011
First Appellate Authority order : Not ordered
Second Appeal received on : 11/05/2011
Information Sought:
1. In Dainik tribune Newspaper the fee account of Smoke Control Cell was printed 18000110456 instead of
1800110456. Which official is responsible for misleading them? Please provide the name and designation of
the officials along with the punishment detail for this wrongful Act.
2. What punishment was given to the newspaper employee and your official? Or are you waiting for the
complaint to be registered.
3. On the fee no. 1800110456, Ashok Prajapat filed various complaints against which no action has been taken
over any complaint. Who is responsible for this and in how much time will he be punished?
4. The Appellant is making a complaint that he is a resident of Haryana and no place in this state is smoke free.
In how much time his complaint will be heard and action would be taken on it?
5. The Appellant also wants to complain against the smoke free city Chandigarh that no park, road, bus stop etc
including other public places like railway station is not smoke free. When will you ask the Nodal Officer to
take action over this? Please provide the name, designation and contact details of the Nodal Officers?
6. The schools in Chandigarh, Haryana and Punjab are not smoke free and several complaints have been
registered against it. So please inform that when will the nodal officers take action over this and to whom can
one appeal after your reply?
7. Please provide the detailed information which is available with you that what are the profits available to the
government from smoking?
8. Are there any recommendations given for the diseases that might take place after the consumption of Smoke?
Please provide the information as to what are the symptoms of the diseases and what preventive measures
must be taken for this?
9. Do you find any employee responsible for this that the laws relating to the Smoking and Tobacco
Consumption and orders for the same are not implemented? If yes then what punishment will be given to
them and when will action be taken over this?
10. Can any Indian citizen claim for penalizing the accused if he is uncomfortable with the smoke? Please
mention the rules as per your answer in yes or no? What all punishments can he claim for the accused and
from whom?
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
With regard to point No 1& 2, it is to inform that the incorrect Toll Free No. 18000-110456 might have been
inadvertently printed in Dainik Tribune Newspaper on 17-08-10. However, no such matter has been reported to this
Ministry.
With regard to point no. (3)- The details of calls received from Ashok Prajapat from May 2010 till date is enclosed
herewith. Further, it may be noted that from the Toll Free Helpline, the complaint/violations reported have been
informed to the respective Nodal Officers of the States. As we dont have any feedback from the States with regard to
the Action taken by them, it will not be possible for us to give any reply on the action taken on the complaints
received.
With regard to point no. (4, 5, & 6)- it is to say that as the State Governments/ UTs are mainly responsible for
ensuring the effective implementation of the COTPA, 2003, they have been requested for enforcing the provisions of
the COWA, 2003 time to time. List of the Nodal Officers are enclosed herewith. If there is no Nodal officer in the
State/ UTS, the complaints may be registered in the office of State Health Secretary of concerned State/UTs.
With regard point No. (7)- No such information is available.
With regard to point no. (8)- Such information is not available.
With regard to point no. (9) & (9 A) – No
With regard to point no. (10)- As per Schedule III of “the Prohibition of smoking in Public Places Rules, 2008”
notified vide GSR No. 417(E) dated 30-O008 and GSR No. 680 (E) dated 15-09-09, the list of Persons/officers
authorized to impose and collect the fine against the violation of section 4 of the “The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco
Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and
Distribution) Act (COTPA), 2003′ regarding ban on smoking in public places have been notified. Any violation of
this Rule is a punishable offence with fine upto Rs. 200 (copy enclosed)
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete information provided by the PIO and information was sought in Hindi.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
No order passed by the FAA.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete information provided by the PIO and no order passed by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Absent;
Respondent : Mr. Ranendra Singh Negi, PIO & Under Secretary;
The respondent shows that he has provided the information available on the records to the Appellant,
which appears to be correct.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information available on the records appears to have been provided.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
26 September 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (HA)