CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2011/000068/13246
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2011/000068
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Complaint:
Complainant : Mr. Bhushan Kumar
C/o Dr. Shabana Azmi
N-142-143, Abul Fazal Enclave
Jamia Nagar,Okhla
New Delhi-110025
Respondent : Dr. K. C. Tamaria
PIO & Dy. Medical Superintendent
Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya Hospital
Malviya Nagar, New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 29/09/2010
PIO replied : -------------
Complaint received on : 27/05/2010
Notice of Hearing sent on : 02/06/2011
Hearing Date : 04/07/2011
Information sought:-
The appellant wants the following information:-
1. On what ground the Appellant have been relieved from malviya nagar Chest clinic, whether the
respondent had received any written direction from STO, if yes, please furnish the copy of the
same to the appellant.
2. How many and of what type of allegation has been leveled against the Appellant and by whom?
Please furnish the complete detail in writing.
3. If any verification has been done by the respondent the please provide the details of verification to
the Appellant.
4. If any complain had lodged against the appellant then why a memo was not issued,why the
appellant was denied of his right to defend himself.Please furnish a written reply to the query.
5. The Appellant seeks information regarding his earlier complaint whether any action has taken
against his complaint.
6. The Appellant also seeks information regarding his another complaint as whether the respondent
can disclose that how much they charged for marking their attendance in absence which is totally
illegal, Please look into this matter and provide a complete reply upon this matter.
The Appellant wants information as to whether any action has taken against the complaint and
also provide a complete reply of the matter.
7. The Appellant also wants to know that Preeti STS & Tilok Chandra STLS always go to patients in
hospital and force them to make false complaints against those who donot pay money as bribe,
what benefits respondent provide them for doing these unlawful activities.
8. Whether the respondent have tried to get information regarding the Appellant’s work and character
during his tenure at malviya nagar chest clinic, if yes then what remark were given?And if no why
they did not take information about the Appellant, his work and character?
9. The Appellant wants to know as to how many DOT centre has the DTO visited after getting the
charge because on paper the meeting are being conducted regularly and charge of refreshment are
being taken every time.
10. How many official and unofficial leaves have ben taken by Mrs. Sampati w/o Trilok Chandra
STLS,(Dot provider Khanpur) in the year 2010 till now?
11. How many memos s far have been issued to the staff of malviya nagar chest clinic since the
respondent have taken charge, who are the persons and what are the charges?
Ground of the Complaint:
No specific reply was furnished by the concerned PIO.
Reply from PIO:-
1. The PIO in reference to an application dated 29/09/2010 submitted that the application is
transferred under sub-section 3 of Section 6 of RTI Act 2005 to the PIO, Office of the State
Tuberculosis Officer, Delhi Government, Dispensary Building,Gulabi Bagh ,New Delhi-110007
for supply of information directly to the Appellant.
2. The PIO stated in reference to Letter dated 12/11/2010 that he is not the a designated person to
look after the RTI matter of the chest clinic under Delhi Tapedic Unmoolan Samiti. All
Administrative matter of the chest Clinic located in the premises of the Pt. MMM Hospital is
directly looked after by the STO, Gulabi Bagh.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Complainant: Mr. Bhushan Kumar;
Respondent : Dr. K. C. Tamaria, PIO & Dy. Medical Superintendent;
There has been confusion about who is the responsible PIO for supplying the information to the
Complainant. The RTI application has been shunted around with nobody taking responsibility for
providing the information. The Complainant has been employed by Delhi Tapedic Unmoolan Samiti in a
clinic which is operating independently from the premises of Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya Hospital. The
Commission now directs Dr. Tamaria to provide the information to the Complainant based on the records
available.
Decision:
The Complaint is allowed.
The PIO Dr. K. C. Tamaria is directed to provide the information available on the
records to the Complainant before 20 July 2011.
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
04 July 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (SB)