CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001810/15186
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001810
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr.D.K.Gupta
B-129, Flat-6,
Malviya Nagar, New Delhi-110017.
Respondent (1) : Public Information Officer
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi.
(2) : Dr. M. Kulashreshtha
PIO & OSD
CGHS South Zone
R. K. Puram Sector-8,
New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 10/02/2011
PIO replied : No reply
First appeal filed on : 06/05/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 02/06/2011
Second Appeal received on : 06/07/2011
Information sought:
The Appellant has sought following information under the RTI Act,2005:-
“I wrote to the then Health Secretary Sri Naresh Dayal, explaining the reasons for treatment taken
in the hospital not approved by CGHS, regarding reimbursement of medical claim in respect of the
treatment of my wife Mrs. Vinodni Gupta (CGHS Card No. 959847 )on 30th. Sept. 2009 & 18th. Dec.
2009 (Annex – 1&2 ) followed by reminders dated 5th. April2010 & 16th. Nov. 2010 to his successor Ms.
Sujatha Rao (Annex -3 &4). Since the papers sent by me earlier were misplaced, as advised, duplicate
papers along with affidavit were sent to Dr. S N Mishra Addl. Director CGHS South Zone R K Puram
New Delhi on 5th. Aug. 2010& followed by reminder dated 15th Oct. 2010 (Annex -5 &6) but no action
has been taken in the matter even after a lapse of 1 year & 4 months.
Provide the following information with respect to the same:-
1. The actions taken by the different officers on the 6-letters written to them as detailed above.
2 Indicate as to how the papers got lost between the office of Health Secretary & Joint Secretary
Health, the official responsible for this and what action is proposed to be taken against the official
for this negligence.
3. The names & designations of the officials with whom my application was lying
during the period. Intimate the periods when it was lying with each officer & what
was the action taken by that official during that period.
4. According to your rules within how many days should such a matter be dealt with & resolved
provide copy of rules.
5. No action in spite of my writing to the highest authority repeatedly has caused mental agony to me
.By when will the action be taken.”
Page 1 of 3
Reply of PIO:
Not replied.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Non-receipt of the information from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
The Appellant has received a copy of the letter dated 02/06/2011 from FAA addressed to the Additional
Director CGHS (Hqr.)
“I am directed to enclose an appeal (in original) dated 6th May, 2011 made by Shri D. K. Gupta, New
Delhi under RTI Act, 2005 along with its enclosures. In this context, it is mentioned here that one of the
letters of the applicant dated 16Lh November, 2010 (mentioned in the RTI application) was received in
the office of Secretary (H&FW) and was finally sent to your office from Director (CGHS) vide Dy. No.
5032 dated 30.11.2010.
2 You are requested to kindly furnish relevant information to the applicant under intimation to this
Ministry.”
Grounds for Second Appeal
Non-receipt of the information from the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. D. K. Gupta;
Respondent: Dr. M. Kulashreshtham PIO & OSD and Dr. Jayshree Bhatnagar, FAA & Additional
Director;
The RTI application was received on 24/06/2011 by CGHS (HQ) from PIO, Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare. This was transferred on 07/07/2011 to PIO, CGHS South Zone. It is evident that
some of the queries were related to Health and Family Welfare Ministry and the Appellant states that he
has received no reply from the PIO, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. It appears that the PIO
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare has not provided any information to the Appellant. PIO, CGHS
also states that the information on the specific queries of the Appellant only would be with PIO, Ministry
of Health and Family Welfare. The PIO, CGHS has attempted to give some information based on his
understanding of the issues raised by the Appellant, but it does not appear that the specific information
sought by the Appellant is available with them.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare is directed to provide the
information to the Appellant after obtaining it from any other officer of required. He will
provide the specific information to the Appellant before 10 November 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO,
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information
within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the
requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is
being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty
should not be levied on him.
Page 2 of 3
PIO, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare will present himself before the Commission at the above
address on 14 November 2011 at 12.30pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty
should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having
given the information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him. If no other responsible persons are brought by the persons asked to showcause
hearing, it will be presumed that they are the responsible persons.
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 cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Ac.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
17 October 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)(AK)
Page 3 of 3