CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.2880/ICPB/2008
F. No. PBC/2007/0381
October 6, 2008
In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 18
[Hearing on 30.9.2008 at 4.30 p.m.]
Appellant: Mr. Manoj Pai
Public authority: Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Deputy Secretary & CPIO
Parties Present: Respondent not present.
Mr. Manoj Pai-Appellant
Mr. Hari Kumar P.
DECISION
The appellant has sought information under RTI Act by his letter dated
15.9.2006 addressed to CPIO, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in respect
some amount of 60,000/- sanctioned for digital hearing aid vide order dated
26.9.1999. His query is whether this amount is for providing one hearing aid or
two hearing aids for both the ears. The appellant did not receive any reply.
Therefore, he has filed his appeal vide letter dated 19.12.2006 addressed to the
First AA, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi. This letter has also
not replied by the First AA. Therefore he has filed this complaint before the
Commission on 31.01.2007. Comments were called for vide letter dated
22.11.2007 and again on 3.3.2008 for which also no reply came from the CPIO.
However, the case was listed for hearing on 30.9.2008, which was attended by
the appellant in person along with his colleague and no one attended the hearing
from the Ministry in spite of the fact the notice was issued as early as on
17.9.2008. The appellant has come all the way from Ahmedabad. I, therefore,
direct the CPIO to show-cause why penalty cannot be imposed on him for not
adhering to the time-frame as provided under the RTI Act by explaining in a
chronological manner from the time he has received RTI application till the time
he has received notice of hearing from the Commission within 15 days. As far as
the RTI application is concerned the CPIO is directed to provide point-wise reply
to the queries raised by the appellant both in the application as well as in the first
appeal within 15 days and he has to file his reply before the Commission during
the same period. It is noticed the appellant has not received any reply either
from the CPIO or from the first AA. This is not the first time the CPIO/AA are
1
figuring for such lapses for not following RTI Act in its true spirit. I direct the AA
to offer his explanation for not responding to the first appeal and as first AA he is
expected to provide suitable guidance to his CPIO in order to implement the RTI
Act in true spirit. Apart from this, I direct the CPIO to appear before the
Commission along with his reply as well as explanation on 14.10.2008 at 1.00
p.m. to decide the matter further. In order to facilitate locating of the file, I am
also enclosing a set of RTI application, first appeal, copy of the second appeal so
that the CPIO will be able to attend to this work immediately.
Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO.
Sd/-
(Padma Balasubramanian)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy :
(Prem Singh Sagar)
Under Secretary & Assistant Registrar
Address of parties :
1. Deputy Secretary & CPIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Nirman
Bhawan, New Delhi-110001
2. Mr. Manoj Pai, T-15, Sunrise Park Tenements, Sargam Road, PO
Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380054
2