In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001140
Date of Hearing : July 20, 2011
Date of Decision : July 20, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Ms.Santosh Yadav
Plot No. C 54A
Flat No.B805
Royal Towers
Sector61
Noida
The Applicant was not present during the hearing
Respondents
O/o the Director, Nursing Division
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Nirman Bhawan
New Delhi
Represented by : Shri S.N.Sharma, Under Secretary
Ms.Neelam Bhatia, Section Officer
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/001140
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.11.1.11 with the PIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.
She stated that she had been placed under suspension vide order dt.16.12.10. In this context, she
wanted to inspect the file containing all the papers related o her case and also to be supplied with
the copies of documents. Ms.Aparna Sharma, CPIO replied on 10.2.11 denying the information u/s
8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. The Applicant thereafter filed an appeal dt.17.2.11 with the Appellate Authority
stating that the CPIO has not furnished any reasons as to how providing the information would
impede the investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders. She added that information
sought is an existing information directly affecting her and there is nothing in the information which
attracts Section 8(1)(h). Shri Debasish Panda, Appellate Authority replied on 18.3.11 upholding the
decision of the PIO. Being aggrieved with the reply, the Applicant filed a second appeal dt.17.4.11
before CIC.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Respondents submitted that the case against the Appellant is still going on
and that the charge sheet has been served on the Appellant on 15.4.11. She added that there was
delay in conducting the enquiry since after the Inquiry Officer and the Presenting Officer were
appointed, the order appointing the Presenting Officer had to be cancelled based on a note received
from the Joint Secretary and a new Presenting Officer had to be appointed. When queried by the
Commission as to how much more time is required to complete the process, the Respondents
submitted that since the Appellant is a Group ‘A’ officer, DOPT and UPSC need to be consulted and
that it will take approximately three to four months more for a decision to be taken on the matter.
3. It is clear that the information cannot be authorized for disclosure u/s8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
However the Commission recommends that the enquiry be completed and the matter be decided at
the earliest, preferably within the next 4 months and the Appellant to be provided complete
information as sought by her immediately after its finalization .
4. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Ms.Santosh Yadav
Plot No. C 54A
Flat No.B805
Royal Towers
Sector61
Noida
2. The Public Information Officer
O/o the Director, Nursing Division
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Nirman Bhawan
New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority
O/o the Joint Secretary, Nursing Division
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Nirman Bhawan
New Delhi
4. Officer in charge, NIC