{"id":218962,"date":"2010-01-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010"},"modified":"2016-06-18T13:40:16","modified_gmt":"2016-06-18T08:10:16","slug":"shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010<\/div>\n
                          CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                            Appeal No. CIC\/AD\/A\/2009\/900945 dated 2.7.2009\n                              Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\n\nAppellant         -          Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi\nRespondent            -      Safdarjung Hospital\n                                    Decision announced : 29.1.2010\n\n\nFacts<\/pre>\n
:\n<\/p>\n
         By an application of 12.6.09 Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi of Sarojini Nagar,
\nNew Delhi applied to the CPIO Dr. R. K. Anand, CMO (NFSG), Office of Medical
\nSuperintendent, Safdarjung Hospital, seeking the following information:\n<\/p>\n
         “(i)    the case file was closed on 6.6.2009 i.e. after the direction of
\n                 CIC and not by the unit Head. The case file was closed at
\n                 12.45 hours on 6.6.2009 on behalf of Unit head. The name
\n                 and designation of the Dr. who closed the file may be
\n                 indicated. The reason for closing the file by Dr. Other than
\n                 Unit Head and that to one month after the discharge\/ death
\n                 of the patient may be intimated. The name of Jr. Resident
\n                 and Sr. Resident closing the case may be intimated. (See P-
\n                 34 of case file).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         (ii)    It may also be informed whether it is allowed that case can
\n                 be closed by person other than Unit Head. The relevant
\n                 provisions of manual may be intimated.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         (iii)   The name of the Doctors who examine the patient and
\n                 prescribed treatment in the emergency may be intimated. (P-
\n                 25-26 of case file).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         (iv)    The patient was transferred to Ward-I while the Unit belongs
\n                 to ward- 24 (P-34 of the case file). The name and
\n                 designation of the Doctor who advised the transfer of the
\n                 patient may be intimated.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         (v)     No advice from ward-B is available in case file for transfer of
\n                 patient. However, a note dated 2.5.2009 for transfer to
\n                 ward-I after USG is available in case file (P-27 of case file).
\n                 However, the case file does not include the USG dated
\n                 2.5.2009 for ward-B. Please also provide me the USG done
\n                 on 2.5.2009 before transferring the patient to Ward-I. The
\n                 name of the Nursing Staff of who transferred the case may<\/p>\n
                                                   1<\/span>
\n          be intimated, who ordered for transfer of case may be
\n         intimated. The reply is relevant in terms Hon’ble CIC’s
\n         decision No. 338\/ICPB\/2006 dated 15.2.2007.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
(vi)     The USG dated 1.5.2009 (P-21-22 of case file) gives the
\n         impression as choleithiasis. I may be intimated when the
\n         hospital came to know about the disease of the patient as
\n         ‘Pancreatitis’ as mentioned in diagnosis at P-34 of case file.
\n         What treatment was provided to the patient after diagnosis of
\n         the patient, the same is not clear from case file?\n<\/p>\n
(vii)    The Lab. Report as available in P-12 of case file indicates it
\n         as ‘Duplicate’ and is unsigned and dated 4.5.2009. Who
\n         conducted the test, the name and designation of the Bio-
\n         chemist may be intimated. Who is responsible for loss of
\n         original report?    Does this not amount to medical
\n         negligence?\n<\/p>\n
(viii)   The case was sent to consultation twice to Medicine
\n         department and ICU. The name and designation of the
\n         Doctor who examined the patient and rendered medical
\n         advice may be intimated. (P-8, 9, 26 and 17 of case file).
\n         The date and time of such advice may be intimated. The
\n         date and time on which such referral was made may be
\n         intimated.\n<\/p>\n
(ix)     The patient was allotted floor bed no. 15 (P-3 of case file),
\n         while Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has ordered that no patient
\n         may be allotted floor bed and be transferred to Private
\n         Hospitals who are mandatorily required to provide free
\n         treatment to the patient of BPL. This patient was CGHS
\n         beneficiary, why the patient was not transferred to CGHS
\n         recognized hospital. Whether this does not amount to
\n         contempt of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. Name of the Dr.\/
\n         Nurse who allotted floor bedding may be intimated.\n<\/p>\n
(x)      From the entire case file it is seen that none of the specialist\/
\n         consultant examined the patient all along the patients stay in
\n         hospital. Keeping the patients on the mercy of Contractual
\n         Resident Doctors amounts to Medical negligence or not.
\n         Whether non examination of patient by the Specialist and
\n         Consultant of the Hospital to the patient amount to medical
\n         negligence or not. If no, the reason thereof.\n<\/p>\n
                                     2<\/span><\/p>\n
       (xi)     What are the duties and responsibilities of specialist and
\n               what are the guidelines for their visit to the ward (both
\n               normal ward and emergency ward).\n<\/p>\n
      (xii)    Name of the nursing Staff who administered the I. V. Infusion
\n               to the patient all alongwith patients stay in hospital may be
\n               informed (shift wise).\n<\/p>\n
      (xiii)   In part-II (other significant conditions) of P-34 of case
\n               indicate that ‘Cholilishesis’ is not the disease, whether
\n               conclusion is against the impression of USG dated 1.5.2009
\n               (P-21 of case file) or not.\n<\/p>\n
      (xiv)    I may be provided medical transcript of death summary at P-\n<\/p>\n
               32 of the case file.\n<\/p>\n
      (xv)     What is the treatment of Pancreatitis and whether the
\n               facilities are available in the hospital for pancritis. ERCP
\n               facilities are available in the ho9spital or not.\n<\/p>\n
      (xvi)    I may be allowed to inspect all the registers and records
\n               maintained in the hospital relating to the treatment of above
\n               patient. I may also be shown ‘Suggestion\/ complaint
\n               register’ which is compulsorily needs to be maintained in the
\n               wards.\n<\/p>\n
      As already accepted by you during hearing dated 5.6.2009 that
\n      matter relate to life & liberty and hence may be provided within 48
\n      hrs.”\n<\/p>\n
      To this Shri Joshi received no response within 48 hours leading him to
\nappeal on 17.6.09 before Dr. Sudhir Chandra, Appellate Authority and Addl.
\nMedical Supdt., SJH pleading as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “The information needs to provide within 48 hours in as held by
\n      Hon’ble CIC indecision No. CIC\/AD\/A\/2009\/9000676 dated
\n      5.6.2009 and agreed by the CPIO. However, no reply has been
\n      furnished by the CPIO yet.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Non furnishing of reply amounts to refusal of information within the
\n      meaning of Sub-section 2 of section 7of RTI Act, 2005.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      On still not receiving a response, Shri Joshi has moved a second appeal
\nbefore us with the following prayer:\n<\/p>\n
                                         3<\/span><\/p>\n
       “As per above direction of your honour, the CPIO provided me
\n      the case file containing 34 pages vide letter No. 14\/06-<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      SJH\/CPIO\/RTI-2009\/151 dated 8.6.2009 at 1430 hrs. However,
\n      the case file has some missing reports\/ discrepancies, I
\n      requested them to provide me the same, beside inspection of
\n      other document vide my application dated 12.6.2009. I have
\n      also appealed to Appellate Authority vide my appeal dated
\n      17.6.2009. However no reply has been received yet.’<\/p>\n
The appeal was heard on 20.7.2009. The following are present:\n<\/p>\n
      Appellant
\n            Sh. Umesh Chandra Joshi
\n      Respondents
\n            Dr. R. K. Anand, CMO (NFSG) & CPIO
\n            Sh. Debasish Sarkar, LDC<\/p>\n
      Dr. R. K. Anand submitted that such information as is held by the Hospital
\nin this regard including the file sheet of Mrs. Rekha has been provided to
\nappellant, who has also inspected the records. Appellant Shri Joshi, however,
\nsubmitted that some files pertaining to this case have been deliberately
\nconcealed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Appellant Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi then submitted his arguments in
\nwriting, a copy of which was handed over to respondents Dr. R. K. Anand, CMO.
\nAppellant Shri Joshi also submitted a copy of a letter sent on 27.6.09 by Dr. R. K.
\nAnand to Shri Harish Chandra Pandey, husband of the deceased Ms. Rekha,
\nwhich reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      “Your wife Late Smt. Rekha Age 35 years \/ female was under
\n      treatment in this hospital vide M.R.D. No. 39993\/09 and was
\n      admitted on dated : 01.05.09. She expired on 6.5.2009.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      You are hereby directed to explain that :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      1.    Why Mr. Umesh Chandra Joshi is seeking information
\n            related to your Wife’s treatment ?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      2.    Why Mr. Umesh Chandra Joshi is taking interest in your
\n            Wife’s Case?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      3.    Whether Mr. Umesh Chandra Joshi is real brother of your
\n            wife or not?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
       4.     Were you in Delhi at the time of admission of your wife in
\n             Safdarjung Hospital on 1.5.2009?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      5.     What was your role in the treatment of your wife?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      6.     Whether Mr. Umesh Chandra Joshi is seeking information
\n             through RTI Cell Safdarjung Hospital with your consent or
\n             knowledge?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      7.     Why y our signature is not present in the Case Sheet at the
\n             time of admission of your wife in this hospital?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      You are hereby directed to give reply of all the above
\n      questions within 10 days of receipt of this letter.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Shri Joshi has also submitted a copy of a letter of 9.3.09 from Shri Harish
\nChandra Pandey to Dr. R. K. Anand affirming that Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi is
\nthe brother of Smt. Rekha and was supervising her treatment.          He has also
\nsubmitted other documents with regard to the treatment of Ms. Rekha as well as
\na complaint against harassment by the CPIO.\n<\/p>\n
      It is noted that u\/s 11(1), a public authority , if it intends to disclosure
\ninformation, is required to give a written notice to such third party of the request
\nand to the fact that CPIO intends to disclose the information on record or part
\nthereof. It is conceded that such information, as is being sought in the present
\ncase by appellant Shri Joshi is information that can be treated as confidential as
\nbeing a fiduciary relationship and, therefore, exempt from disclosure u\/s 8(1)(e).
\nHowever, this cannot warrant a peremptory notice as issued by CPIO Dr. Anand
\nto Shri Harish Chandra Pandey dated 26.11.08 as quoted above, which is more
\ninterrogatory than simply a request for agreement to disclosure.\n<\/p>\n
      Nevertheless to allow respondents to reply exhaustively to the points
\nraised by Shri Joshi and his complaint on information not having been provided
\ndespite several decisions by this Commission, the last being on 5.6.09, Dr. R. K.
\nAnand was directed to provide a written response by or before 24.7.2009 on the
\nbasis of which this Commission would proceed to arrive at a decision in this
\nmatter. This response dated 24.7.’09 has been received followed by a rejoinder<\/p>\n
                                         5<\/span>
\n from appellant Shri Joshi dated 12.9.’09. The appeal was, therefore, heard once
\nmore on 29.1.10. The following are present:\n<\/p>\n
       Appellant
\n             Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi
\n       Respondents
\n             Dr. R. K. Anand, CMO (NFSG) & CPIO
\n             Dr. S. Laxmi, CPIO-I
\n             Dr. Manoj Kumar, CPIO-II
\n             Dr. Ashwani Gupta, Sr. Surgeon
\n             Dr. A.S.N. Rao, Sr. Surgeon
\n             Mr. Debashish Sarkar, Dealing Asstt. RTI Cell<\/p>\n
       In his written rejoinder appellant has listed questions asked and responses
\nreceived, commenting against several that “the record management is very
\npoor”. On several punts however, appellant Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi has
\ncontested the information provided. We then examined each of these points in
\nthe hearing. This is with regard to point 2, 9, 11, 12, 15 & 16, which are as
\nfollows:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Point 2:      Dr. A. N. S. Rao submitted that the response given to appellant Shri
\n       Joshi is correct in light of the fact that this matter is not covered by any
\n       rule and, therefore, part of any manual but is prescribed practice. In this
\n       case the matter had been closed by Dr. Rao himself in the absence of Sr.
\n       Surgeon Dr. Ashwani Gupta.\n<\/p>\n
Point 4:      In this matter respondent Dr. Ashwani Gupta submitted that there is
\n       no record of the name and designation of the Dr. who advised the transfer
\n       of the patient, since this would have been on the basis of verbal orders.\n<\/p>\n
Point 9:      In this case, again it was confirmed by Sr. Surgeon Dr. Ashwani
\n       Gupta that information provided was correct. There is no record of any
\n       request by the patient for transfer to another CGHS Hospital. Dr. Gupta
\n       submitted that SJH is a tertiary level hospital that provides that same
\n       treatment for all.\n<\/p>\n
                                         6<\/span><\/p>\n
 Point 11:    In this matter, as informed by CPIO in his comments, Dr. A. N. S.\n<\/p>\n
      Rao in his letter of 24.6.09 to CPIO submitted that a reply is to be provided
\n      by the Administration Section.\n<\/p>\n
Point 12:    Respondents submitted that there is no such record maintained
\n      since the Nursing Staff works in six rotating shifts and, therefore, it is not
\n      possible to specify which Member of that staff administered IV infusion.\n<\/p>\n
Point 15:    CPIO Dr. S. Laxmi submitted that the information sought had been
\n      provided through a letter of 24.6.09, which appellant Shri Joshi confirmed
\n      having received.\n<\/p>\n
Point 16:    It was argued that the information sought was maintained only for
\n      day to day use and once used was not maintained as a part of the record.
\n      The particular information, which appellant had sought may not have been
\n      destroyed but was not traceable.\n<\/p>\n
                           DECISION NOTICE<\/p>\n
      From the above, it would appear that other than the information mentioned
\nat point 11 of appellant’s rejoinder, the remaining information such as exists had
\ninfact been provided to appellant Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi. Now, therefore,
\nCPIO-1 Dr. S. Laxmi will ensure that the information awaited from the
\nAdministration Section is passed on to Shri Joshi within ten working days
\nof the date of receipt of this Decision Notice, under intimation to Shri
\nPankaj KP Shreyaskar, Jt. Registrar of this Commission.\n<\/p>\n
      On the other hand, we notice that this Commission has repeatedly had
\noccasion to take note of the inadequacies in maintenance of records in the SJH.
\nIn our order in Appeal No. 338\/ICPB\/2006 (File No.PBA\/06\/345) -S. K. Verma
\nvs. SJH, announced on 15.2.09, we have noted as follows:\n<\/p>\n
                                         7<\/span><\/p>\n
        “From the facts of this case, it is apparent that there is a need to
\n       streamline the administration of medical health in the hospital in
\n       general and particularly in the Emergency Wards and Casualty
\n       Wards where temporary doctors viz. Junior Residents and Senior
\n       Residents, work for short periods. To ensure accountability among
\n       these temporary doctors, proper records should be kept regarding
\n       dates, time of duty and period of stay etc of all the doctors and
\n       nurses.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       Again in Complaint No. CIC\/WB\/C\/2007\/00320 -Rita vs. SJH, we have
\nadvised on 16.8.2007 as follows:\n<\/p>\n
       “From the above we find that there has in fact been a delay of one
\n       week between the date when the information became due i.e.
\n       21.6.07 and 28.6.07. This can be deemed reasonable as a result of
\n       information having to be sought from the Admn.IV(D) Section.
\n       However, although a sympathetic view has been taken in this view
\n       in light of appellant Ms Rita’s application for withdrawal, CPIO
\n       Safdarjung Hospital is cautioned to adhere more closely to time
\n       frames mandated u\/s7(1) of the Act ensuring that different Sections
\n       within the same public authority also do the same at risk of being
\n       held liable for penalty.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       In our decision in CIC\/AD\/A\/09\/900676, Umesh Chandra Joshi vs. SJH
\nannounced on 5.6.09, we have directed as below:\n<\/p>\n
       “The Respondent Public Authority is further directed to set up a
\n       nodal RTI Cell at a central place to receive RTI applications and to
\n       aid and expedite the process of seeking information and alleviate
\n       the agony of the information seekers, more so since the Public
\n       Authority is rendering medical \/ health services which is aimed at
\n       public welfare. Report of compliance of the order to reach the
\n       Commission within a month of the receipt of this order.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       What in fact is required of the SJH, which is a premier institution for the
\npublic health of Indian citizenry, is full compliance with sec. 4 of the RTI Act,
\nwhich implies not only efficient storage of information but ready accessibility to be
\nable to service such cases, as that of appellant Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi.
\nMedical records, which will be readily acknowledged by all, are a vital
\nrequirement for every citizen of a country which seeks to guarantee the public<\/p>\n
                                         8<\/span>
\n health. Yet we were concerned to hear from the respondents themselves, as can
\nbe seen included eminent Members of SJH’s medical staff, a sense of frustration
\nat the facilities extended to them, their consequent inability to modernize their
\nfacilities. Therefore, u\/s 19(8) (a)   we direct that CPIO Dr. R. K. Anand, CMO
\n(NFSG), SJH immediately prepare recommendations for Ms. K. Sujata Rao,
\nSecretary (Health) to take all steps necessary to secure compliance with the
\nprovisions of this Act, specifically sec. 4(1) (a) & (b) to enable ready access to
\ninformation whenever requested by any citizen of India, in light of the earlier
\ndecisions of this Commission cited above. This appeal is disposed of with the
\nabove directions.\n<\/p>\n
       Reserved in the hearing this decision is announced in the afternoon of this
\n29th day of January, 2010. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the
\nparties including a copy to Ms. K. Sujata Rao, Secretary, Ministry of Health
\n& Family Welfare. .\n<\/p>\n
(Wajahat Habibullah)
\nChief Information Commissioner
\n29.1.2010<\/p>\n
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
\napplication and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO
\nof this Commission.\n<\/p>\n
(Pankaj Shreyaskar)
\nJoint Registrar
\n29.1.2010<\/p>\n
                                         9<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No. CIC\/AD\/A\/2009\/900945 dated 2.7.2009 Right to Information Act 2005 – Section 19 Appellant – Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi Respondent – Safdarjung Hospital Decision announced : 29.1.2010 Facts : By an application of 12.6.09 Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-218962","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nShri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-18T08:10:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-18T08:10:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2676,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-18T08:10:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-18T08:10:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-18T08:10:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010"},"wordCount":2676,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010","name":"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-18T08:10:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-umesh-chandra-joshi-vs-safdarjung-hospital-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri Umesh Chandra Joshi vs Safdarjung Hospital on 29 January, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218962","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=218962"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218962\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=218962"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=218962"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=218962"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}