CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003081/10549Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003081
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. S.C. Yogi 7, Alipore Road,
Respondent : Dr. Hem Prakash Public Information Officer & Chief Medical Officer (NFSG.) Shushruta Trauma Centre,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
9, Metacalf Road, Delhi- 54
RTI application filed on : 26/08/2010 PIO replied : 25/09/2010 First appeal filed on : 30/09/2010 First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned. Second Appeal received on : 01/11/2010
Information has been sought regarding the condition of Shushruta Trauma Centre. Information has been sought on various points like the facilities available, staff, total property of the Trauma Centre, details of the shops operating in the Trauma Centre, the details of the total expenditures of the centre from 1.4.10 to 30.8.10, availability of the C.T. Scan machines and ambulances, details of the properties of the staff members, timings of the administrative office, details of the number of patients who were brought to the centre between 2-5 pm on 24/8/10 and how many of them were not admitted in the centre and the reason for the same, details of the tenders been issued, and total number of operations done between 1/1/09 to 31.08.10, etc.
Reply of the PIO:
PIO replied to the application accordingly.
Incomplete and non-satisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Incomplete information provided by the PIO.
Page 1 of 3
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing 21 December 2010: The following were present
Appellant : Mr. S.C. Yogi
Respondent : Dr. Hem Prakash, Public Information Officer & Chief Medical Officer (NFSG.);
"The First appellate Authority Dr. Ajay Gupta, Medical Superintendent has not passed any order in this matter. The First Appellate Authority Dr. Gupta appears to be guilty of dereliction of duty since he does not appear to have passed any order in the matter.
The Respondent has provided certain information but has not provided any information on queries 2, 6, 7 and 22. The information on query 2 & 7 should infact be available suo-moto as per Section-4 of the RTI Act.
The Appellant has been informed in some of the queries that patients are not expected to bring any equipment or accessories by themselves and that all this is provided free of cost. However, in reply to query- 28 the Respondent has said that they do not have information about equipments or accessories which patients have to bring from the outside. These two appear to be contradictory. The PIO is directed to provide the exact information as to whether any equipment or accessories have to bring by the patients on their own cost or the reply to query 28 should state that no equipment or accessories have been brought by the patients.
The Respondent states that the person responsible for providing information at that time was Dr. J. K. Basu, CMO & Deemed PIO."
Commission's Decision dated 21 December 2010:
The Appeal was allowed.
"The PIO Dr. Hem Prakash is directed to provide the information on queries 2, 6, 7 & 22 and clarification about query-28 as stated above. The PIO will give this information to the Appellant before 10 January 2011.
The First Appellate Authority Dr. Ajay Gupta is directed to present himself alongwith his explanation before the Commission on 14 January 2011 at 04.30PM, to showcause why the Commission should not recommend disciplinary action against him for dereliction of duty.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the deemed PIO Dr. J. K. Basu, CMO & Deemed PIO within 30 days as required by the law. From the facts before the Commission it appears that the deemed 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 deemed 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.
Dr. J. K. Basu, CMO & Deemed PIO will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 14 January 2011 at 04.30PM. He will also bring the information sent to the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the information to the appellant."
Page 2 of 3
Relevant Facts emerging during the inquiry held on 14 January 2011 The following were present
Respondent: Dr. Ajay Gupta, Medical Superintendent & FAA; Dr. Hem Prakash, Public Information Officer & Chief Medical Officer (NFSG.); Dr. J. K. Basu, CMO & Deemed PIO; Dr. Sumant Sinha, HOD & the then PIO;
The FAA Dr. Ajay Gupta has stated that he had called for a hearing on 10/11/2010 but the Appellant had not come. He states that the Appellant came later on and therefore he again called for hearing on 18/11/2010 at 12.00noon. The Appellant again did not appear. Dr. Gupta states that he was unaware that he should pass an order even if he had not heard the appellant. The Commission accepts this explanation and hopes that Dr. Gupta will ensure that in all first appeals he issues an appropriate order within 30 days as mandated under the RTI Act. The Commission therefore drops the proceedings against the First Appellate Authority.
The then PIO Dr. Sumant Sinha states that he went on leave on 15/09/2010 to 26/09/2010. He also states that he sought the assistance of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sakkarwal, Officer Superintendent to collect the information. Dr. J. K. Basu was officiating as PIO in the absence of Dr. Sumant. Dr. Basu states that he was never informed that he was officiating as PIO. On 25/09/2010 Dr. Basu states that since it was the last day for providing the information Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sakkarwal asked him to sign the information. Based on the statements before the Commission it appears that the person whose assistance was sought by the PIO under Section 5(4) was Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sakkarwal, who then becomes the deemed PIO under the RTI Act.
Therefore the Commission issues a showcause to Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sakkarwal, Office Superintendent and Dr. J. K. Basu, CMO to appear before the Commission on 04 February 2011 at 03.00PM to showcase why penalty under Section 20(1) should not be levied on him.
The Commission directs Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sakkarwal, Office Superintendent and Dr. J. K. Basu, CMO to appear before the Commission on 04 February 2011 at 03.00PM to showcase why penalty under Section 20(1) should not be levied on them. 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.
14 January 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (ST)
Copy through Dr. Hem Prakash, Public Information Officer & Chief Medical Officer (NFSG.):
1- Dr. J. K. Basu, CMO & Deemed PIO.
2- Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sakkarwal, Office Superintendent;
Page 3 of 3