Central Information Commission
Veljibhai K. Jat vs Kandla Port Trust on 11 January, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/KPOTR/A/2020/124856
Veljibhai K. Jat ......अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Deendayal Port Trust, Port
Hospital, RTI Cell, Gopalpuri,
Gandhidham-Kuchchh,
Gujarat-370240 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 10/01/2022
Date of Decision : 10/01/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 18/03/2020
CPIO replied on : 06/05/2020
First appeal filed on : 28/05/2020
First Appellate Authority order : 29/06/2020
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 21/08/2020
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 18.03.2020 seeking the following information;
"The DPT has its own Medical Attendance Rules dully notified in Government Gazette. Since last few years the DPI Hospital Administration is 1 following CGHS rates for various pathological and radiological investigations' and various treatments availed in referral hospitals., in this regard the following information may be supplied:-
(o) Whether Ministry of Shipping has issued any guidelines for adoption of CGHS rates in Port Trust Hospitals? If yes, please provide a copy of the same:.
(p) Whether CGHS has approved any rates for Gandhidham or any city of Kachchh district? If yes, the same may be provided. If no, the approved CGHS rates of which city are followed by DPI Hospital?
(q) Date of enforcement of CGHS rates in DPT Hospital for various laboratory, tests and various treatments availed in referral hospitals. (r) Whether the approval of competent authority has taken for enforcement of CGHS rates, in OPT Hospital for various pathological and radiological investigations and various treatments availed in referral hospitals? If yes, the copy of noting sheet under which the approval has obtained.
(s) Whether the approval of Board has taken for enforcement of CGHS rates in DPT. Hospital for various pathological and radiological investigations and various treatments availed in referral hospitals? If yes the copy of Board note along with enclosures and Board resolution may be provided.
(t) Whether the approval of Ministry of Shipping has taken for enforcement of CGHS rates in DPT Hospital for various pathological and radiological investigations and various treatments availed in referral hospitals as per a letter of Ministry of Shipping No. A-38011 /1 /2000-PE-I dated 20/09/2019 stating that the Major Port Trust, shall not adopt the rules/guidelines/orders etc of Central Government (DoPT/DoPttPW/MOF) without the approval of Ministry of Shipping? If yes the copy of ministry's approval may be provided.
(u) Since, Kandla Port Trust (Medical Attendance) Regulations, 2000 are notified in Government Gazette vide No. G.S.R. 230(E), dated 07/03/2000, whether any gazette notifications for amendments regarding adaptation of CGHS rates in Kandla Port Trust (Medical Attendance) Regulations, 2000 is issued? If yes a copy of the same may be provided. (v) Whether eligible class of accommodation for indoor patients as per Clause 3 (xiii)(iii)(h) Kandla Port Trust (Medical Attendance) Regulations, 2000 is revised- due-to -wage revisions? If yes, the copy of the same may be provided. If no, the relative eligibility of class of accommodation for indoor patients followed by Hospital may be provided. (w) The copy of latest EOI issued to various hospitals/pathological laboratories/radiological centers for empanelment with DPT as referral hospitals/ pathological laboratories/radiological centers.
(x) A latest List of Hospitals/pathological laboratories/radiological centers submitted their EOI for empanelment with DPT and a list of Hospitals/pathological laboratories/ radiological centers finally empanelled with DPT.2
(y) The copy of EOI submitted by Sterling Hospital, Gandhidham for empanelment of their hospitals/pathological laboratories/radiological centers with DPT as referral hospitals/ pathological laboratories/radiological center. (z) Presently Sterling Hospital, Gandhidham, is denying to carry out certain pathological and radiological investigations, in this 'regard whether Medical Department has issued any such restrictions on certain pathological and radiological investigations? If yes copy of letter to be provided. (aa)Whether, any bills are passed by Medical Department ignoring CGHS rates and as per scheduled rates of particular hospital under special case since adoption of CGHS rates in DPT Hospital? The details of the same with respective rule/provision of CGHS or DOP may be provided.
(bb)The list of pathological and radiological investigations which are not prescribed by DPT Hospital may, be provided. It may also be clarified under which CGHS/KPT M.A. Rules these investigations are not prescribed by DPT Hospital. (cc)The expenditure on Medicines incurred by DPT for last 10 years may be provided."
The CPIO replied to the appellant on 29.04.2020 stating as follows:-
"...the information available with Medical Department can be supplied to you on payment of cost of information of Rs. 346/- (Rs. 2X173 pages).
The CPIO, upon receipt of averred RTI fees furnished a copy of relevant information to the appellant on 06.05.2020.
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 28.05.2020. FAA's order dated 29.06.2020 upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the ground of non-receipt of information against points no.3(u) and 3(bb) of RTI Application. He further harped on the fact that false information has been furnished by the CPIO in response to point no. 3(aa).
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present through audio-conference.
Respondent: Dr. A J Chellani, Dr. Dy. CMO & PIO present through audio- conference.3
The Commission at the outset apprised the Appellant that the queries raised by him through the instant RTI Application majorly are in the nature of seeking clarifications/ inferences from the CPIO which do not conform to Section 2(f) of RTI Act. In response to it, he contested that a copy of Kandla Port Trust circular as sought for at point no. 3(u) has not been provided to him till date.
The PIO relied on his written submission dated 07.01.2022 and submitted that that the information sought by the Appellant are more in the nature of queries seeking clarifications/explanations which are outside Section 2(f) of RTI Act, yet the CPIO & FAA have provided available information to him in the best possible manner. To a query from the Commission, he explained that such information is partially available in the public domain while some of it has not been uploaded on their website as it is dynamic in nature and keeps changing within short intervals.
Decision:
The Commission observes from a perusal of the facts on record that the Appellant has not sought for any information at points no. 3(u), 3(aa) and 3(bb) of RTI Application as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act as he has sought for the interpretation and deduction by the CPIO, yet the CPIO has provided a very detailed clarification by giving reference to a circular to assist the Appellant which is in the spirit of the RTI Act. Also, during the hearing , the CPIO provided the subtle clarification about the list of Hospitals, Gandhidham and other referral hospitals which is in the spirit of RTI Act.
The Appellant may note that outstretching the interpretation of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act to include deductions, inferences to be drawn by the CPIO is unwarranted as it casts immense pressure on the CPIOs to ensure that they provide the correct deduction/inference to avoid being subject to the penal provisions of the RTI Act. It will be relevant here to cite a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of CBSE vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay&Ors[CIVIL APPEAL NO.6454 of 2011]wherein it was held as under:
"35. At this juncture, it is necessary to clear some misconceptions about the RTI Act. The RTI Act provides access to all information that is available and existing............ A public authority is also not required to furnish information which require drawing of inferences and/or making of assumptions. It is also not required to provide `advice' or `opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any `opinion' or `advice' to 4 an applicant. The reference to `opinion' or `advice' in the definition of `information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority. Many public authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act." (Emphasis Supplied) However, upon insistence of the Appellant, the CPIO is directed to provide a copy of the circular Kandla Port Trust (Medical Attendance) Regulations, 2000 notified in Government Gazette vide No. G.S.R. 230(E), dated 07/03/2000 against point no. 3(u), free of cost to the Appellant through speed post and via email. The said direction should be complied by the CPIO within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
ADVISORY A pertinent issue emanating from the instant case and similar nature of cases dealt with by this bench in the recent past is that a number of RTI Applications are being filed for seeking clarifications on various policy matters of DPT Hospitals and other Public Authorities. It will be in the best interest of DPT to explore the viability of introducing and/or keep updating its FAQs Section on their website wherein the most commonly sought for clarifications can be identified and relevant information in that regard can be placed in the public domain in keeping with the letter and spirit of suomotu disclosures prescribed under Section 4 of the RTI Act. This will also relieve the public authority from the burden of RTI Applications which are filed for merely seeking clarifications and not any specific record.
In pursuance of the aforesaid advisory, the CPIO is directed to place a copy of this order before their competent authority for taking appropriate action.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) 5 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 6