Central Information Commission
Ganesan S vs Ministry Of Health & Family Welfare on 25 March, 2026
के ीय सू चना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/MH&FW/A/2025/104059
Ganesan S .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
PUBLIC HEALTH FOUNDATION OF
INDIA 4TH FLOOR H NO. 60
PROPERTY NO KHASRANO 293,
294,295 WESTEND MARG .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
SAIDULAJAB EXTN. SAKET DELHI
110030
Date of Hearing : 24.03.2026
Date of Decision : 25.03.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Jaya Varma Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 13.11.2024
CPIO replied on : 10.12.2024
First appeal filed on : 18.12.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 23.01.2025
2nd Appeal dated : 03.02.2025
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.11.2024(offline) seeking the following information:
"Canada's International Development Research Centre (IDRC) gave a foreign grant of Canadian dollar 1,906,000 (approximately Rs 11.15 Cr) to the Public Health Foundation of India under project number 107344 in November 2013 for CIC/MH&FW/A/2025/104059 Page 1 of 6 the purpose of "Promoting health, livelihood and sustainable livestock systems in peri-urban ecosystems of India".
Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI) comes under Right to Information (RTI) Act.
Under the provisions of the RTI Act, a citizen has a right to seek such information from a public authority which is held by the public authority, or which is held under its control.
This right includes inspection of work, documents and records; taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; and taking certified samples of material held by the public authority or held under the control of the public authority.
Under the RTI Act, I would like to inspect all your records connected/relevant to the huge grant received by you from Canada's International Development Research Centre (IDRC) as given above. The records shall include, but not limited to the following.
1. Records showing MOU or Agreement signed, if any, between Canada's IDRC and PHFI in connection with project number 107344.
2. MOU/ Agreement signed if any between PHFI and institutions/universities in connection with project number 107344 with specific reference to analysis of Indian dairy milk sample for pesticide content published in article titled "Pesticide Residues in Peri-Urban Bovine Milk from India and Risk Assessment:
A Multicenter Study".
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341407273 Pesticide Residues in Per i-Urban Bovine Milk from India and Risk Assessment A Multicenter Study
3. Records showing Form FC-4 as submitted to the Secretary of Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, FCRA wing, New Delhi for the financial year 2013-14 with specific reference to the project number 107344.
4. Records showing transfer of part of this fund to other association/organisation/institution/universities in India.
5. Health Ministry's Screening Committee (HMSC) is an Inter-Ministerial High Level Committee. This has the powers and mandate to carry out the screening and clearance of proposals involving international collaboration/funding for scientific studies in humans, animals, plants and environment. Further details can be obtained from the link: https://hmsc.dhr.gov.in/hmscguidelines. I want to inspect all your rrecords showing permission granted by HMSC for conducting research involving analysis of dairy milk samples for pesticide residues in five different states namely: Punjab, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Orissa and Assam as published in the study given above.
CIC/MH&FW/A/2025/104059 Page 2 of 66. Record showing submission of annual report and final progress report to Department of Health Research/ICMR. This shall include, among others, annual reports, statements of account, exact amount of budget used under different heads etc., with reference to the above project.
7. Records showing necessary approvals obtained from State Health Authorities for the field work (collecting dairy milk samples and their transportation in special container maintaining -20°C) as required by Section 16 of the guidelines issued by HMSC.
8. Records showing mutual agreement on IPR claims as submitted to HMSC in conformity with Section 14 of the guidelines issued by HMSC.
9. HMSC does not permit sharing of raw data by Indian Principal Investigator (PI). Therefore, I would like to see your records to confirm that all the original raw data are retained by you. These raw data, shall among other includes, number of milk samples collected, date and place of collection, mode of transport used for transferring samples, expenses incurred in manpower resources, laboratory data on pesticide residues in each of the 1183 samples analyzed, laboratory generated chromatograms etc. I will be there at your office for inspection of records by 10 am on 21st Nov 2024. Please ensure that all the relevant records are kept ready for inspection. During my visit I will be accompanied by my colleague Ms. Shantwana Dixit, a citizen of India to assist me in quick inspection of records."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 10.12.2024 stating as under:
"Point no.1:The Project in question is sponsored and supported by IDRC (International Development Research Centre).
It is an international collaborative research study involving partner institutions. The MoU and agreements between the partners are confidential and sharing contents of the same is not permissible per the project agreement. Point no.2:As already mentioned, the MoU and agreements between the partners are confidential and sharing contents of the same is not permissible per the project agreement.
Point no.3:This information is available on PHFI website www.phfi.org Point no.4:This information is confidential and sharing contents of the same is not permissible per the project agreement.
Point no.5 to 9:The information requested is not be available for confirmation."
3. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.12.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 23.01.2025, held as under:
CIC/MH&FW/A/2025/104059 Page 3 of 6"1. The Project in question is sponsored and supported by IDRC, an International Agency. It is an International Collaborative Research Study involving partner institutions. The MoU and agreements between the partners are confidential and sharing this will be detrimental to the interests of the partners undertaking the project.
2. Information with regard to Form FC-4 as submitted to the Secretary of Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs is available on PHFI website www.phfi.org in downloadable form.
3. The PIO seems to have based the decision to decline details sought by you on exemptions allowed by Section 8 (d) of the RTI Act. I do hope the above information clarifies the issues raised by you. Since no grounds are found that warrant a different view, I therefore uphold the decision of the PIO and see no reason to grant a personal hearing sought by you."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present in person.
Respondent: Ms. Kalpana Swamy, CPIO-cum-Academic Registrar and Ms. Neha Tomar, Head (Legal), attended the hearing in person.
5. The Appellant stated that in the instant RTI Application, he had sought inspection of the relevant records but the CPIO has denied the same without quoting any suitable exemption clause of Section 8 of the RTI Act. Thereafter, the FAA vide order dated 23.01.2025, has denied the information under Section 8 (1) (d) of the RTI Act, which is wrong.
6. The Respondent submitted that the disclosure of information as sought by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application would harm competitive position of third party and the same is held in their records under fiduciary capacity. Therefore, the same is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act. However, their office can now provide an opportunity of inspection of the relevant records to the Appellant after invoking the provisions of Severability under Section 10 of the RTI Act.
Decision:
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observes that CIC/MH&FW/A/2025/104059 Page 4 of 6 the CPIO vide letter dated 10.12.2024 has denied the inspection of the relevant records to the Appellant without quoting any suitable exemption clause of Section 8 of the RTI Act. Accordingly, the Commission admonishes the CPIO for treating the instant matter in a cavalier manner and cautions him to remain careful in future while dealing with the matters related to the RTI Act.
8. In the light of submissions made by the Respondent during the hearing, the Commission directs Ms. Kalpana Swamy, CPIO-cum-Academic Registrar, to afford an opportunity of inspection of relevant records to the Appellant on a mutually decided date and time within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Before giving a date to the Appellant, the Respondent should supply him a list of files connected with the query in the RTI application giving File Nos., Subject of the file, and total number of pages of correspondence in each file. Further, on the day of inspection, all relevant records must be brought at one place to facilitate inspection and not make the Appellant run around various departments of the Respondent Public Authority. Intimation of date and time should be sent to the Appellant well in advance in writing. Copy of records as may be desired by the Appellant be provided to him upon receipt of requisite fees as per RTI Rules. Information which are exempt under the RTI Act may be redacted/severed.
9. The FAA to ensure compliance with the above directions.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Jaya Varma Sinha (जया वमा िस ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) (Ashutosh Vasistha) Dy. Registrar 011- 26107042 CIC/MH&FW/A/2025/104059 Page 5 of 6 Copy To:
The FAA, PUBLIC HEALTH FOUNDATION OF INDIA 4TH FLOOR H NO, 60 PROPERTY NO KHASRA NO 293,294,295 WESTEND MARG SAIDULAJAB EXTN. SAKET, DELHI-110030 CIC/MH&FW/A/2025/104059 Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)