Central Information Commission
Pankaj Arora vs Pg Institute Of Medical Education & ... on 27 August, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066
F. No.CIC/PGIME/C/2017/121556
Date of Hearing : 25.07.2018
Date of Decision : 25.07.2018
Appellant/Complainant : Shri Pankaj Arora
Respondent : CPIO
PGIMER, Nehru Hospital
Through: Prof. Arunangshu Behera
- ACPIO, Deptt. Of General Surgery
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 01.02.2017
PIO replied on : 06.08.2017
First Appeal filed on :
First Appellate Order on :
2nd Appeal/complaint received on :
Information soughtand background of the case:
The complainant's son Master Yash Arora due to alleged medical negligence in liver transplant surgery performed at Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon. Vide RTI application dated 01.02.2017, the complainant sought information seeking following information:-
a. The copy of such FIR 46/5 which handed over or received by Asst. Admin officer, Nursing Cell MS office, PGIMER Chd from Incharge, Thana Sadar Gurugram.
b. How much Paediatric live donor Orthotropic Liver Transplant has been performed in PGIMER Chd alongwith documentary evidence? Which is mandatory to certified that PGI Chandigarh is competent & experienced authority for giving expert opinion in such case of Pediatric Liver Donor Orthotropic Liver Transplant As per Supreme Court guideline i.e. Jacob Mathew Vs State of Punjab. c. The certified copies of complete medical records (digital & paper) of my child /victim & both liver donors verified by billing details as per receiving.
d. Copy of videography CDs of both surgeries of donors & recipient. e. Copy of final expert medical opinion report in such case. CPIO/PGIMER, Chandigarh vide letter dated 03.03.2017 informed as under:-
1 - Please contact the Medical Superintendent Office for the copy of the FIR 2 - None 3 & 4 - N.A 5 - Please contact the medical Superintendent Office for the final expert medical opinion report.
CPIO, Medical Superintendent Officer vide letter dated 06.08.2017 furnished information on points A and E as under:-
A. The FIR 46/15 has not been received in this office.
E. The report of the medical board has already been sent to Sh. Vijay Kumar, Inspector, Office Incharge, Thana Sadar, Gurgaon vide this office letter dated 08.12.2016, a copy of forwarding letter of this office is enclosed herewith.
Dissatisfied with response of respondent, the complainant approached the Commission.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both parties are present. Applicant contends that he has not been given appropriate information, though he admits that his queries have been merely responded. The applicant has narrated that a Board was constituted to investigate the case of medical negligence by Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon which led to the death of his son. However, the Respondents have intentionally avoided providing the copy of the FIR, medical record of the deceased child and the expert medical opinion, as sought by him. The applicant alleges that PGI Chandigarh which was expected to take an independent and impartial view in this matter, has failed to do so. The Expert opinion has eventually been botched up by forging records, either at the end of Medanta hospital itself or by tacit involvement of the PGI, Chandigarh.
The applicant has made out a case on various counts against the PGIMER, Chandigarh, police authorities and the Medanta Hospital. Some of the important contentions pointed out by the appellant are as follows:
I) lapses in police investigation have vitiated the entire investigation. The evidence viz. the medical records of the deceased child was allegedly seized by the police after passage of six months from the registration of first Police complaint on 28.07.2014.
II) The complete set of documents/medical records so seized from the accused hospital by the police and enlisted in the seizure memo dated 04.02.2015 (certified by Dy. Civil Surgeon, Gurgaon) was not handed over to PGIMER, Chandigarh.
III) The FIR No. 46/2015 uploaded on official website (CCTN) of Haryana Police contains information about diary no., date, numbers of allegations, place of occurrence which are contrary to the hard copy of the FIR provided to the appellant;
Against PGIMER, Chandigarh:
IV) The medical Board constituted at PGIMER was not competent to give medical expert opinion on the subject because of lack of experience of paediatric liver transplantation surgery.
V) According to the PGIMER, they had not received copy of the FIR No. 46/2015, and hence opinion given without consideration of the factual allegations contained in the complaint, is not likely to have any materially relevant data.
VI) The report received from Medical Board of PGIMER contains misleading facts about vital occurrences and hence is not a reliable report based on actual facts.
Apart from the above, the applicant has pointed out a number of technical violations by the Respondents which has further aggrieved the appellant, who is seeking a fair trial of the case of medical negligence which has claimed the life of his son.
Respondent appearing from the Deptt of Surgery, PGIMER has replied to the contentions of the applicant reiterating that information against queries 1-3 have been provided while rest of the information were to be provided by Deptt Of Hepatology. It was learnt that representative from Department of Hepatology, was conspicuously absent to shed light in this case.
Decision:
At the outset, it is noted that plea/s of the applicant deem it necessary that the case at hand is converted into a Second Appeal.
After hearing contentions of the parties present for hearing, the Commission finds that the responses/information which have so far been received from the Respondents, are deficient and lacking inasmuch as they lack concrete and correct facts. Records of the case and the conduct of Respondent during the hearing reveal that Department of Hepatology, Deptt of Genral Surgery and Medical Superintendent's office have been passing the onus on each other endlessly. The Commission expresses concern over such act/omission on the part of the Respondent's officials, particularly in view of the fact that the PGIMER is a premier medical institution and was expected to have conducted a unbiased, responsible and proper verification of facts in this unfortunate case. Suffice to say that the way this case has been handled and presented before the Commission by apparently responsible officials of three departments of PGIMER, Chandigarh, has failed to elicit any confidence on the Respondent organisation per se and reflects rather dismally in this case.
The Commission is not inclined to address any inter se issues between the various officials of the PGIMER and their water tight work allocations, hence deems it appropriate that the Prof. Jagat Ram, Director, PGIMER, Chandigarh is appointed the deemed PIO, in this case, to: 1. Ensure that actual custodian of the information, from concerned department provides adequate, correct and succinct information against each of five queries raised by the appellant vide RTI Application dated 01.02.2017. The complete response shall be provided to the appellant within two weeks of receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission;
2. Conduct an Enquiry affixing responsibility of the official responsible for denial and obstruction of information till date. The Enquiry Report shall also indicate the proposed action to be taken against such official found guilty of suppression of facts and giving misleading information, thereby violating provisions of the RTI Act.
Since the appellant has already submitted detailed contentions before the Commission vide emails, no further submissions are sought from the appellant.
Before parting with the case, the Commission notes that this is an unfortunate but glaring example of the abject indifference of the medical institutions to the plight of the patients, at the tacit support of the law enforcing mechanism - the police. If organisations like PGIMER fail to rise above such mediocrity, patients and victims of medical injustice will have to lose all hopes of good medical treatment in this country.
The Commission shall take a final view upon receipt of the above mentioned documents from the Director, PGIMER, Chandigarh - which must reach the Commission by or within 20.09.2018.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(R.P.Grover) Designated Officer