Central Information Commission
Lalit Suman vs Directorate Of Health Services Head ... on 9 October, 2025
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/DHSHD/A/2024/613240
Lalit Suman .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Directorate of Health Services,
Delhi Govt. Dispensary Building,
A-2, Paschim Vihar, Opp. Radha
Krishna Mandir, New Delhi - 110063 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 06.10.2025
Date of Decision : 08.10.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 21.12.2023
CPIO replied on : 10.01.2024
First appeal filed on : 31.01.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 21.02.2024
Compliance of FAA's order : 01.03.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 27.03.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an (online) RTI application dated 21.12.2023 seeking the following information:
"1. What action has been taken on Complaint forwarded against RATTAN SHAFAKHANA, SANT BUCCHI JI DHAM, J 29A J-30 RAMESH Page 1 of 4 NAGAR BANDARWALI KHUI, RAMESH NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110015 to Directorate General of Health Services, F-17, Karkardooma, Industrial Area, Delhi-32, through Letter F. No. 3(21)/2021/DBCP/428, by Dr. Raghuram Ayyagari, Registrar, DBCP ?
2. How many Fake Clinics/Shafakhanas/Health Service Providers have been acted upon by the Directorate of Health Services in West District, after complaint of DMC and DBCP? Please Provide a Detailed Report regarding the same."
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 10.01.2024 stating as under:
"1.No such letter (letter F.No.3(21)/2021/DBCP/428, As mentioned in S. No. 1 Question of RTI Application) has been received by the West District Office till date neither from Directorate General of Health services nor from Dr. Raghuram Ayyagari, Registrar, DBCP.
2.In reply of Point No. 2 of RTI Application, this is to submit that District has conducted total 68 Inspections in last Five years and submitted detailed Inspection reports to Anti quackery cell, DHS and all the councils (Delhi Medical Council, Delhi Bhartiya Chikitsa Parishad, Board of Homeopathic System of Medicine) as "being the action taking authority"
under their respective Council Acts."
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 31.01.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 21.02.2024, held as under.
"The appeal was conducted on 21.2.2024, I/C(AQC), PIO(RTI) were present in the appeal but as informed through e-mail could not able to present in the appeal. I/C(AQC) is directed to provide the revised reply within 7 days to the appellant.
Order passed and appeal disposed of accordingly."
4. In compliance of FAA's order the PIO furnished a revised reply dated 01.03.2024 to the appellant as under:
"Subject: Revised reply of Information sought by Mr./Ms. Lalit Suman Under RTI ACT 2005, ID. No. DGHS-2023/60415 Ref: First Appellate Authority order no. RTI ID- DROHS/R/2023/60415 date 21/02/2024 Page 2 of 4 Sir Point wise reply of information sought by Mr. Lalit Suman the RTI ACT 2005 is given as under:
1. Inspection of Rattan, Shafakhana done by CDMO (W) Twice and inspection report dated 21/08/2013 and 09/09/11 had been forwarded to Secretary, Delhi Medical Council for further necessary action. Copy of action taken report enclosed.
2. Action is to be taken at the level of Delhi Medical Council."
5. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: He, along with Shri Aashirwad Bhartiya present in person. Respondent: Dr. Pragya Singh, Addl. Chief District Medical Officer present in person.
6. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on respondent while filing the same in CIC on 27.03.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirms non-service.
7. Written submission of the Appellant is taken on record.
8. The Appellant while reiterating the contents of his RTI application stated that action taken report of Delhi Bhartiya Chikitsa Parishad has not been given to him till date. He contended that the information was intentionally hidden by the Respondent to shield the ill-practice of fake doctors who did not possess the valid degree.
9. The Respondent submitted that point-wise reply along with relevant available information has already been provided to the Appellant earlier. She further apprised the Bench that their office is not the Competent Authority to take action on the issue flagged by the Appellant. On a complaint of the Appellant, inspections were conducted twice by their authority and inspection report of the same has already been forwarded to the DMC (Delhi Medical Council) for necessary action. At the behest of the Commission, she Page 3 of 4 volunteered to provide the inspection report dated 21.08.2013 and 09.09.2011 to the Appellant.
Decision:
10. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records observes that as far as RTI application is concerned appropriate reply has been given by the Respondent vide letters dated 10.01.2024 and 01.03.2024 which are as per the provisions of the RTI Act. Accordingly, the same are upheld.
11. However, to allay the apprehension of the Appellant and as per hearing proceedings, the Respondent is directed to provide copy of Inspection Report dated 21.08.2013 and dated 09.09.2011, free of charge to the Appellant. This direction should be complied with in one week from the date of receipt of this order.
12. FAA to ensure compliance of the directions.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Copy To:
The FAA, Additional Director Health Services Hqrs., Directorate of Health Services, F-17, Karkardooma, Delhi-110092 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)