Central Information Commission
Mr.Rakesh Kumar vs Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare on 27 January, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003402/17118
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003402
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar
House No. 3071
14 JER-24 D
Chandigarh
Respondent : Central Public Information Officer
PGIMER (Nehru Hospital) Chandigarh RTI application filed on : 26/02/2011 PIO replied : Not Mentioned First appeal filed on : 09/04/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 18/08/2010 Second Appeal received on : 13/10/2011 Information Sought:
Please provide the information about the actions taken against Mr. Ashok (resides in h.n.3072/14JEF Sector 12) who has been creating nuisance and copy of minutes of the house allotment committee meeting.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
No reply from PIO.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
No reply from PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA): The FAA stated that "The appellant's grievance is that Mr. Ashok who has bee residing in house no 3072/14JEF in sector 12, was allotted house no.12/14JEF no.8 keeping in view various complaints submitted against him as he was creating nuisance in the neighborhood. Even the complaints were also lodged with the police but no action has been taken. The appellant now seeks for a copy of minutes of the house allotment committee meeting. He was informed that the minutes have been prepared and signed by the members concerned but approval of DPGI is pending. The nodal officer was asked to supply the relevant abstract from the minutes of house allotment committee immediately as soon as the same are approved by the director, PGI. The appellant was satisfied with this . Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed off.1
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
No information received even after FAA's order.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Rakesh Kumar through video conferencing at NIC studio in Chandigarh. Respondent: Mr. Rajnish Anand, PIO & Administrative Officer through video conferencing at NIC studio in Chandigarh.
The Respondent states that he has given the minutes of the meeting to the Appellant. The Appellant admits this.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
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.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 27 January 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AS) 2