Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Sachin Kumar Sharma vs Ministry Of Health & Family Welfare on 28 October, 2021

                               के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                             बाबा गंगनाथ माग , मुिनरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नई  द ली
                             द ली, New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या   / Second Appeal No. CIC/MH&FW/A/2019/114951
                                              FW/A/2019/114951

Shri Sachin Kumar Sharma                                     ...   अपीलकता /Appellant
                                  VERSUS/बनाम

CPIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare                ...   ितवादीगण /Respondent
Through: Shri Thangkholun Haokip - Under
Secretary

Date of Hearing                        :    28.10.2021
Date of Decision                       :    28.10.2021
Chief Information Commissioner         :    Shri Y. K. Sinha

 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on               :   31.10.2018, 05.11.2018
PIO replied on                         :   31.12.2018, 16.01.2019
First Appeal filed on                  :   18.02.2019
First Appellate Order on               :   12.03.2019
2ndAppeal/complaint received on        :   25.03.2019
 Information sought

and background of the case:

Perusal of records of the case reveal that the Appellant had filed two RTI Applications dated 31.10.2018 and 05.11.2018. One of the RTI applications application related to information regarding work/role/contribution of Dr. L Swasticharan under National Tobacco Control Programme and National Tobacco Testing Laboratories in India since his appointment in DGHS/Ministry of Health & Family Welfare. Among the ten queries raised in this RTI application, some are as follows:

The other RTI application dated 31.10.2018 filed by the Appellant was responded to by the PIO, MoHFW vide reply dated 16thJanuary 2019 in the following manner:

A copy of DoPT O.M. No. 11/2/2013 11/2/2013-IR(Pt.) IR(Pt.) dated 14.08.2013 had been enclosed with the reply which clarifies that disclosure of personal Page 2 of 4 information of employees is debarred in terms of the Apex Court decision in the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande Deshpande.

Dissatisfied with the reply from the CPIO the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.02.2019. The FAA/Director vide order dated February 2019upheld the PIO's reply in the following words:

Thus two parallel RTI applications dated 31.10.2018 and 05.11.2018 one related to Shri Praveen Sinha and the other about Dr. L Swasticharan were filed by the Appellant.

The CPIO/Under Secretary vide letter dated 31.12.2018 responded that with reference to point no. 10(v) the Rules ules regarding testing of tobacco products under COTPA 2003, have not been notified. Reason is not available. Further, he transferred the RTI application, for the rest of the information to Dte. GHS and International Health and International Cooperation Divisions of Ministry of Health and Family Welfare under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Aggrieved with this reply, the Appellant filed another First Appeal, which was decided by the FAA/Director FAA vide order dated 12.03.2019 .2019 in the following manner:-

A reply dated 16.01.2019 from the IC Section of Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, is also part of the Second Appeal, Appeal whereby queries no. 6 and 7 about international travels of Dr. Swasticharan for attending conferences, workshops, meetings and cost incurred by the Government for attending such international conferences had been answered.

Still aggrieved and dissatisfied dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission by filing two Second Appeal Appeals, both dated 25.03.2019.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A written submission has been received from CPIO CPIO/MoHFW vide letter dated 29.09.2021,, stating as under:

Perusal of the above submission and its enclosures reveal that it relates to the other RTI application dated 31.10.2018, wherein queries about Shri Praveen Sinha, National Consultant(Policy) had been raised by the Appellant.

In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, 19, hearing was scheduled tthrough hrough video conference after giving prior notice to both the parties. Respondent alone attended the hearing through video conference, while the Appellant remained absent and has not communicated the cause of his absence to the Commission. Respondent from DGHS has not attended the hearing.

Decision:

Perusal of the above records reveal that information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, has been provided to the Appellant.. The Appellant is not present to buttress his case or expla explain why he has mixed up two RTI applications.. Be that as it may, considering the confusion created due to proceedings related to two separate RTI applications being combined in one case, the Commission advises the Appellant to be careful in future and file only one Second Appeal/Complaint arising out of one RTI Application, failing which the case will not be entertained at all, in future.

The appeal is thus disposed off with no further directions.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई.

वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु मु यय सू सूच चना ना आयु आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 of 4