Central Information Commission
Mr.V B Jain vs Delhi Jal Board, Gnctd on 26 April, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000468/12139
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000468
Appellant : Mr. V B Jain
A-99, Sec-41, Noida,
Uttar Pradesh - 201301
Respondent : Mr. R. Tiwari
PIO & Assistant Commissioner (T) Delhi Jal Board, GNCTD O/o Assistant Commissioner (T), Varunalaya Ph-II, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005 RTI application filed on : 09/11/2010 PIO replied : 03/12/2010 First Appeal filed on : Not mentioned.
Hearing Notice Issued on : 30/03/2011 Date of Hearing : 26/04/2011 Information Sought:- The particulars of information required.
A) No reply to my representation addressed to CEO (received in CEO office vide Diary No. 6520/G dated 15.09.10) has been provided to me.
Copy of the observations/comments/notings recorded by various persons- officers on my representation to CEO be provided.
B) In my representation it was requested to decide the issue by any one out of three methods suggested for reimbursement of balance amount of Rs. 233380/- which are elaborated as under:
i) Balance amount be reimbursed keeping in view the judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi (copy enclosed with claims No 1 to 5) bearing No WP( C) Nr3763 2002 decided on 12.05.08 in case of KNS Bindra Petitioner v/s U.0.1 News paper cutting regarding Judgment of Honable High court of Delhi ( copy enclosed with claim Nos.
1 to 5) bearing No WP (c) No. 13435-37/2006 included with WP (c) No 12968-70/2006 decided on 20.08.08 Govt of NCT Delhi Petitioner, Dr Prem Parkash and G.R.Arya respondents respectively.
If claim has been rejected, reasons there of be provided on thi account.
ii) Or balance amount be reimbursed amount to Rs. 2,33,380/-. Since my wife Smt. Raj Jain was suffering from advanced stage Malignancy cancer hence expired on 24.11.09 therefore her case is covered with in the circumstances mentioned in Ministry of Health & family welfare CHGS (P) Division No. 4-18-2005- C&P ( Vol I-P-L(1) ) dated 20.02.09 regarding full reimbursement of expenditure incurred by beneficiary after relaxing the rules. If claim has been rejected reasons there of be provided on this account.
iii) Or let balance amount be reimbursed amounting to Rs. 2,33,380/- by invoking my right to claim the expenditure incurred by me through my own resources that is through insurance companies amounting to Rs. 6-84,479.00 because no circular has been issued or rules has been prescribed by DJB regarding payment / reimbursement of medical expenses to beneficiaries from two sources i.e. from Insurance companies and by the DJB If claim has been rejected reasons there of be provided on this account. (C) Amount of payment released be provided against each individual bill submitted by me as under for the treatment of my wife Late Smt. Raj Jain.
i) 33 bills submitted by me. Vide M(A) Diary No. 3674 dt 05.09.08
ii) 15 Bills submitted by me vide M(A) Diary No. 4103 dt. 06.10.08
iii) 14 Bills submitted by me vide M(A) Diary No. 6800 dt. 07.11.08 An amount of Rs. 116600/- was paid by DJB on 20/03/2009 for the above mentioned bills( i, ii & iii)
iv) 17 (+3 bills claiming nil) Bills submitted by me vide M(A) Diary No.5223 dt.15.01.09
v) 18 (+6 Bills claiming nil) Sills submitted by me vide AC(T) Diary No.28/rn dt.17.03.09 An amount of Rs. 24064 was paid by DJB on 31/07/2009 for the above mentioned bills(iv & v).
vi) 25 (+6 Bills claiming nil) Bills submitted by me vide AC(T) Diary No. 69/m dt.17.06.09 An amount of Rs. 38171/- was paid by DJB on 01/01/2010 for the above mentioned bill.
vii) 25(+7 bills claiming nil) Bills submitted by me vide AC(T) Diary no. 99/m dt.24/08/2009
viii) 39 bills submitted by me vide AC(T) Diary No. 120/m dt. 20/10/2009
ix) 28 bills submitted by me vide AC(T) Diary No. 135/m dt. 30/10/2009 An amount of Rs. 193402 was paid by DJB on 19/05/2010 for the above mentioned bill. Total 214 Bills (+22 Bills claiming Nil) Reply from the PIO:
The appellant was given the point wise reply to the queries asked by him. The requested information or part of the requested information based upon the reply given by the deemed PIO to the extent of his/their jurisdiction is enclosed.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by PIO.
FAA's Order:-
It was ordered to provide the necessary information asked for in the original application as per admissibility under RTI Act.
Grounds for Second appeal:
Despite first appellate authority's order no information provided.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. V B Jain;
Respondent: Mr. R. Tiwari, PIO & Assistant Commissioner (T); Mr. Ashok Kumar, Dy. Director(F&A);
The PIO has given certain information to the Appellant. The Appellant wants reasons for certain actions and his claim not been passed in full. The PIO admits that the claims have not been passed in full and states that the matter is being reexamined actively and states that he will inform the appellant about the final findings before 30 May 2011.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to send the findings after the reexamination to the Appellant before 30 May 2011.
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 26 April 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (RR)