Central Information Commission
Rajiv Dhar Jayal vs Ministry Of Health & Family Welfare on 2 December, 2024
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मार्ग, मुनिरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MH&FW/A/2023/145153
Shri RAJIV DHAR JAYAL ... अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रतिवादीगण /Respondent
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Date of Hearing : 28.11.2024
Date of Decision : 28.11.2024
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 14.08.2023
PIO replied on : 13.09.2023
First Appeal filed on : 18.09.2023
First Appellate Order on : 18.10.2023
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 28.10.2023
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.08.2023 seeking information on following points:-
"1) REGULATIONS for Organisation, Instruction and Examination of CLASSES, Syllabi of the various Courses of Instruction, Medallion, Label, and Pendant Rules and other relevant information, Revised Edition, 1977 or later. (14 PAGES)
2) General Regulations of the St John Ambulance Association (India), NINTH EDITION 1966 or later. (4 PAGES)
3) Single page forwarded request J-11011/34/13/SJ/UP Lot No.26 for issue of 1439 proficiency certificates from U.P. State Centre. (1 PAGE)
4) Single page from Dispatch Register of Uttar Pradesh of Uttar Pradesh LOT NO.26, index 118 and 119, relating to certificates dispatched on 26-7-2013 and 2-7-2013. (1 PAGE)
5) Single page with Serial Numbers 90 to 98, providing the information SI.NO 95, Ref No.SJA/182. Date 31/10/12, Certificate 158 (SFA Prof) New, Centre... Gonda/Lucknow, DD/Amt/Date, Printer/Dispatched date. (1 PAGE)
6) Examination Forms
(a) Reference No 182, 31.10.12, PNJ/21/12, STATE Uttar Pradesh-09, CLASS-
Professionals, Batch No. 000001, Sheet No. 001, 002, 003, Centre GONDA, Examination Date 20.09.12, Number of Candidates examined and passed -
25.
(1) Lot26>0022 Page Barcode No. "A121643" (1 PAGE)
(ii) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. "A121644" (1 PAGE) Page 1
(iii) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. "A121645" (1 PAGE)
(iv) Lot26 > 0022 Page Barcode No. *A121646" (1 PAGE)
(v) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. *A121647* (1 PAGE)
(vi) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. *A121648* (1 PAGE)
(b) Reference No 182, 31.10.12, PNJ/22/12, STATE Uttar Pradesh-09, CLASS-
Professionals, Batch No. 000001, Sheet No. 001, 002, (003), Centre LUCKNOW, Examination Date 22.09.12, Number of Candidates examined and passed-19+1
(i) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. *A121655* (1 PAGE)
(ii)Lot26 0022 Page Barcode No. "A121656" (1 PAGE)
(iii) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. *A121657* (1 PAGE)
(iv) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. *A121658" (1 PAGE)
(v) Lot26> 0022 Page Barcode No. "A121659" (1 PAGE) (c ) And other related information."
The CPIO vide letter dated 13.09.2023 replied as under:-
"Point 1: Copy attached.
Point 2: Copy attached.
Point 3 to 6(a) to (e): The requisite information is not available with St. John Section, NHQ. which may be sought from the office of St. John Ambulance, Uttar Pradesh State Centre, VII (U.P.) District, Red Cross Bhawan, Raja Nawab Ali Road, Post Bag No. 1, Kaiserbagh, Lucknow-226001 (U.P.) A copy of the RTI application is being transferred to Uttar Pradesh State Branch under section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 with the request to provide the relevant information directly to you under intimation to IRCS, NHQ."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 18.09.2023. The FAA vide order dated 18.10.2023 stated as under:-
3. The undersigned has examined the records relating to information sought in the original RTI application dated 14/08/2023 of Sh. Rajiv Dhar Jayal; the information provided by the Public Information Officer vide letter dated 13th September, 2023; and the availability of the relevant information/documents in this office.
4. The information/documents sought in the original RTI application dated 14/08/2023 of the appellant, in brief, are as under:
1) Regulations for Organization, Instructions and Examination of CLASSES, Syllabi of the various Courses of Instruction, Medallion, Label, and Pendant Rules and other relevant information, Revised Edition 1977 or later.
2) General Regulations of the St. John Ambulance Association (India), ninth edition 1966 or later.
3) to 6) (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) - Various documents concerning proposals for proficiency certificates forwarded by Uttar Pradesh State Centre, and copy of examination forms of First Aid training conducted by various district centres under Uttar Pradesh State Centre pertaining to the year 2012 and 2013.
5. Regarding the information provided, it is seen that the Deputy Secretary & PIO has provided the information sought at Sl. No.1 & 2 of the application. The documents sought at Sl.No.3 to 6 at points (a) to (e), have not been provided Page 2 stating that the requisite information was not available with St. John Section, National Headquarters. A copy of the RTI application was also forwarded to the Uttar Pradesh State Branch with the request for providing the relevant information directly to the applicant.
6. With regard to availability of the information sought, it is observed that the documents stated to have been inspected by the appellant on 16.12.2014 and 17.12.2014 at the National Headquarters are not available in the records of this office at present. This is due to the fact that, as per the records retention schedule, the records of secondary importance having only reference value, are retained only for a limited period up to 3 years. The records/documents sought by the appellant fall in this category. As such these documents, pertaining to the year 2012 and 2013, having crossed its retention period, had been weeded out.
7. The above-mentioned position shows that the PIO has provided the information sought at Sl.1 & 2 of the application, which were available and could not provide the information sought at Sl.No.3 to 6 at points (a) to (e), which were not available, which cannot be considered as denial of information. The forwarding of a copy of the RTI application to the Uttar Pradesh State Branch is also in order as the requisite documents pertained to the records of the Uttar Pradesh State Centre. As such, the information provided by Public Information Officer to the appellant vide letter dated 13th September, 2023 in response to his RTI application dated 14/08/2023, is based on records available in this office. The appellant is also informed that in the absence of the original documents, as mentioned in para 6 above, copies of the same cannot be certified.
8 In view of the above, there appears to be no reason for issuing any direction to the Public Information Officer in this matter, except that PIO may verify the cost of documents remitted by the appellant with the RTI application dated 14.08.2023 vis-a-vis the cost of documents provided to him, and refund the amount, if any, due to the appellant.
9 With the above decision, the 1st Appeal dated 19/09/2023 of Sh. Rajiv Dhar Jayal is hereby disposed of."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant:
Respondent:
The CPIO submitted that vide letter dated 18.5.2023 all the information available on record in the material has been provided to the Appellant as per the provisions of the RTI Act,2005. The CPIO submitted that since certain information was not in the custody of the CPIO, hence the RTI application was transferred to the concerned CPIO under Section 6(3) RTI Act,2005 and the same was informed to the Appellant. It was further submitted that as per the records retention schedule, the records of secondary importance having Page 3 only reference value, are retained only for a limited period up to 3 years. The records/documents sought by the appellant fall in this category. As such these documents, pertaining to the year 2012 and 2013, having crossed its retention period, had been weeded out thus information cannot be provided.
Decision:
Upon the perusal of the case records & submissions, the Commission observes that an appropriate reply has been provided by the CPIO. No further action lies.
The Appeal stands disposed off Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामरिया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित सत्यापित प्रति) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . चिटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)