Central Information Commission
Dr. Santosh Narayan Mehrotra vs National Medical Commission (Nmc) on 29 September, 2022
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग ,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या/Second Appeal No.: CIC/NMCOM/A/2021/152313
Dr. Santosh Narayan Mehrotra .....अपीलकताग /Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
Public Information Officer Under RTI,
Under Secretary-(A) & CPIO,
National Medical Commission
(formerly Medical Council of India),
Administration Section, Pocket-14,
Sector-8, Dwarka, Phase-I,
New Delhi-110077.
...प्रनतवािीगण/Respondents
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 03.07.2021
CPIO replied on : 31.12.2021
First appeal filed on : 01.09.2021
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record
Second Appeal received at CIC : 06.12.2021
Date of Hearing : 29.09.2022
Date of Decision : 29.09.2022
सूचना आयुक्त : श्री हीरालाल सामररया
Information Commissioner: Shri Heeralal Samariya
Page 1 of 6
Information sought:
The Appellant sought following information:
• Dissatisfied with no response received from PIO, Appellant filed First Appeal, vide letter dated 01.09.2021.
• Written submission has been received from PIO, vide letter 22.09.2022, as under:Page 2 of 6
• The reply furnished by PIO, dated 31.12.2021, is as under:
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The PIO has not provided correct information to the Appellant.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present: -
Appellant: Reptt. By Dr. R.K. Awasthi, Present via V-C. Respondent: Ms. Navaneetha Pramod, S.O., PIO, present.
Rep. of Appellant stated that relevant information, as sought in the instant matter, has not been furnished to him by the concerned PIO. He further requested the Commission to direct the concerned PIO to furnish a reply in the instant matter.
Written submission has been received from PIO, dated 22.09.2022, submitting relevant point-wise reply to the Complainant. She also submitted that a previous reply was also furnished to the Appellant, vide letter dated 31.12.2021. She further submitted that he would abide by the orders of Commission, if any.
Upon Commission's instance, PIO submitted that no relevant records, with regards to para 2 of instant matter, is available with the concerned department.Page 3 of 6
Decision:
At the outset, Commission directs the concerned PIO to furnish a copy of their reply, dated 22.09.2022, along with annexures, to the Appellant, free of cost via registered post, within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order, and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission.
Furthermore, Commission, after perusal of case records and submissions made during hearing, expresses displeasure over the conduct of the then PIO in not having provided reply on the RTI Application within the stipulated time frame of RTI Act. Therefore, Commission directs then PIO through the present PIO to send his/her written submissions to justify as to why action should not be initiated against him/her under Section 20 of the RTI Act for the gross violation of its provisions. In doing so, if any other persons are also responsible for the omission, the then PIO shall serve a copy of this order on such other persons under intimation to the Commission and ensure that written submissions of all such concerned persons are sent to the Commission. The said written submission of then PIO along with submissions of other concerned persons, if any, should reach the Commission within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The present PIO will ensure service of this order to then PIO.
Nevertheless, Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that that under the RTI Act the CPIO can only provide information which is available in the record. Thus, the appellant cannot expect the respondent to take certain action or initiate action as desired by him. In view of the foregoing, Commission deems it expedient to highlight that Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in its judgment dated 04.12.2014 in case of The Registrar, Supreme Court of India vs. Commodore Lokesh K. Batra and Ors. [W.P.(C) No. 6634/2011] has held as under:
"11. Insofar as the question of disclosing information that is not available with the public authority is concerned, the law is now well settled that the Act does not enjoin a public authority to create, collect or collate information that is not available with it. There is no obligation on a public authority to process any information in order to create further information as is sought by an applicant......."Page 4 of 6
Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in its decision dated 09.08.2011 in the matter of CBSE &Anr. vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay&ors. (C.A. No. 6454 of 2011) has held as under:
"35......... But where the information sought is not a part of the record of a public authority, and where such information is not required to be maintained under any law or the rules or regulations of the public authority, the Act does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to collect or collate such non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant..............."
In view of the above, the Commission upholds the submission of the CPIO and further notes that an appropriate reply has been provided to the appellant by the respondent, vide letter dated 22.09.2022.
However, to allay any subsequent apprehension of the Appellant, PIO must file an appropriate affidavit stating that whatever information was available on record, with regards to information/documents sought in para 2, has been provided to the appellant and nothing material has been withheld from disclosure.
The said affidavit shall be sent by the PIO to the Commission with its copy duly endorsed to the Appellant. The said direction of the Commission must be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the PIO. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणतसत्यानपतप्रनत) Ram Parkash Grover (रामप्रकाशग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 5 of 6 Copy to be served through the PIO to:
Then PIO, Under Secretary-(A) & CPIO, National Medical Commission (formerly Medical Council of India), Administration Section, Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwarka, Phase-I, New Delhi-110077.
--(For complying with the directions mentioned as above)--Page 6 of 6