Central Information Commission
Mr.Krishan Kant Swami vs Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare on 15 March, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003539/17278Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003539
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. K. K. Swami
Vice President
Akhil Bhartiya
Grahak Panchayat, Delhi
51 Samrat Enclave, Pitampura
Delhi- 110034
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Food safety and standards authority of India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare 1st floor East Tower, NBCC Place Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Pragati Vihar, Delhi-110034 RTI application filed on : 23/07/2011 PIO replied : 05/09/2011 First appeal filed on : 01/10/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 24/10/2011 Second Appeal received on : 08/12/2011 Information Sought:
1. Have you determined the safe percentage of Trans fats in Ghee and Edible oils etc.
2. Have you instructed the manufactures of Ghee and edible oils to exhibit the safe percentage of Trans fats on their packets along with actual percentage of trans fats on their products.
3. If you have not determined the safe percentage of Trans fats in Ghee and edible oils what steps you have taken to determine the safe percentage of Trans Fats.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
PIO replied that "The letter from PFA Department referred to in your application does not seem to have been received in this Authority.
In this context, it is informed that definition of information under RTI Act reads as following:-- As per RTI Act the Information means any . material including records, documents, memos, c-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models. data materiel held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be assessed by the public authority under any law for the time being in force .
Para 2- The Food Safety and Standards (Labelling and Packaging) Regulations, 2011 provide the following Labelling requirements regarding Trans Fatty Acids under Chapter 2.2.2. 'The Food, in which hydrogenated vegetable fats or bakery shortening is used shall declare on the label that 'hydrogenated vegetable fats or bakery shortening used contains trans fats; Provided further that, a health claim of 'trans fat free' may be made in cases where the trans fat is less than 0.2 gm per serving of food and the claims 'saturated fat free may- be made in cases where the saturated fat does not exceed 0.1 gm per 100gm or l00...of food."Page 1 of 3
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
FAA ordered that "Reply given by the C.P.I.O. vide his letter of even number dated the 5th September; 2011 is correct as the part of the information sought by you vide your letter dated 23.07.2011 relating to trans fat labeling on packet of foods including ghee held in this Authority in the electronic form and conveyed to you. Information on para 1 and 3 is not held by this. Authority. However, to know the safe percentage of trans fats in ghee and edible oils, you may please consult National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal or National Dairy Development Board, Anand (Gujarat) / Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi or any other dairy research institutes."
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and unfair disposal of appeal by FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 09 February 2012:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. K. K. Swami;
Respondent: Absent;
"The Appellant is a public spirited person who is trying to enforce certain standards as regards Ghee and Edible oils. He states that studies have shown that trans fats are harmful to health and Denmark has specified an upper limit of 2% as being safe. The Appellant shows that he has been pursuing this matter to persuade government to specify such standards. He shows a letter given to him by Mr. B. Balchandra of 19 March, 2009 in which it is mentioned that a notification GSR no. 664(E) of 19/09/2008 had been issued in which it was required to declare trans fat content. However, this letter acknowledges that since industry made various representations apprehending commercial implications in terms of their sales of products a corrigendum was issued on 27/02/2009 modifying this. Subsequently the Appellant was given information on 29/12/2009 by Mr. D. P. Dwivedi, Director (PFA) stating "it was clarified to the Appellant that the safe limit specified for trans fats in food products shall be clarified from Government of India by this Department and efforts are being made to get the Food Laboratory of this Department accredited from NABL to have all these testing facilities in near future." On 02/08/2010 the Appellant received a letter from PFA stating that "as regards safe limits to be prescribed for trans fats in food products the process of framing regulation by Food Authority of India is in process as this is their subject." Subsequently the Appellant was informed that this work had been given to Food Safety and Standard Authority of India.
The appellant was pursuing this matter and hence sought information whether anything concrete had been done by the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India. It is unfortunate that the PIO has not provided simple information sought by the Appellant. If the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India has taken no steps about specifying the safe level trans fats percentages in Ghee and Edible Oil they should atleast admit this. The Appellant has been unnecessarily harassed in pursuing this matter. If there is complete neglect of care for citizens help this should atleast come out when a citizen uses Right to Information.
Harassment of a common man by public authorities is socially abhorring and legally impermissible. It may harm him personally but the injury to society is far more grievous. Crime and corruption thrive and prosper in the society due to lack of public resistance. Nothing is more damaging than the feeling of helplessness. An ordinary citizen instead of complaining and fighting succumbs to the pressure of undesirable functioning in offices instead of standing against it. Therefore the award of compensation for harassment by public authorities not only compensates the individual, satisfies him personally but helps in curing social evil. It may result in improving the work culture and help in changing the outlook. In view of this the Commission under Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act awards a compensation of Rs.2000/- to the Appellant for the loss and detriment suffered by him in pursuing the appeal and not yet getting the information."Page 2 of 3
Commission's Decision on 09/02/2012:
The Appeal was allowed.
"The PIO is directed to provide the complete information as per available records to the Appellant before 05 March 2012.
The PIO is also directed to ensure that a cheque of Rs.2000/- as compensation is sent to the Appellant before 30 April 2012.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing complete information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 as per the requirement of the RTI Act. It appears that the PIO's actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him. He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 15 March 2012 at 3.30pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the information to the appellant. "
Relevant Facts emerging during the showcause Hearing on 15 March 2012: The following were present Appellant: Mr. K. K. Swami;
Respondent: Mr. S. C. Kathuria the then Public Information Officer & DADG; Mrs. Sunita Gehani, Technical Officer and Mr. Prakash Chandra, Technical Officer;
The PIO has sent the draft minutes of the meeting of the Scientific Committee to the Appellant in response to the Commission's order but has found it difficult to provide the information which have been sought by the Appellant. When the Commission asked Mr. Kathuria he stated that he found it difficult to understand the queries and had given long winding answers. The Commission took the queries to the Respondent Mr. Kathuria as follows:
1- Query-1: Have you determined the safe percentage of Trans fats in Ghee and Edible oils etc. The Respondent states that FSSAI has not determined the safe percentage of Trans Fats in Ghee and Edible oil.
2- Query-2: Have you instructed the manufactures of Ghee and edible oils to exhibit the safe percentage of Trans fats on their packets along with actual percentage of trans fats on their products. The Respondent Mr. Kathuria confirms that no such instruction has been issued.
The Respondent claims that he had not understood the queries property and states that he should not be penalized. He has also asked the Commission to waive the compensation of Rs.2000/- awarded to the Appellant by the Commission. The Commission sees no reason for waive the compensation and the Public Authority will have to pay this compensation to the Appellant. Though the Commission is extremely surprised about the lack of understanding to the simple queries by the Appellant it gives benefit of doubt to the Respondents and accepting their plea that they have not been able to understand the queries properly. In view of this the Commission is dropping the penalty proceedings.
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 15 March 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PG) Page 3 of 3