Central Information Commission
Dr. Atul Kumar Agarwal vs Medical Council Of India on 12 February, 2019
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No(s).:- CIC/MEDCI/A/2017/150232-BJ+
CIC/MEDCI/A/2017/153706-BJ
Dr. Atul Kumar Agarwal
....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. CPIO
Law Officer, Medical Council of India,
Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwarka
New Delhi - 110077
2. CPIO
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare,
PNDT Section, Nirman Bhawan,
New Delhi
... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 12.02.2019
Date of Decision : 12.02.2019
ORDER
RTI I: File No. CIC/MEDCI/A/2017/150232-BJ Date of RTI application 30.03.2017 CPIO's response 12.05.2017 Date of the First Appeal 01.06.2017 First Appellate Authority's response 05.07.2017 Date of diarised receipt of Appeal by the Commission 20.07.2017 FACTS:
The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 02 points regarding the status of some courses as mentioned in Annexure 1 and 2 of the application, whether these courses were recognized by the MCI, if yes, then a copy of the permission letter and whether the course for sonographers run by one Medi Scans System, Chennai mentioned in Annexure 2 was recognized by the MCI along with a copy of the recognition letter etc. Page 1 of 4 The CPIO, vide its letter dated 12.05.2017 stated that the list of permitted and recognized courses was available on their website and that no such course for sonographers was recognized by the MCI Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000. Dissatisfied by the CPIOs response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, vide its order dated 05.07.2017, upheld the CPIO's reply and further informed that SLP (C) Nos. 16657-16659/2016 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi arising out of judgment dated 17.02.2016 in W.P. 2721/2014, W.P. No. 3184/2014 and W.P. No. 6968/2011 was pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
RTI II: File No. CIC/MEDCI/A/2017/153706-BJ Date of RTI application 07.02.2017 CPIO's response 05.04.2017 Date of the First Appeal 01.06.2017 First Appellate Authority's response 17.07.2017 Date of diarised receipt of Appeal by the Commission 02.08.2017 FACTS:
The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 07 points regarding the PC & PNDT Act, 1994 & PNDT Rules, 1996, and its provisions, such as, the number of detected cases of pre-determination of sex of the foetus along with the techniques and the number of cases in which other techniques were used for determination of sex of the foetus etc. The CPIO, vide its letter dated 05.04.2017, provided a point wise response to the Appellant. Dissatisfied by the response, the Appellant approached the FAA. The FAA, MCI, vide its order dated 17.07.2017 while referring to another RTI application 25.04.2017 and the CPIOs reply dated 22.05.2017, stated that the available information had already been shared with the Appellant. It was further informed that the matter relating to PNDT Act, did not fall within the purview of MCI.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. Shikhar Ranjan, Law Officer and Ms. Akansha Srivastava, Legal Assistant and Mr. Ajay Kumar, US, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare and Mr. Deepak Bhatt, ASO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare;
The Appellant remained absent during the hearing. Mr. Rahul Varshney, Network Engineer NIC studio at Lucknow confirmed the absence of the Appellant. The Respondent (in File No. CIC/MEDCI/A/2017/150232-BJ) while reiterating the response of the CPIO/FAA, submitted that the information sought by the Appellant was available on its website and the intimation to this effect was furnished to him. The Respondent, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, PNDT Section, present during the hearing (File No. CIC/MEDCI/A/2017/153706-BJ) informed that a point-wise information as available on record had already been shared with the Appellant by the CPIO/FAA. Moreover, the attention of the Commission was drawn towards the matter inter alia Page 2 of 4 relating to qualifications under PNDT Act, and the definition of Sonologist or Imaging Specialist defined under Section 2 (p) of the PNDT Act which was pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Indian Radiological and Imaging Association and Ors etc. etc. in Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 16657-16659 of 2016.
The Commission referred to the definition of information under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 which is reproduced below:
"information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e- mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, report, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force."
Furthermore, a reference can also be made to the relevant extract of Section 2 (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 which reads as under:
"(j) right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes ........"
In this context a reference was made to the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in 2011 (8) SCC 497 (CBSE Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay), wherein it was held as under:
35..... "It is also not required to provide 'advice' or 'opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any 'opinion' or 'advice' to an applicant. The reference to 'opinion' or 'advice' in the definition of 'information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority. Many public authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act."
Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Khanapuram Gandaiah Vs. Administrative Officer and Ors. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.34868 OF 2009 (Decided on January 4, 2010) had held as under:
6. "....Under the RTI Act "information" is defined under Section 2(f) which provides:
"information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e- mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, report, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force."
This definition shows that an applicant under Section 6 of the RTI Act can get any information which is already in existence and accessible to the public authority under law. Of course, under the RTI Act an applicant is entitled to get copy of the opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc., but he cannot ask for any information as to why such opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc. have been passed."
7. "....the Public Information Officer is not supposed to have any material which is not before him; or any information he could have obtained under law. Under Section 6 of Page 3 of 4 the RTI Act, an applicant is entitled to get only such information which can be accessed by the "public authority" under any other law for the time being in force. The answers sought by the petitioner in the application could not have been with the public authority nor could he have had access to this information and Respondent No. 4 was not obliged to give any reasons as to why he had taken such a decision in the matter which was before him."
The Appellant was not present to contest the submissions of the Respondent or to substantiate his claims further.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Respondents, and in the light of the matter pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
The Appeals stand disposed accordingly.
Bimal Julka (िबमल जु का)
Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु )
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
K.L. Das (के .एल.दास)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011-26182598/ [email protected]
दनांक / Date: 12.02.2019
Page 4 of 4