Central Information Commission
Mr.B Seturaman vs Ministry Of Chemicals And Fertilizers on 13 February, 2012
Central Information Commission
Room No. 305 BWing, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Kama Place, New Delhi - 110066
Tel No: 26167931
Case No. CIC/SS/A/2011/002085
Name of the Appellant : Mr. B Sethuraman
(The Appellant was present)
Name of the Public Authority : National Pharmaceutical Pricing
Authority, New Delhi.
Represented by Mr. K.K. Jain, Dy.
Director and Mr. A.K. Gautam, Adviser.
The matter was heard on : 13.2.2012
ORDER
The appellant Mr. B. Sethuraman, vide his RTI requested dated 19.5.2010 sought the following information:
"I want to know under which para of DPCO'95 or the guidelines and Press notes and New Drug Policy, 1994, NPPA have issued the notes in the Notification No. S.O.2458(E) dated 24.9.2009."
The CPIO has replied as follows to the RTI application:-
"The ceiling prices are notified by the NPPA by exercising the power, conferred by sub-paragraph (1) and (2) of paragraph 9 and read along with Paragraph 11 of Drug Price Control Order 1995. Regarding Note (a) of S.O. No. 2485(E) dated 24.9.2009 where the price factor for 56 bulk drug/API, for addition and deletion in the composition has been given inclusive of admissible MAPE so that concerned manufacturer can work out their MRP for their specific composition of multivitamin and mineral in form of tablet and capsule and inform the NPP. The manufacturer of such formulation need not take the specific approval for their specified composition/product.
As per sub-para (3) on paragraph 9 of DPCO'95, the note (a) of the said notification is enabling the manufacturer of similar formulation to sell their formulation for which the ceiling price has been notified under sub-paragraph (1) and (2). The manufacturer shall work out the price of their respective formulations in accordance with such norms/ note as may be notified by the Government from time to time and shall intimate the price of formulation pack, so worked out, to the Government/NPPA and such formulation packs shall be released for sale only after the expiry of sixty days after such intimation."
The Appellate Authority, vide his reply dated 19.8.2010 has held that the reply furnished by the CPIO in this regard is adequate.
In his 2nd appeal filed before the Commission, the appellant states that through his RTI application he sought to know under which para of DPCO'95 or under the Pharma Policy of 1994 or the press release of Govt. of India, the Respondents have issued the Notes for 56 bulk drugs. According to the appellant the Respondents have given a vague reply saying that the Note 'A' of S.O.2458(E) dated 24.9.2009 has been issued under Sub- paragraph 1, 2, 3 of para 9 and para 1 of DPCO'95. The NPPA is violating the DPCO'95 and pharma policy, 1994 by bringing under price control all the combinations of Multivitamin and Minerals in Caps. and Tablet forms. Therefore, as per the appellant, the Respondents have not provided correct and complete information in reply to his RTI application.
In response to the 2nd appeal the Respondent in a written statement submit that the information available with the NPPA to the extent possible has already been provided to the appellant through their above mentioned replies. The S.O.2458(E) dated 24.9.2009 is related to the ceiling price fixation of multivitamins and minerals tablets and capsules. In Note A of the Notification a price adjustment formula of 56 items/API/drugs (including non- scheduled drugs) has been mentioned to enable the manufacturer to work out the price of their brand/product with their composition and to follow the same. All the notes as mentioned in the notification are an integral part of the notification should be read implemented with the notification price and not separately.
It is the contention of the appellant that the Respondent have given a vague reply. The NPPA have just added a Note in the notification with 56 bulk drugs and asking the manufacturers to add/subtract certain amount from the ceiling price of the Composition without following the DPCO'95 para 7 and 9 and also the Guidelines and press notes or the New Drug Policy, 1994. As per DPCO'95 para 9 NPPA should fix ceiling price of each and every commonly marketed composition separately as per the norms under para 7 and not by giving Notes and fixing prices for not commonly marketed Composition and without ascertaining the turnover of the Composition and a leader for the particular composition.
Having heard the submissions made by parties, the Commission observes that the appellant primarily wants to know the source of powers under which the NPPA has issued notification dated 27.9.2009 and the Notes thereunder. Clearly this is not an issue that can be adjudicated by the Commission under the RTI Act. The Respondents have, through their replies, informed the appellant of the provisions of the law and regulation under which the aforementioned notification has been issued. As per section 2(f) of the RTI Act "information" means that information which is held in material form by the Respondent. By informing the appellant of the relevant provisions of the law under which the notification has been issued, information, as per record, has been provided to the appellant. In case the appellant is of the view that the order, including Notes, are not as per law, they may take up the matter before the appropriate forum.
With these observations the matter is disposed of on the part of the Commission.
(Sushma Singh) Information Commissioner 13.2.2012 Authenticated true copy:
(D.C. Singh) Deputy Registrar Copy to:
1. Mr. B. Sethuraman, 1, Kanniamman Koli Street, Shenoy Nagr, Chenai - 600030.
2. The C.P.I.O., The Director, National Pharmceutical Pricing Authority, 5th/3rd floor, YMCA Cultural Centre Building, 1 Jai Singh Road, New Delhi - 110001.
3. The First Appellate Authority, National Pharmceutical Pricing Authority, 5th/3rd floor, YMCA Cultural Centre Building, 1 Jai Singh Road, New Delhi - 110001.