Central Information Commission
Ashwani Kumar Munjal vs Ut Of Chandigarh on 16 June, 2020
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/UTOCH/C/2018/158587
Ashwani Kumar Munjal ...अपीलकता/Complainant
Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Post graduation Institute of Medical
Centre & Research,
Chandigarh. ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
RTI application filed on : 20/04/2018
CPIO replied on : 05/05/2018 &05/07/2018
First Appeal filed on : 15/05/2018
First Appellate Authority order : 29/06/2018
Complaint dated : 20/09/2018
Date of Hearing : 08/06/2020
Date of Decision : 08/06/2020
Information sought:
The Complainant sought certified copies of investigation reports or preliminary enquiry reports on 8 complaint(s) filed by their Association alleging fraudulent and corrupt practices.
Grounds for the Complaint::
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
present:-
Complainant: Present through VC.1
Respondent: Ankur Sharma, Admn. Officer & CPIO, Vigilance Section, Post graduation Institute of Medical Centre & Research, Chandigarh present on phone.
Complainant stated that he is aggrieved with the initial denial of information inform under Section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act as no justification has been provided by the CPIO for the same. Moreover, he argued that the source of information should be deemed as him and his association who have highlighted the corrupt activities prevalent in the Respondent office, office therefore the question of him causing harm to life and physical safety of other individuals does d not even arise. He further stated that even after the FAA ordered the CPIO on 29.06.2018 to provide the information, the information provided vide letletter ter dated 05.07.2018 by the CPIO is not complete. He furthermore alleged that these complaints pertain to various instances of misconduct, malfeasance and gross misuse of public exchequer in activities like appointments; purchase of medicines & drugs; conveyance allowances claimed by lecturers who have no concern with patient care or hospital services; purchase chase of apparatus; favouritism etc. That, yet, information regarding the averred complaints has been withheld for the longest time as it is more than 4 to 5 years since the complaints were filed, information cannot be denied citing pending ending investigation as the CVC Manual also prescribes time bound action on such complaints.
CPIO submitted that subsequent to the FAA order dated 29.06.2018, point wise information was provided to the Complainant on 05.07.2018. He further submitted that he will abide by the orders of the Commission, if any, in the matter.
Decision At the outset, based on the nature of relief sought, Commission treats the instant matter as Second Appeal.
Commission based on the perusal of facts on record concedes with the contention of the Complainant that the initial denial of information under Section 8(1)(g) of RTI Act by the CPIO does not hold good, particularly, in light of the larger public interest apparent in the disclosure of the information as per section 8(2) of RTI Act. It is established beyond reasonable doubt that the several counts of serious allegations of malfeasance levelled against the working of the Respondent office, decidedly warrants probity and transparency rather than labored opacity as 2 File No: CIC/UTOCH/C/2018/158587 evident from the averred CPIO reply. Nonetheless, without going into the merits of the exemption claimed by the CPIO, FAA ordered the CPIO to only provide the status of the complaints.
Now, in view of the ostensible larger public interest subsisting in the matter based on the contentions of the Complainant, Complainant Commission directs the CPIO to provide an adequate opportunity to the Complainant to inspect all available and relevant information including the investigation reports/preliminary report as sought in the instant RTI Application, on a mutually decided date and time duly intimated to him telephonically and in writing. Copy of documents, if desired by the Complainant should be provided without charging prescribed fees. fees The said direction should be complied within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and a compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the CPIO enumerating the details off records inspected and copy of documents provided, if any.
Further, to allay the apprehensions of the Complainant regarding withholding of information, Commission directs the CPIO to file an appropriate affidavit subsequent to the facilitation of inspection, inspect stating that all available information relevant to the RTI Application has been offered for inspection to the Complainant. The said affidavit should be sent to the Commission by the CPIO with its copy duly endorsed to the Complainant within 7 days from the date of facilitation of inspection.
The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Divya Prakash Sinha ( द काश िस हा)
Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु )
3
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त
त)
Haro Prasad Sen
Dy. Registrar
011-26106140/
26106140/ [email protected]
हरो साद सेन,उप-पंजीयक
दनांक / Date
4