Central Information Commission
Anil Kumar vs Aiims, Patna on 18 June, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/AIMSP/A/2024/622581.
Shri. Anil Kumar. ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
AIIMS, Patna.
Date of Hearing : 16.06.2025
Date of Decision : 16.06.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 29.02.2024
PIO replied on : 01.05.2024
First Appeal filed on : 09.04.2024
First Appellate Order on : 06.05.2024
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 29.05.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.02.2024 seeking information on following points:-
"Please arrange below information at earliest. Request to arrange all ORDER COPIES Issued (Related to SUTURE MATERIAL/Hernia Mesh/Harmonic, PPH and staplers) along with supply proof i.e invoice copy raised by supplier in between 1st April 2020 to 31st Jan 2024 This information cannot be denied to citizen of India Please find some CIC- Central information commission decision where Purchase order copies and their proof of supply has been provided to citizen. Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2013/000381/05732, Decision No. CIC/AD/C/2010/000595 dated 27.7.2010 Decision No. CIC/LS/A/2013/001715-55 dated 29.1.2014, Decision No. CIC/SH/A/2014/003151 dated 26.02.2016"
The CPIO, Medical Superintendent vide letter dated 01.05.2024 replied as under:-
"Requested information amount to 2620 pages (approx.). Photocopy charges of Rs. 2/- per page, totaling Rs-5240/- to be submitted in the form of demand draft in favour of AIIMS, Patna for providing copy of the documents."
Page 1 Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.04.2024. The FAA, Deputy Director vide order dated 06.05.2024 stated as under :-
"An appeal under RTI Act 2005 bearing Registration No. AMSPT/A/E/24/00032, dated 09.04.2024 has been received on the ground that "No Response Within the Time Limit.
3. In connection with the above, the undersigned does not find any reason to interfere with the information provided vide letter bearing no. AllMS/Pat/RTI/2024/MS (CPIO)-82 dated 01.05.2024 (Copy Enclosed) by the CPIO. Further CPIO is also being directed to provide information within the stipulated time limit.
4. This appeal is accordingly disposed off."
PIO has furnished reply dated 17.05.2024 as under:
"..Reply:
Order Copy of Suture Material/Hernia Mesh/Harmonic, PPH and Staplers along with invoice copy is attached. The total no, of copies are 2620..."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Written submission dated 13.06.2025 has been received from the Deputy Director/FAA and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
" 2. I am directed to submit that the Appellant had filed a RTI application dated 29.02.2024 through RTI portal. The reply of the same was sent to the Appellant vide letter in F.No. AIIMS/Pat/RTI/MS (CPIO)-82, dated 01.05.2024 by the CPIO. The copy of the same is being enclosed herewith as Annexure-l.
3. Further, the appellant had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, AIIMS Patna on 09.04.2024. The reply of the appeal was sent to the appellant vide letter in F.No. AIIMS/Pat/RTI Appeal/2024/C-7287, dated 06.05.2024. The copy of the same is being enclosed herewith as Annexure-II.
4. Subsequently, order copy of Suture Material/Hernia Mesh/Harmonic, PPH and Staplers along with invoice copy sent to the appellant vide letter in F.No. AIIMS/Pat/RTI Appeal/2024/MS(CPIO)- 128, dated 17.05.2024. The copy of the same is being enclosed herewith as Annexure-III.."
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Not present Respondent: Mr. Jabbir Husain, AAO- participated in the hearing through video-conferencing.
Page 2 The Respondent reiterated the averments made in their written submission and stated that the relevant information as sought by the Appellant has been duly provided to the Appellant. He averred that complete information comprising 2620 pages has been supplied to the Appellant.
Decision:
Upon perusal of records and submissions made during hearing, it is noted that the Appellant's queries had been appropriately answered by concerned PIO. Furthermore, written submission filed by the Respondent is comprehensive and self-explanatory. Thus, information as permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act has been duly furnished to the Appellant. In the given circumstances, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in this case under the RTI Act. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)