Azad Singh vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 24 September, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Azad Singh vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 24 September, 2020

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                            केंद्रीय सच
                                      ु ना आयोग
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                               बाबा गंगनाथ मागग
                             Baba Gangnath Marg
                        मनु नरका, नई ददल्ऱी - 110067
                        Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                                           File no.: CIC/BSNLD/A/2019/601177
In the matter of:
Azad Singh
                                                              ... Appellant
                                      VS
CPIO cum PGM (HR)
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
O/o CGMT, 107, Mahatma Gandhi Marg,
Ambala Cantt. - 133 001
                                                             ...Respondent

RTI application filed on : 12/09/2018 CPIO replied on : 18/10/2018 First appeal filed on : 02/11/2018 First Appellate Authority order : 17/12/2018 Second Appeal dated : 21/01/2019 Date of Hearing : 24/09/2020 Date of Decision : 24/09/2020 The following were present:

Appellant: Present over VC Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, Assistant Director (RTI) and CPIO, present over VC Information Sought:

The appellant's wife underwent the Bilateral TKR treatment in Primus Hospital Delhi. The treatment was done as per NABH rates. The appellant submitted a bill for Rs.3,83,000/- for reimbursement. He was reimbursed a sum of Rs.3,19,750/- against the said bill. An amount of Rs. 63,250 has not been reimbursed to him. In regard to the same he has sought the following information:

1. Whether the Haryana Circle has its own rules for reimbursement of medical claims irrespective of CGHS guidelines. If so, provide a copy of the same.

2. Whether letter No. C-11022/29/2016 RTI (HEC) dt. 27/06/2016 of Ministry of H&FW sent by the appellant along with his representations 07/07/2016, 25/03/2017, 02/06/2017, 09/11/2017 & 04/08/2018 have been received in the department.

3. Provide the reason for not entertaining the letter dated 27/06/2016.

4. Photocopy of the note sheet containing details of dealing with the letter dated 27/06/2016 of the Ministry of H&FW.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO has not provided the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant in his second appeal contested the reply in respect of point no.

3. He submitted during the hearing that a satisfactory reply was not given.

The CPIO reiterated the contents of the reply dated 18.10.2018 and stated that the BSNL MRS scheme was introduced in 2003 and is well within the knowledge of the employees of BSNL. He further submitted that CGHS benefit is not applicable to BSNL employees. Observations:

Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 18.10.2018 enclosed the reply provided by the custodian. The FAA vide order dated 17.12.2018 upheld the CPIO's reply. The reply provided by the custodian was point-wise and as per the RTI application.

Decision:

The Commission observes that medical bill reimbursement is a policy decision of the concerned public authority and grievance redressal is beyond the scope of the RTI Act. The reply provided vide letter dated 18.10.2018 is just and proper and hence no further action lies.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयक् ु त) 2 Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित सत्यापित प्रतत) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दिन ंक / Date 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission