Central Information Commission
Brigadier Praveen Kumar Narula Vsm ... vs Directorate General, Armed Forces ... on 31 August, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File No.:- CIC/DGAFM/A/2020/696058
In the matter of:
Praveen Kumar Narula
... Appellant
VS
CPIO
Office of Director General, Armed Forces
Medical Services (DGAFMS),
Ministry of Defence,
M Block, New Delhi-110001
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 09/10/2020 CPIO replied on : 02/11/2020 First appeal filed on : 11/11/2020
First Appellate Authority order : 03/12/2020 Second Appeal filed on : 14/01/2021 Date of Hearing : 31/08/2021 Date of Decision : 31/08/2021
Note: Due to the advanced age of the appellant and his request for priority hearing, the case has been listed early.
The following were present:
Appellant: Present over VC Respondent: Col. Jasdeep Singh, rep of the CPIO, present over intra VC Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information:
1. Provide information/policy for assessment/calculation of hearing disability between 10 feet and 20 feet while conducting Conversational Voice/Forced Whisper test.1
2. Provide policy/guidelines for assessment of hearing disability based on Pulse Tone Audiometry (PTA) as per Guide to Medical Officers 2002 (as amended in 2008) or as per any other document/guidelines/policy instructions.
3. Provide information regarding incorporation of provisions of Persons with Disability Act 1995 (PWD Act - 1995), Gazette Notification of Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, dated 01 June 2001 and dated 05 July 2018, in the Guide to Medical Officers 2002 (as amended in 2008).
4. And other related information.
Grounds for filing Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the specific information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO as the document given to him does not cover the information sought in his RTI application. On point 1, he submitted that the information as to how the assessment is being carried out between 10 to 20 feet was not given. On point no 2, it has been informed that if a person fails in 610 cm test or 20 feet test, he shall be subject to audiometer test, however, nothing has been stated as to how the failure in this test will result in disability. On point no. 3, he submitted that since he was the affected party, he should be informed as to whether provisions of Persons with Disability Act 1995 (PWD Act - 1995), Gazette Notification of Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, dated 01 June 2001 and dated 05 July 2018, in the Guide to Medical Officers 2002 (as amended in 2008) were incorporated or not. For point no. 4, no name of the specific branch was given and it is not possible that Dept,. of Ex-servicemen is responsible to formulate such guidelines.
The CPIO submitted that an appropriate reply was given to the appellant on
02.11.2020.
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that the CPIO vide his reply dated 02.11.2020 had annexed a copy of Para 20 of Chapter VII of Guide to Medical Officers 2002, amendments 2008. The appellant in his first appeal had stated that the information provided to him did not answer the queries raised by him, however, the FAA in his order had clearly stated that whatever information was available with them, the same was supplied to the appellant and other than this, they do not have any additional information. The Commission is not convinced with the reply of the CPIO and as rightly 2 explained by the appellant that none of his points have been adequately answered. The CPIO is therefore directed to re-visit the RTI application and provide a revised reply to the appellant while taking into consideration the submissions made by him above.
Decision:
In view of the above, the CPIO is directed to provide a revised reply to the appellant in a point-wise manner as per the discussions held during the hearing within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना)
Information Commissioner (सच
ू ना आयु त)
Authenticated true copy
(अ भ मा णत स या पत त)
A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011- 26182594 /
दनांक / Date
3