Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 2689
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Vinod Kumar Tiwari, IC
Pratap Ratho – Appellant
Versus
CPIO, Office of the CMS/KGP, South Eastern Railway – Respondent
CIC/SERLK/A/2024/105315
For the Appellant: Pratap Ratho
For the Respondent: Dr. Kanamanambeti Manmadha Rao
The court ruled that personal medical information under the RTI Act cannot be disclosed unless it serves a larger public interest.
Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 8(1)(j) - Information request regarding treatment details which were deemed personal - The appellant sought details of medical treatment provided to his wife during her hospital stay. The CPIO maintained that details were included in the discharge certificate, and relevant information was later provided. The Commission found no further intervention necessary. (Paras 6, 7)
(B) RTI - Personal Information - The Act restricts disclosure of personal information unless public interest is established, thus emphasizing the balance between right to information and privacy. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The appellant sought copies of the Bed Head Ticket for his wife’s treatment, but the information was stated to have already been provided through the discharge summary.
Findings of Court:
The Commission concluded that the required information had already been provided to the appellant and was thus compliant with the RTI Act.
Issues: The primary issue revolved around the disclosure of personal medical information and whether adequate information was provided by the CPIO.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that personal information related to an individual’s health cannot be disclosed unless public interest is substantiated, in accordance with RTI provisions.
Result: No further intervention warranted; appeal disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant sought treatment records under rti. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. commission's finding on information compliance. (Para 3 , 7) |
| 3. respondent's argument on information provision. (Para 5) |
Date of Hearing : 08.07.2025 Date of Decision : 10.07.2025 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 31.10.2023 CPIO replied on : 03.01.2024 First appeal filed on : 12.12.2023 First Appellate Authority’s order : 12.01.2024 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 16.02.2024 Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.10.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
“I got my wife SMT. BIMALA RATHO admitted in Rly. Divl. Hospital Kharagpur for the treatment of Hyper Tension, Blood Sugar and seizure disorders etc. on 24/10/2023. In bed No- 5 of female medical ward and after treatment my wife has been discharged from the S.E.Rly Divl. Hospital Kharagpur on 30/10/2023 at about 15:00 hrs. (Ref CRNO.
191012200010003).
In this connection, I would like to have the information of my following queries in connection with the treatment and medicines given.
1. Please supply me the authenticated photocopies of bed ticket of bed No- 5 of female medical ward to know clearly about the medicines given and particulars of treatment done to my wife Smt. BIMALA RATHO from
24/10/2023 to 30/10/2023 in the Divl. Hospital Kharagpur S.E.Rly.”
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 03.01.2024 stating as under:
“Vide reference letter, this is to inform that the reply to the first application of Sri. Pratap Ratho dated 31.10.2023 received by the office on 02.11.2023 has been supplied within stipulated time i.e. on 17.11.2023 and sent through registered post, Moreover, the treatment history is mentioned in the discharge certificate which was handed over to the party at the time of discharge. (1st request reply copy enclosed)”
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.12.2023.
The FAA vide its order dated 12.01.2024, held as under:
“Your appeals have been reviewed, in reference above and the requisite information as sought duly communicated vide PIO & CMS/KGP’s letter No.SER/P-KGP/740/23/879/24/03 dated 03/01/2024 in prescribed format containing Two (02 pages) are enclosed herewith for your ready reference.
This is for your information please.”
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Absent Respondent: Dr. Kanamanambeti Manmadha Rao, Divisional Medical Officer, appeared through video conference.
5. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had filed detailed written submissions dated 02.07.2025 disclosing complete facts of the case and requested the Commission to place the same on record. The relevant paras of the written submission are reproduced as under:
6.
“Smt. Bimala Ratho, female, aged 61 years, was admitted to Divisional Railway Hospital, Kharagpur (DRH/KGP) on 24.10.2023 at 1:30 AM with complaints of uncontrolled hypertension and heaviness in the head. She is a known case of seizure disorder and hypertension/Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). On the day of admission, she had not taken her prescribed anti-
epileptic medications.
She was treated from 24.10.2023, her blood pressure was controlled with medications, anti-epileptics given and discharged in stable condition on 30.10.2023. Her husband, Shri Pratap Ratho, received the discharge papers and two ECG strips, and took her home after providing written consent at
2:35 PM on 30.10.2023.
In accordance with Letter No. SER/P-KGP/740/RTI/25/600, Dated: 17.11.2025 as per provision of RTI Act 2005 8.(1) (j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual unless the Central Public Inform
