SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 3033

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Shri Heeralal Samariya, CJ
Shri R. K. Mittal – Appellant
Versus
PIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare – Respondent
Second Appeal No. CIC/MH&FW/A/2024/628737 | Complaint No. CIC/MH&FW/C/2024/628757



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents:

The Commission upheld the CPIO's response under the RTI Act, noting that no intervention was required as the information was appropriately answered.

Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 8(e) & (g) - Non-disclosure of information sought under RTI by CPIO on grounds of potential misuse - The Commission held that information permissible under RTI has been supplied, and no further action is warranted. (Para 1)

(B) Appeal process under RTI - Displeasure expressed over non-attendance of PIO during hearings; however, the response provided met the requirements under law. (Para 3)

Facts of the case:
The appellant sought information on public feedback regarding NEXT regulations and highlighted discriminatory practices in previous responses.

Findings of Court:
The Commission found the CPIO's response to be appropriate under the RTI Act.

Issues: Whether the CPIO appropriately responded to RTI requests.

Ratio Decidendi: The information as permissible under the RTI Act has been duly supplied; hence, the Commission concluded no further intervention was necessary.

Result: The Second Appeal and Complaint were disposed of accordingly.

के቎ኚरीय सचू ना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गगं नाथ माग,ग मनु नरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई दिल्ली, New Delhi – 110067 नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MH&FW/A/2024/628737 निकायत संख्या / Complaint No. CIC/MH&FW/C/2024/628757 Shri. R. K. Mittal. … अपीलकता/ग Appellant …निकायतकताग /Complainant VERSUS/बनाम PIO, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare. …्ቚनतवािीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 23.07.2025 Date of Decision : 23.07.2025 Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 09.05.2024 PIO replied on : 29.05.2024 First Appeal filed on : 29.05.2024 First Appellate Order on : 01.06.2024 2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 10.07.2024 Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant/ Complainant filed an RTI application dated 20.05.2024 seeking information on following points:-

“Kindly refer to Public Notice dated 24.1.2024 seeking comments from Kindly provide copy of all public feedback recieved in response including google form report in soft copy to my email address er.rakeshkumarmittal@yahoo.com Alternatively, you can also provide them in physical form & i am ready to bear all expanses.

Kindly also refer to your letter no C- 21011/45/22/NMC/Coord/025014-16 dated 04.05.2023 where in similar information was denied as NMC feared that I will misuse the same to lobby through print media etc to put pressure on NMC to bring out the final next Regulations in perticular form which may suit to a perticular group I undertake not to go to media with this information as that seems to be precondition of NMC to maintain comfortable levels of NON TRANSPARANCY Kindly note that NCISM & NCH expressed no such fear while providing similar information. May be NCISM & NCH do not have habit of working under pressure while NMC has habit to work under various pressures from Modern Medicine Medical Mafia & IMA and therefore fear even legitimate demands being put forth by public as pressure.

Non disclosure of information at that stage led to a highly discriminatory NEXT regulations & peoples voice was suffocated leading to huge outcry which made even published next Regulations NULL & VOID & forced you to open the same for further public feedback, ultimately delaying NEXT for almost an year, which may be your ultimate objective.

It is hoped that this time NMC becomes as transparent as NCISM & NCH who had no hesitation in making public comments public even before..”

The CPIO, vide letter dated 29.05.2024 replied as under:-

“Reply:- With respect to your request for providing of details related to feedback on implementation of NeXT, it is informed that the Ministry alongwith other stakeholder designed a google sheet for seeking feedback from all concerned on the aforesaid issue. The google sheet was put on the website of NMC for wide publicity. The input received are placed in google sheet and it has not been compiled & hold by CPIO of Ministry and NMC. It is also informed that the Ministry has constituted a new committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. V.K. Paul. The Committee is in process to consider all facts for making strategies for implementation of NeXT. Further it is also informed that under Section 8 (e) & (g) of RTI Act, 2005, the input/comments furnished by individual on a Govt. Policy may be supplied to third party until it is considered by Ministry and final decision is reached.”

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 29.05.2024. The FAA, Deputy Secretary vide order dated

01.06.2024 replied as under:-

“The appellant, vide letter dated 29.05.2024 bearing Registration No. MOHFW/A/E/24/00266, filed first appeal under RTI Act, 2005 on the grounds "CPIO refused access to information requested".

2.On perusal of records produced before the Appellate Authority, it is found that the CPIO, Medical Education Policy disposed of the RTI application stating that the comments in google sheet have not been compil

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top