Copy of enquiry reports regarding unsatisfactory services provided by Pushpanjli Crossby Hospital to a patient was delayed - CIC: DG ESIC to call for the explanation of PIO for delay & also for not attending the hearing; Compensation of Rs. 2500/- granted
The applicant wants the attested photocopies of preliminary and ongoing enquiry reports conducted by ESI Hospital NOIDA and reports submitted by Pushpanjli Crossby Hospital Ghaziabad till date regarding unsatisfactory services provided by Pushpanjli Crossby Hospital for patient Chanchal Rani Gupta.
Grounds for the Second Appeal: The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing held on 13/03/2015: The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Bhuvanesh Kumar through VC M: 09311711392 Respondent: Absent
The appellant stated that he was provided information after 10 months due to which he faced great difficulty in filing medical negligence claim before the consumer forum and has also been put to extra legal expenses.
The CPIO is not present inspite of being put on notice for the hearing.
Interim decision notice dated 13/03/2015:
The Commission takes a serious view of the lackadaisical/callous attitude adopted by the CPIO who has not bothered to attend the hearing inspite of being put on notice. The Commission, therefore, directs the DG ESIC to call for the explanation of the CPIO for not providing timely information and also for not attending the hearing inspite of being put on notice. The explanation of the CPIO as aforesaid along with the DG’s comments should reach the Commission on or before 01/04/2015 by post and also by e-mail at email@example.com. Next date of hearing is fixed for 15/04/2015 at 04:00 PM.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing held on 15/04/2015: The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Bhuvanesh Kumar through VC M: 09311711392
Respondent: Mr. Mukesh Kumar CPIO through VC
The CPIO explained that enquiry report submitted by Dr. Mukherjee was under consideration by the higher authority and the information was provided vide letter dated 21/05/2014. The appellant pointed out that even after taking a final view the information was delayed thereby putting him to extra expense. He requested that some compensation should be awarded for the detriment caused to him. The CPIO regretted and explained that the delay was on account of the huge workload in the department.
The information has been provided.
The appellant did not receive the information timely. For the detriment caused he deserves to be compensated, therefore in exercise of the powers vested in the CIC under section 19(8)(b) In its decision, the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, has the power to require the public authority to compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered; of the RTI Act, we direct the department to compensate him by an amount of Rs. 2500/- for the inconvenience and detriment caused to him. Accordingly, the CPIO should ensure that this amount is remitted to the appellant by demand draft/pay order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Citation: Mr. Bhuvanesh Kumar v. ESIC in File No. CIC/BS/A/2014/000681/7406