Moneylife: Delhi: Thursday, April 18, 2013.
Delhi police
and GNCTD failed to provide a viscera report for over two-and-a-half years
despite repeated reminders. Such inefficient practices are fertile ground for
complete wrongdoing to go scot-free, the CIC noted. This is the 75th in a
series of important judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner
Shailesh Gandhi that can be used or quoted in an RTI application
The Central
Information Commission (CIC), while disposing an appeal, expressed concern over
the “absurd state of affairs” where the Delhi police and Government of National
Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) could not provide a viscera report for over
two-and-a-half years, despite repeated reminders.
While giving
this a judgement on 19 November 2010, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central
Information Commissioner said, “In the instant case over thirty months have
already elapsed and yet the Viscera Report has not been given in spite of
repeated reminders. Such inefficient practices are fertile ground for complete
wrong doing to go scot-free.”
Karnal
(Haryana) resident KK Sharma, on 5 July 2010, sought clarification as to his
wife's death in Batra Hospital, the doctor's role and the post mortem report
under the Right to Information (RTI) Act from the PIO of DMC.
Here is the
reply given by the PIO...
1.
It
is informed that complaint No. 493 of Shri KK Sharma against doctors of Batra
Hospital was under consideration of Delhi Medical Council.
2.
That
the Disciplinary Committee of the Delhi Medical Council has ordered the seeking
of the post mortem report from the Police Station, Ambedkar Nagar. In pursuance
of the same notice was sent to the SHO, Police Station, Ambedkar Nagar on 26
November 2008 and on 31 December 2008. Two reminders were also sent, one on 20
March 2009 and the other on 12 May 2009. Similar notice was sent to the Joint
Commissioner of Police, Southern Range, Delhi Police on 2 July 2009.
3.
A
letter was sent to the Directorate of Health Services, Govt of NCT of Delhi
(GNCTD) dated 29 September 2009 and again a letter was sent dated 27 January
2010 wherein attested copy of the following was requested:
(a) Post Mortem report No. 304/08 dated 27
March 2008.
(b) Opinion as to cause of death in
respect of Post mortem report No.304/08.
(c) Viscera analysis report including
records of Batra Hospital to determine
the issue of medical negligence as in the absence of the said documents, the
Delhi Medical Council is unable to proceed in the matter. As on date of reply
of the PIO i.e. on 13/07/2010, the above mentioned documents were not received
by the PIO.
The PIO also
observed that the queries raised by the applicant in his RTI application are in
the nature of grievance redressal which is beyond the scope of the RTI Act in
term of section 2(l) and (j) of the said Act.
Not satisfied
with the reply, Sharma filed his first appeal. The First Appellate Authority
(FAA) while disposing off the appeal, made following observations.
1)
The
PlO has rightly observed that all issues which are or may be the subject matter
of complaint being under consideration of the Delhi Medical Council and cannot
be commented upon by the PlO.
2)
The
queries raised by the applicant in his RTI application are in the nature of
grievance redressal, which is outside the scope of the RTI Act in term of
section 2 (l) and section 2(j) of the said Act.
3)
The
information provided to the appellant by the Public Information Officer was
based on the information available on the records of DMC and in terms of
Section 2(f) and section 2(j) of the Act.
Again not
satisfied with the reply from both the FAA and PIO, the applicant (Sharma)
filed his second appeal before the CIC.
During the
hearing, the Commission observed that the appellant (Sharma) had alleged
medical negligence in the death of his wife and filed a complaint in June 2008
to the Directorate of Health Services (DHS). This complaint was forwarded to
Delhi Medical Council on 10 June 2008. The Delhi Medical Council set up a
Disciplinary Committee to look into the matter. The Disciplinary Committee came
to the conclusion that it needed a copy of the viscera report to decide on the
issue.
The PIO
submitted before the Commission that in spite of repeated efforts the DMC has
not been able to get the final cause of death because of the pending viscera
report.
He stated
that “With reference to your application received in this office on 5 July
2010, on the subject noted above, based on the records available in the office
of Delhi Medical Council, it is informed that complaint No493 of KK Sharma
against doctors of Batra Hospital is still under consideration of Delhi Medical
Council. In the last hearing held in this case on 2 November 2008, the
Disciplinary Committee of Delhi Medical Council has directed that efforts be
made towards seeking copy of post-mortem report from Police Station at Ambedkar
Nagar. In pursuance to the said direction of Disciplinary Committee, a notice
was sent to SHO Police Station Ambedkar Nagar on 26 November 2008 and again on
31 December 2008. A second reminder was sent on 20 March 2009 and third
reminder was sent on 12 May 2009. A letter in this regard was also sent to
Commissioner of Police, Southern Range, Delhi Police on 2 July 2009. The matter
was also brought to the notice of Directorate of Health Services, GNCTD on 29
September 2009 and again on 27 January 2010
wherein it was requested that attested copy of (a) Post Mortem report
No. 304/08 dated 27.3.2008 (b) Opinion as to cause of death in respect of Post
mortem report No. 304/08. (c) Viscera Analysis report, including medical records
of Batra Hospital be provided to the office of Delhi Medical Council as the
examination of the same are essential for determining the issue of medical
negligence and in absence of the said documents, the Delhi Medical Council is
unable to proceed in this matter. It is further informed that as on date, the
aforementioned documents are still awaited in the office of Delhi Medical
Council.”
“It is also
observed that all issues which are or may be the subject matter of complaint
No. 493 or connected therewith or incidental thereto being under consideration
of the Delhi Medical Council cannot be commented upon by the PIO,” he stated.
Mr Gandhi,
the then CIC, noted that the PIO was unable to inform the applicant about the
final outcome because the Disciplinary Committee could not conclude the matter
in absence of the viscera report and the Delhi Medical Council has been
pursuing this matter with the Delhi Police and Delhi Government without
success.
“The
Commission would like to comment that it is an absurd state of affairs that the
viscera report is not been supplied for over two-and-half years and endless
efforts are being made in this regard. The PIO confirms that normally it should
not take more than three months to get the viscera report,” the CIC said.
The
Commission then disposed the appeal.
.JPG)
.JPG)
