KERALA PRIVATE MEDICAL COLLEGE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION v. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

WP(C) 9218/07-: 3 :-directing the respondents to furnish the information sought for inExts.P2 and P6. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the 1st respondentto take follow up action on Ext.P7. 6.Among the requests made by the petitioner, at least Ext.P1made to the 2nd respondent, who is stated to be a member of theJustice P.A. Mohammed Committee has been responded by Ext.P4, inwhich it stated that Ext.P1 has been forwarded to the Department ofHealth & Family Welfare for necessary action. Since the Department ofHealth & Family Welfare, to which Ext.P2 request and Ext.P6 reminderhave been made, has not furnished the information within the timespecified in Section 7 of the Act, there is deemed refusal as provided inSection 7(2) of the Act. In this background petitioner is well justifiedin approaching the 1st respondent by filing Ext.P7 complaint underSection 18 of the Act. Since the petitioner has already approachedthe 1st respondent, I am not inclined to direct that further actionshould be taken on Exts.P2 and P6. 7.The further complaint of the petitioner is that even Ext.P7has not been acted upon by the 1st respondent. It is to beremembered that Section 3 of the Act confers on all citizens the rightto information, subject to the provisions of the Act. None of theauthorities have so far claimed any exemption from disclosure of theinformation sought for by the petitioner and therefore I proceed on thebasis that the entitlement of the petitioner has not been disputed. The1st respondent has been appointed under Section 15 of the Act, andhas been conferred with the power to deal with complaints regardinginaction on the part of Information Officers appointed under the Act. WP(C) 9218/07-: 4 :-As I have already stated, Ext.P7 is such a complaint filed by thepetitioner invoking the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent under Section18 of the Act. If Ext.P7 has been received by the 1st respondent, Ican’t find any justification for the inaction the 1st respondent on thecomplaint made by the petitioner. This, to say the least, is a failure onthe part of the 1st respondent in discharging its statutory duties. 8.In the aforesaid circumstances, I dispose of the writpetition directing the 1st respondent to take up Ext.P7 complaint filedby the petitioner, consider the same on its merits and pass appropriateorders thereon, with notice to the petitioner. In view of the urgency ofthe matter highlighted in the writ petition, it is further directed thatorders on Ext.P7 shall be passed within three weeks of receipt of acopy of this judgment. 9.Petitioner is directed to produce certified copy of thisjudgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above.Antony DominicJudge.ess 15/5