The conditions & details of a tender were sought - Respondent: the said tender has already been cancelled - CIC: as the RTI application was filed before the cancellation, provide certain information along with the reasons for cancelling the said tender
The appellant is present. The Public Authority is represented by Dr. Anuradha Pande, Consultant (ENT), Dr. Shakuntala Rani, Mr. Virender Kalonia, DA, from Babu Ragjivan Ram Memorial Hospital, GNCTD, Delhi.
2. The appellant filed the above two appeals against the same Public Authority and hence they are heard together today.
3. In the first file, the appellant submitted that through his RTI application dated 29-12-2012, he is seeking to know about the conditions and details of a Tender for Local Chemist, floated by the respondent authority on 25-5-2012. He is seeking information on 21 points by his RTI application. The PIO has given information by his reply dated 28-1-2013, over which the appellant filed first appeal before the FAA. FAA by his order dated 14-3-2013, upheld the information given by the PIO and disposed of the first appeal.
4. In the second file, by his RTI application dated 29-12-2012, the appellant is seeking to know about the 20,000 pairs of sterile gloves (ISI Mark) supplied to the respondent hospital – about the quality, details of the suppliers, whether they were sent for testing, whether Central Purchasing Authority has been informed, names of the departments who have consumed these gloves, etc. through 25 points raised in the said RTI application. The PIO has given information by his reply dated 2812013, over which the appellant filed first appeal before the FAA. FAA by his order dated 1432013, directed the PIO to supply information to the appellant on the points Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 16, 19 and 21 within 15 days from the date of receipt of his order.
5. Claiming dissatisfaction at the information supplied by the respondent authority, the appellant filed 2nd appeal before the Commission in both the cases.
6. Heard the submissions made by both the parties. In the first case, the respondent authority submitted that the tender referred by the appellant has already been cancelled by them. However, as the appellant filed the RTI application before the cancellation of the tender, the Commission directs the respondent authority to provide information on points Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 16, 18 and 20 along with the reasons for cancelling the said tender, within a week from the date of receipt of this order.
7. In the second case, the Commission directs the respondent authority to inform the details of information as to whether any batches of gloves, or all batches of gloves, were sent for testing, which were actually tested, why others were not tested, etc. within one week from the date of receipt of this order.
8. With the above directions, the Commission disposes of the above two appeals accordingly.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu)
Citation: Mr. Pawan Vij v. Babu Jagjivan Ram Memorial Hospital, GNCTD, Delhi in (1)File No.CIC/AD/A/2013/001429SA(2)File No.CIC/AD/A/2013/001430SA