SUNIL DHULL v. Delhi Medical Council

The CPIO vide letter dated 22.06.2022, furnished a reply to the Complainant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the PIO, the Complainant approached the FAA. The FAA vide order dated 03.08.2022, furnished a reply to the Appellant.

Thereafter, the Complainant approached the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Complainant: Present in Person Respondent: Mr Sandeep Mittal AO Dr Girish Tyagi FAA , Mr Praveen Khatter Advocate

Present in Person

The Complainant while reiterating the contents of the RTI application submitted that he had sought a certified copy of minutes of meeting of committee held on 1.06.2022 regarding two doctors ( Dr Manish Jain & Dr Akash Yadav) and Sh. Rahul Malik, certified copy of communication issued by DMC and their replies in the aforesaid matter etc. He claimed that in the medical field some people are showing false qualifications for being appointed as a doctor and to get jobs by concealing facts such as their MD degree which is not affiliated in India. Further he pointed out that even few of the reputed hospitals of Delhi & NCR, show these people as consultants and specialists in order to deceive the common people. In one such case, he said, the two mentioned doctors were helping a dropout of Maulana Azad , Rahul Malik, who is the brother in law of the Complainant by granting him their stamps. He said although the RTI involved his own brother in law he was seeking the information in larger public interest. The Respondent in reply and through his written submission dated 18.07.2023 explained that the Delhi Medical Council has examined the Complainant's complaint on this issue and acted on it with the seriousness it deserves. He observed that observed that Sh. Rahul Malik is liable to be

Page 2 of 3

prosecuted under section 27 of the Delhi Medical Council Act, 1997, as he prefixes the title of Dr., and suffixes M.B.B.S.. M.D.M.A. to his name, and that he is not qualified to claim himself as Doctor or practice in modern scientific system of medicine. The same has been informed to the Station House Officer, Police Station Najafgarh, Delhi 110043 for the information and necessary action. Further, Dr. Manish Jain(Delhi Medical Council Registration No.25143) and Dr. Aakash Yadav(Delhi Medical Council Registration No.31490) were also found guilty of violation of regulations of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002 as mentioned in the order and were awarded the punishment of removal of their names from the State Medical Register of the Delhi Medical Council for a period of 30 days, respectively and the same was informed to the Complainant. The Complainant claimed that partial and uncertified information has been furnished to him. The Respondent contradicted and said that complete certified copies have been furnished in Annexure 31and Annexure of the written submission and were already given to the Complainant.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions the Commission observes that the instant matter is a Complaint under the RTI Act where no further direction for disclosure of information can be given and it is only required to be ascertained if the information has been denied with a malafide intention or due to an unreasonable cause. Taking into consideration, the submission made by both the parties and on the perusal of the documents on record, the Commission observes that no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter. The Complaint stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर)

(Information Commissioner) (सचूना आयुक्त)

Authenticated true copy (अशिप्रमाशणत एवं सत्याशित प्रशत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के. राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उि-िंजीयक) 011-26182598

शदनांक / Date: 25.07.2023

Page 3 of 3