Central Information Commission pulls up ECHS Haldwani for denying RTI details on medical grievance

Commissions | Forums | Tribunals | RERA

The Central Information Commission has criticised the ECHS Cell at Station Headquarters, Haldwani, for what it described as an unjustified refusal to share information related to a medical grievance filed by an ex-serviceman. The case, heard on November 12 and decided on November 20, 2025, revolved around an RTI application filed by appellant Maneesh Bisht seeking updates on his complaint alleging medical malpractice by an empaneled private hospital, Krishna Hospital in Haldwani.

According to the order, the applicant had earlier submitted CT scan films, post-operative notes and supporting documents to the ECHS Cell in 2023 while pursuing a complaint regarding a failed surgery. He later sought inspection of all relevant records and action taken on his grievance. The Public Information Officer (PIO) declined the request, citing a fiduciary exemption under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. Both the First Appellate Authority and the PIO maintained this stand.

The Commission found this reasoning legally unsound. In the detailed decision, Information Commissioner Vinod Kumar Tiwari noted that the PIO had given a vague reply, failed to apply his mind and had even avoided the hearing. The order pointed out that when a public authority receives a complaint about an empaneled private hospital, the information does not fall under any fiduciary relationship. The Commission emphasised that a complainant is entitled to know the status of action taken, especially when allegations involve potential malpractice in an empaneled facility, which is a matter of public interest.

The Commission directed the PIO to revisit the RTI request and issue a revised, point-wise response free of cost within four weeks. Any genuinely exempt material may be redacted under Section 10 with proper justification. In addition, the PIO, Arun Shekhar, has been issued a show-cause notice asking why penalty proceedings should not be initiated for both the unjustified denial and his absence during the hearing. The order has also instructed the First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance.

Case Details : Maneesh Bisht vs PIO, ECHS Cell, Station Headquarters, Haldwani, PIN – 900281

Scroll to Top