Chandigarh: State Information Commission, Punjab has declared MAX Super Specialty Hospital, Bathinda as “Public Authorities” and directed them to provide the required information to the appellant within 30 days. Disposing off an appeal, filed by Mr. Sadhu ram Kusla S/o Ram Chand Bansal House no 138,Indira lodge, Veer Colony Bathinda , the commission held that
institutions in question are being given land on a nominal annual in single-lump sum of Rs.50/- for 50 years (Re.1/year as Lease Rent by the Punjab Infrastructure development board (PIDB), squarely fits into the definition of Section 2(h)(d)(ii) of the RTI Act thus we accordingly declare this institution as “Public Authorities” with the direction to the authority Max Super Specialty Hospital,Nh 64, Near District Hospital, Bathinda to part with the information asked for within 30 days to the appellant.”
Disclosing this here, an official Spokesperson of the commission said that a case had been filed with the contention that Max Super Specialty Hospital, Bathinda was not providing information under RTI Act on the pretext that they are neither public Authority. Resultantly, they are not obliged to act on the application of the complainant.
After reviewing the documents, the commission said that State information commission in its order dated 12.05.2011 in CC No.3315 of 2010 titled Dr. S.G. Damle Vs PIO Fortis Hospital, Mohali is another important aspect to the case, which should not be ignored. the respondent is a hospital. It is true that it is a private commercial venture, but given the nature of its business, the respondent is discharging an important service to the society. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in a full bench decision in the case of Ravneet Kaur Vs CMC, Ludhiana, (AIR 1998 Punjab and Haryana -1) rejected the argument that a body discharging public duty, merely because it is a private body, would place it beyond the pale of scrutiny. The court observed that what is relevant is the nature of the functions being discharged by an institution, rather than the consideration whether it is a public body or a private institution. “source of power is not important. It is the nature of power that is relevant”.
Even the Government of India in its guidelines issued through the Department of Personnel and Training has maintained that all information relating to PPPs must be placed in public domain suo moto as per proviso of Section 4 of the RTI Act, including the details of SPVs. Project report, concession agreement, operation and maintenance manuals and other documents generated as part of implementation of PPP Project should also be proactively disclosed. The very nomenclature of a Public Private Project (PPP) suggests the preponderance of a public interest involved in the project.