PEOPLE WELFARE SOCIETY Vs. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises in this Letters Patent Appeal is whether a Public Trust registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 (for short, the Act of 1950) is duty bound to supply information sought from it under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short, the Act of 2005) ?

(2.) The facts giving rise to the aforesaid question are that it is the case of the appellant-Society that it is registered under provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 as well as under provisions of the Act of 1950. The Society runs various educational institutions in the district of Nagpur. On 15/04/2010 the respondent No.3 moved an application seeking information under provisions of the Act of 2005 from the Society. This information was not supplied by the Society on the ground that the provisions of the Act of 2005 were not applicable to it. Being aggrieved, the respondent No.3 availed the remedy of statutory appeal and the proceedings reached the State Information Commissioner under Section 19(3) of the Act of 2005. By the order dated 07/06/2010 the State Information Commissioner allowed the appeal preferred by the respondent No.3 and directed the Society to appoint a Public Information Officer as per provisions of Section 5 of the Act of 2005 and thereafter supply the information sought by the respondent No.3. This order of the State Information Commissioner was challenged by the Society in Writ Petition No.5168/2010. By the judgment under challenge in the Letters Patent Appeal the learned Single Judge held that it was undisputed that the Society was running a college that was receiving 100% grant from the State Government. Such Public Trust/Society was thus bound to comply with the provisions of Act of 2005 being a public authority. Following the decision of Division Bench in Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Kamptee and anr. vs. The State Information Commissioner, Nagpur and ors. 2010 (6) Mh.L.J. 357 , the writ petition came to be dismissed. Being aggrieved the Society has challenged the aforesaid judgment.

(3.) Shri P. R. Parsodkar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the Society which was registered under the Act of 1950 was not receiving any grants from the State exchequer so as to satisfy the requirement of it being a "public authority " under Section 2(h) of the Act of 2005. Merely because the Society was running a college which was receiving grant from the State exchequer the same could not be the reason to hold that the Society was a "public authority " under the Act of 2005 and thus liable to supply information as sought by the respondent No.3. The Society and the college run by it were separate and distinct entities. It was only the college that was receiving grants and therefore the college alone was bound to supply information under the Act of 2005. Placing reliance on the decisions in Nagar Yuwak Shikshan Sanstha, Nagpur and anr. vs. Maharashtra State Information Commission, Vidarbha Region, Nagpur and anr. 2009 (6) Mh.L.J. 85, Bhaskarrao Shankarrao Kulkarni vs. State Information Commissioner, Nagpur and ors. 2009 (4) Mh.L.J. 802 and D.A.V. College Trust and Management Society and ors. vs. Director of Public Instructions and ors. (2019) 9 SCC 185 it was submitted that by no stretch of imagination could a Public Trust not receiving any grant-in-aid be called a public authority so as to require it to comply with the provisions of the Act of 2005. On these grounds the judgment of the learned Single Judge was liable to be set aside.