SHIROMANI GURUDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, I propose to decide three writ petitions, which emanate from the orders passed by the State Information Commission, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') holding Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'SGPC') a 'public authority' under The Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'RTI Act') as also the institutions, which are owned, controlled and substantially financed by it. The issue involved in these writ petitions being identical, these three writ petitions were heard together with the basic arguments being addressed in the context of the pleadings in CWP No.4082 of 2010 titled as Shiromani Gurudwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar Versus State of Punjab and others. The initial facts are, therefore, being taken from the said writ petition.

(2.) Three complaints came to be filed before the Commission, where the applicants having sought information relating to the selection process from the SGPC where they had applied for different posts in three different institutions run by SGPC but the said information was not supplied to them within the time stipulated under the RTI Act. It would not be out of way to mention here that the information, which has been sought for, pertaining to the selection in which the applicants had participated but were not selected and were thus seeking information pertaining to the said selection.

(3.) These pleas as were taken by SGPC before the Commission were rejected vide order dtd. 4/12/2009 (Annexure P-l) by concluding that SGPC is a public authority under Sec. 2 (h) (c) of the RTI Act being a creation of law under the State Legislature. Whether it is funded or some financial aid is received from the Government or not is immaterial and, therefore, it was bound to provide the information under the RTI Act to the applicants, who had approached the Commission under Sec. 18 of the RTI Act. It was further observed that the information, which has been sought by the applicants, does not pertain to any religious affairs but relates to the selection process of the teachers recruited by SGPC in the institutions established by it. The Commission did not find any reason as to why this information should be withheld as according to the Commission, transparency will bring greater legitimacy to the system and strengthen the confidence of all concerned. Review applications preferred by SGPC were dismissed vide order dtd. 27/1/2010 by the Commission (Annexure P-2).