SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Bom) 1476

High Court of Judicature at Bombay
B.H. MARLAPALLE & A.A. SAYED
The Board of Management of the Bombay Properties of the Indian Institute of Science
Versus
The Central Information Commission & Others
WRIT PETITION NO. 1887 OF 2010
Decided on 11-10-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Aspi Chinoy with Kevic Setalwad i/by M/s. Harish Joshi & Co., Advocates. For the Respondents:R3, A.A. Kumbhakoni with Ms.Srikrishnan i/by M/s. Kanga & Co., Advocates, R4, Mrs. Poornima Awasthi - Union of India.

Headnote:Right of Information Act, 2005 - Section 2(h)(d)-Public authority-Board of Management of Mumbai Properties of Indian Institute of Science at Bangalore-Established by Notification issued by Government of India-A public authority under Section 2(h)(d) of Act.-The CIC has noted the arguments advanced by both the parties i.e. the petitioner and respondent No. 3 and has stated that the Vesting Order dated 27th May, 1909 has been replaced by a new scheme published by the Notification dated 22nd May, 1967 by the Union of India and the said notification stipulated that the revised scheme came into effect from 22nd May, 1967 under Section 5 of the Endowments Act. Respondent No.2 further noted that in para 2.1 of the said Scheme, the Board of Management has been constituted and two out of the 4 members of the Board are Government Officers and one is nominated by the Government of India and thus 3 of the 4 members of the Board owe their position on the Board by the nomination of the Government of India it also noted that the Scheme notified on 22nd May, 1967 has established the petitioner Board and therefore it is public authority under Section 2(h)(d) of the Act i.e. the Board has been established/constituted by a Notification issued by the Government of India. In Court’s opinion, this reasoning of the CIC cannot be faulted with having regard to the Scheme notified on 22nd May, 1967, which has substituted the original vesting order dated 27th May, 1909.

       Right of Information Act, 2005 - Section 6-Application for information-Locus standi or intention of applicant-Cannot be questioned-All information sought by applicant required to be furnished to him except what exempted under Section 8 of Act therein.-As per Section 3 of the Act, subject to the provisions therein, all citizens shall have the right to information. Section 6(1) of the Act states that a person, who desires to obtain any information under the Act, shall make a request in writing or through electronic means specifying the particulars of the information sought by him/her. Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act states that an applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details except those that may be necessary for contracting him. It is thus clear that while entertaining an application for information made under the Act, the locus standi or the intention of the applicant cannot be question and is required to furnish all the information sought by him except what has been exempted under Section 8 therein.

Judgment :-

B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.

This petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order dated 15th February, 2010 passed by the Central Information Commissioner (for short “the CIC”) holding that the petitioner is a public authority as defined under Section 2(h)(d) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short “the Act”) and directing the petitioner to provide the complete information to the present respondent No.3 before 5th March, 2010. This petition was filed on 4th March, 2010 and appeared before the Court for the first time on 17th March, 2010 and the Court had not granted stay to the impugned order.

2. The petitioner is the Board of Management of the Mumbai properties of the Indian Institute of Science at Bangalore (for short “the Institute”) and the said Institute is an autonomous body under the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India and is also a deemed University and financed by the Government of India. Late Shri Jamsetjee Nusserwanjee Tata had submitted a proposal to the Government of India for funding an Institute of Research in India and endowing such institute with immoveable properties in the City of Mumbai. Accordingly, on 27th May, 1909 the Secretary to the Government of India passed a Vesting Order under Sections 4 and 7 of the Charitable Endowments Act, 1890 (for short “the Endowments Act”) and the properties as listed in Schedule “A” to the said Vesting Order came to be vested in the treasurer of the Charitable Endowments for the Territories subject to the Government of Mumbai. By a subsequent order dated 13th November, 1941 passed by the Government of India through the Finance Department all the properties vested in the Treasurer for Charitable Endowments for any Province came to be vested under Section 12 of the Endowments Act in the Treasurer of Charitable Endowments for India. By the subsequent Notification dated 22nd May, 1967 the Government of India through the Ministry of Education and upon the application of the Council of the Institute and its Board of Management and in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 5 of the Endowments Act and with the concurrence of the Council and the Board of Management and the joint consent of the Trustees of the Public Charities known as Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and the Sir Ratan Tata Trust and with the approval of the Visitor of the said Institute, declared a Scheme for the administration and management of the properties and funds of the said Institute and as set out in Schedule “H” to the Vesting Order dated 27th May, 1909 and thereby revised the Scheme as set forth in the Vesting Order dated 27th May, 1909. Thus, the management of the properties which were vested with the Treasurer for Endowments of the Central Government and covered by the Order dated 27th May, 1909 became a part of the Scheme dated 22nd May, 1967.

3. Respondent No.3, by his application dated 24th September, 2007 addressed to the Public Information Officer of the Institute, sought the following informations in respect of 2 flats situated in Hamton Court and 1 flat in Jenkins House at Mumbai:

“a) The names of present tenants since there was a proposal to transfer the flats to the defence forces.

b) Whether Edwart Investment was authorized by IISc to negotiate on their behalf. c) Whether IISc is a charitable trust and does it fall under charitable commissioner of UGC.

d) Whether permission had been taken to allot flats to the defence forces.

e) The total transaction since the market value of the flats were estimated to be around Rs.5 crores.

f) The benefits to IISc in the transfer of the flats.

g) Whether Edwart Investment control IISc, Bangalore.

h) Act or legislation under which Edwart Investment has control over IISc Bangalore.

I) The person responsible for the loss of revenue.

j) Whether any bids/offers were invited to determine market value of the flats.

k) All the correspondence regarding between IISc and Edwart Investment.”



































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top