JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioners are private unaided educational institutions being run and administered by Tyndale Biscoe & Mallinson Society registered under the Jammu & Kashmir Societies Registration Act, 1998 (Samvat) 1947 A.D. The petitioners are primarily aggrieved of the action of the respondents for forcing, pressuring and compelling the petitioner-schools to provide information to various persons under the Right to Information Act, 2005 [“the Act of 2005”]. The petitioners have made reference to few communications of Chief Education Officer, Srinagar, who is also a designated Public Information Officer under the Act of 2005, whereby the Public Information Officer aforesaid has called upon the petitioners to provide point-wise information in reference to the applications made by different persons seeking information with regard to affairs of the petitioner-schools under the Act of 2005.

2. The petitioners claim that in response to the different communications issued by the Chief Education Officer, Srinagar, the petitioners have written back that the private unaided schools, as the petitioners are, do not come within the purview of the expression “public authority” as defined under Section 2(h) of the Act of 2005 and, therefore, they are not bound to disclose or provide any information to the applicant(s) seeking information by invoking the Act of 2005.

3. Ms. Asifa Padroo, learned AAG appearing for the respondents has contested the contention of Mr. Sethi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners by submitting that the petitioners, who are performing a public duty of imparting education and have established their institutions on the lands provided by the government on nominal prices, are nonetheless public authority within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Act of 2005, therefore, the Chief Education Officer, Srinagar has committed no illegality in calling upon the petitioners to respond to the applications moved by some information seekers under the Act of 2005.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, it is seen that the petitioner-schools being run by Tyndale Biscoe and Mallinson Society are unaided private schools, though, established and recognized under the J&K School Education Act, 2002. The Society is admittedly not receiving grant in aid and is not otherwise substantially financed by the Government and that being so, it is difficult to bring the petitioners within the purview of the term “public authority” as defined under Section 2(h) of the Act of 2005.

5. It may not be out of place to set out the definition of “public authority” as given in Section 2(h) of the Act of 2005 herein below:-

“2(h) “public authority” means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted-

(a) by or under the Constitution;

(b) by any other law made by Parliament;

(c) by any other law made by State Legislature;

(d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any-

(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;

(ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government”

6. The Society, which is running and administering the petitioner-schools is not an authority, body or institution of self-government established or constituted by or under the Constitution or by any law made by Parliament or State Legislature. There is also no notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government to declare the Society a institution of self government. Apart from this, the Society may have established its educational institutions on the lands provided by the government on concessional rates, yet it would not be correct to presume or hold that the petitioner-schools are substantially financed by the Government. The terms “means” and “includes” used in Section 2(h) of Act of 2005 makes it abundantly clear that Section 2(h) is restrictive and embraces