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

2008 Supreme(P&H) 515

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
M.M.Kumar and T.P.S.Mann JJ.
D.A.V.College Trust And Management Society
Versus
Director Of Public Instruction
Civil Writ Petition No. 2626 of 2008,
Decided On : FEBRUARY 25, 2008

Institutions receiving substantial grant-in-aid from the government are considered public authorities under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Headnote:

Right to Information Act - Public Authority - Section 2(h)(d) - [Right to Information Act, 2005, Section 2(h)(d)] - The court discussed the definition of 'public authority' under Section 2(h)(d) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and concluded that institutions receiving substantial grant-in-aid from the government are considered public authorities. The court also referred to the case of Ravneet Kaur v. The Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, AIR 1998 Punjab and Haryana 1, where it was held that institutions performing public functions and receiving substantial grant-in-aid are considered public authorities.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved the question of whether D. A. V. College, Sector 10, Chandigarh could be regarded as a public authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners, including D. A. V. College, Sector 10, Chandigarh, are covered by the expression 'public authority' as used in Section 2(h)(d) of the Act, as they receive substantial grant-in-aid from the Chandigarh Administration.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners could be considered public authorities under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that institutions receiving substantial grant-in-aid from the government are considered public authorities, and referred to the case of Ravneet Kaur v. The Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, where it was held that institutions performing public functions and receiving substantial grant-in-aid are considered public authorities.

Final Decision: The petition failed and was dismissed by the court.

Judgment

M.M.KUMAR, J.

1. The short issue raised in this petition is as to whether the D. A. V. College, Sector 10, Chandigarh could be regarded as public authority within the meaning of Section 2(h)(d) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for brevity the Act).

2. There are colleges with the name of D.A.V. College, Sector 10, Chandigarh, M. C. M. D. A. V. College, Sector 36, Chandigarh and a school with the name of D. A. V. Senior Secondary School, Sector 8, Chandigarh. These institutions are established by the society and are admittedly getting financial aid to the extent of 95% from the Union Territory, Chandigarh. It is claimed that grant-in-aid was initially to the extent of 95% which has come down to 45%. The grievance aired by the petitioner is that the Director of Public Instructions, U. T. Chandigarh has initiated proceedings against the petitioners under the Act whereas the petitioners do not fall within the expression public authority as used in Section 2(h) (d) of the Act. It is claimed that the petitioners cannot be considered to have been receiving substantial financial aid from the government or government resources. In respect of petitioner No. 4 i.e. D. A. V. Senior Secondary School, Sector 8, Chandigarh, respondent No. 2 vide order dated 10-10-2001 /3-12-2007 (Annexure P/ 1) has already expressed its opinion that it is a public authority within the meaning of Section 2(h)(d) of the Act. Members of the public had sought information from the petitioners by moving applications to the Public Information Officer. On 25-9-2007 (Annexure P.2), one Arun Aggarwal, respondent No. 5 has sought information regarding annual fee structure for various Classes/ Programmes/Diplomas/Certificate courses/ Add-on courses offered by the D. A. V. College, Sector 10, Chandigarh along with many other informations. Likewise, on 26-9-2007 (Annexure P.3), one Shri Avanindra Chopra, respondent No. 6, has requested for supply of information concerning advertisement/ to notices issued by the D. A. V. College, Sector 10, Chandigarh in respect of college admissions for the session 2007-08. One Sat Pal Kharwal, respondent No. 7 on 26-2-2007 (Annexure P. 4) had also requested for supply of some information. However, the petitioners, in their reply sent to respondent No. 5 has taken the stand that the Act does not apply to their institution as it is not a public authority. Respondent No. 1 on 10-9-2007 advised the petitioner to comply with the provisions of the Act as the petitioner is getting 95% grant-in-aid from the Chandigarh Administration. The view of respondent No. 1 is expressed in the following terms :

"In view of the above provisions, it is clear that the DAV College, Chandigarh being an Aided College getting 95% grant-in-aid from the Chandigarh Administration is controlled and substantially financed by the Government and as such the college authorities are bound to comply with the provisions of the Act. We operate in an era of transparency and accountability and it is expected that all our decision must stand the test of public scrutiny. Issues relating to annual fee structure for various courses, leave encashment, contributory provided fund deductions etc. are not covered by the provisions of Section 8 of the Act which provides exemption from disclosure of information. Even otherwise, the annual fee structure, being an integral part of the Prospectus, is open to all and it would be improper to withhold information on the same."

3. Similar directions have been issued by the Central Public Information Officer, office of respondent No. 1 to the petitioners for furnishing information to respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 (Annexures P. 8 to P. 10).

4. We have heard the learned counsel at a considerable length and find that the petitioners are covered by the expression public authority as used by Section 2(h)(d) of the Act. The afore-mentioned provision is reproduced hereunder for facility of reference :

"2. Definitions. In this Act, unless, the







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top