The main legal point established in the judgment is that the declaration of political parties as 'public authorities' under the RTI Act does not automatically make them a 'State' for the purpose of Article 12 of the Constitution, and the High Court cannot issue directions for legislation.

S.S. Saron, J.

This petition has been filed seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 8, which are political parties to implement the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short - 'the RTI Act') in their office/s in terms of the final decision dated 03.06.2013 (Annexure P-5) of the Central Information Commission (for short - 'the Commission'). A further direction has been sought for empowering the Central Information Commission/State Information Commissions to ensure the compliance of its orders. It is further prayed for directing the respondents to implement the National Commission on Farmers' 5th and final report dated 04.10.2006 (Annexure P-3) and the report (Annexure P-4) submitted by a Group of Ministers in the year 2010 in terms of the election manifestos (Annexures P-7 and P-8) of respondents No. 1 and 2, which are political parties. It is further prayed for calling the relevant records from the office of respondents' No. 1, 2, 8 and 9 to check the steps taken to implement their pledges to the farmers to the limited extent of their manifestos relating to agricultural reforms. It is further prayed for directing the Election Commission of India to take steps to get implemented the election manifestos of the political parties and also ensure compliance of the provisions of the RTI Act in the functioning of political parties.

2. The petitioner is a practising lawyer, primarily, in the Supreme Court of India and in this Court. It is submitted that he has rendered services to the Commission and National Investigation Agency as a Legal Consultant/Legal Retainer. He is involved in social activities and has rendered legal service to the 'Justice Onkar Singh Free Legal Aid Service Trust' headed by Sh. K.T.S. Tulsi, Senior Advocate. He is M.A., LLB; PGD in Journalism and Mass Communication; PGD in Cyber Law, PGD in Intellectual Property Laws and General Course in Intellectual Property Rights (WIPO, Geneva). He has no personal interest in litigation and that the petition is not guided by self-gain or for gain of any other person/institution/body and that there is no motive other than that of public interest in filing the writ petition.

3. It is submitted by way of clarification that the petitioner belongs to an agricultural family and his near dear family members and relatives are involved in agricultural activities as a source of their livelihood since immemorial times. The petitioner has 1/15 share in land measuring 140 kanals 7 marlas, i.e. 9 kanals 7 marlas, situated in revenue estate of village Balu, Tehsil Kalayat, District Kaithal. The district of the petitioner shares its boundary with District Patiala in the State of Punjab. It is submitted that the petitioner is entitled to seek information under the RTI Act from the respondents - political parties without giving any reason. It is further stated that the petitioner is a registered voter and would participate in democracy in a more transparent and effective manner. Therefore, it is submitted that if the present public interest litigation is allowed, the petitioner along with other lakhs and lakhs of citizens would be direct as well as indirect beneficiaries of the relief. Due to involvement of the aforesaid personal interest in the matter, the petitioner filed CWP No.10477 of 2016. However, the said petition was disposed of vide order dated 28.07.2016 (Annexure P-15), which reads as under:-

"After hearing the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the cause shown in this petition is largely of a public nature, therefore, the petitioner may, if so advised, file Public Interest Litigation."

Therefore, the present petition has been filed.

4. We have heard the petitioner who is appearing in person at considerable length and gone through the voluminous paper book that has been filed. The primary relief that has been claimed by the petitioner is for implementation of the RTI Act by political parties in terms of decision tak