By the Court.—Heard Sri J.J. Munir, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing Counsel.

2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 12.12.2007, 4.1.2008, 11.1.2008 and 12.3.2008. The writ petition raises an important issue. The orders, which are sought to be challenged in the writ petition are the orders issued by the authorities under Right to Information Act, 2005, asking the management to provide certain information, as prayed for, in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Right to Information Act, 2005. The petitioner is a Committee of Management of an Intermediate College, which is recognised under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. In para-16, it is also mentioned that the institution is receiving grant-in-aid from the State of U.P.

3. Sri J.J. Munir, learned Counsel for the petitioner, challenging the orders contended that the institution is not covered by the definition of public authority, as provided under Section 2 (h) of Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). Elaborating his submission, the learned Counsel submits that the institution is a private institution run by a registered society and is providing education to the society. The institution has corpus, building and land, which are permanently owned by the institution and the mere fact that the institution is receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government by way of payment of salary to the teachers and staff, will not cover the institution under Section 2 (h) of the Act since the institution is not substantially financed. In fact, the authorities under the Act have to find out in each and every case whether the institution is substantially financed or not and in the present case no inquiry having been conducted by the competent authority the orders directly issued asking the management to divulge the information cannot be sustained.

4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the institution, which is receiving grant-in-aid and covered by the provision of U.P. High School and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salary to Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971, is an institution, which is receiving 100% salary grant for teachers and the staff. Apart from payment of salary, the institution also receives maintenance grant from time to time e.g. grant for building, games, laboratory, library. The institution, which is receiving such kind of grants, has to be treated as substantially financed.

5. We have considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the records.

6. The Right to Information Act, 2005 has been enacted with the object of setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. Section 2 of the Act is definition clause, which defines public authority. Section 2 (h) of the Act is quoted as below :

"2. Definition.—ln this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

(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 organisation substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;"

7. The petitioner, which is run by Committee of Management constituted by a Society, is a non-Government organisation, which can come within the definition of Section 2 (h)(d)(ii) of the Act, as noticed above. The institution has been granted recognition under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, and is run by Committee of Management in