P.Jothibasu vs The Commissioner, State Information Commission

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Mad) 1155

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. Lakshminarayanan, J
P.Jothibasu – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, State Information Commission – Respondent

Advocates:
For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Purushothaman
For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Vigneswaran For R1, Mrs.Geetha Thamaraiselvan Special Government Pleader For R2 & R3

Table of Content
1. rti application denied; appeals dismissed by sic. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. tanfed claims not public authority under thalappalam. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. tanfed structure shows government-linked shareholders. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
4. tncs act distinguishes apex societies with state control. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
5. state aid, audit, cadre control over apex societies. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
6. rules mandate government oversight of apex management. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45)
7. thalappalam history: primary societies not public authorities. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58)
8. thalappalam inapplicable to controlled apex societies. (Para 59 , 60 , 61)
9. iffco differs; subsidies not substantial financing. (Para 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67)
10. primary tn co-ops exempt; apex under state control. (Para 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73)
11. regulatory transparency trumps exemption claims. (Para 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78)
12. tanfed is public authority; quash order, disclose info. (Para 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83)

ORDER :

V. Lakshminarayanan, J.

1.The petitioner impugns the order of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Mad) 1155

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASV. Lakshminarayanan, JP.Jothibasu – AppellantVersusThe Commissioner, State Information Commission – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. Lakshminarayanan, J
P.Jothibasu – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, State Information Commission – Respondent