Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Independence of the Body - The sources indicate that an Information Commission, such as the Central or State Information Commission, is a statutory body established under the RTI Act and functions independently within its statutory framework. It is not merely a regulatory or supervisory entity but operates as a separate, independent authority to uphold citizens' right to information ["MECON Indraprastha Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. through its Secretary and Another v. State of U. P. through Principal Secretary Cooperative Development and Others - Allahabad"]; ["State Of Kerala vs T.K.I. Ahamed Sherief - Kerala"]; ["YANAM PEOPLES VOLUNTARY vs SRI.RAKSHA HARIKRISHNA - Madras"]; ["Sonadhan Chakma VS State of Assam - Gauhati"].
Nature of Control and Financing - The degree of control exercised by the government over these bodies determines their independence. When a body is substantially financed or controlled by the government, it may be considered a public authority; however, if there is no such control, it remains a private or independent entity. For example, bodies with no government control are recognized as private bodies and not as public authorities ["MECON Indraprastha Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. through its Secretary and Another v. State of U. P. through Principal Secretary Cooperative Development and Others - Allahabad"]; ["State Of Kerala vs T.K.I. Ahamed Sherief - Kerala"]; ["YANAM PEOPLES VOLUNTARY vs SRI.RAKSHA HARIKRISHNA - Madras"]; ["Muppathadam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. VS State Chief Information Commissioner - Kerala"].
Role and Functions - The Information Commissions act within their statutory mandate, primarily as fact-finding or advisory bodies. Their recommendations are not binding, and they do not decide disputes or enforce legal rights but ensure compliance with the RTI Act. They are separate from courts and tribunals and do not have jurisdiction beyond their statutory powers ["State Of Kerala vs T.K.I. Ahamed Sherief - Kerala"]; ["MECON Indraprastha Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. through its Secretary and Another v. State of U. P. through Principal Secretary Cooperative Development and Others - Allahabad"]; ["Raj Kumar Jain vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited - Central Information Commission"].
Statutory Nature - The bodies are created by law (statutory bodies), and their powers and functions are defined explicitly by legislation. They are bound by the provisions of the RTI Act and cannot act outside their statutory framework. For example, the Central Information Commission has framed regulations under its statutory powers but cannot constitute benches beyond what the law permits ["Central Information Commission VS D. D. A. - Supreme Court"]; ["Muppathadam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs State Chief Information Commissioner, Tc-14, 2071, Punnen Road - Kerala"]; ["Sonadhan Chakma VS State of Assam - Gauhati"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The evidence clearly shows that the Information Commission (both Central and State) is a statutory body with an independent role within the framework of the RTI Act. It is not merely a regulatory or supervisory entity controlled by the government; rather, it functions as an autonomous statutory authority, with powers and functions defined by law to ensure transparency and citizens' right to information. The independence is rooted in its statutory establishment, with control and financing considerations affecting its classification as a public authority, but overall, it is recognized as an independent statutory body ["MECON Indraprastha Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. through its Secretary and Another v. State of U. P. through Principal Secretary Cooperative Development and Others - Allahabad"]; ["State Of Kerala vs T.K.I. Ahamed Sherief - Kerala"]; ["YANAM PEOPLES VOLUNTARY vs SRI.RAKSHA HARIKRISHNA - Madras"].
In the realm of Indian governance, understanding the status of key institutions like the Information Commission is crucial for citizens, activists, and legal professionals alike. A common question arises: is the Information Commission an independent body or merely a statutory body? This query often stems from comparisons with powerhouse constitutional bodies like the Election Commission of India. In this post, we delve into the legal foundations, court interpretations, and distinctions to provide clarity.
Drawing from constitutional provisions, statutes, and judicial precedents, we'll examine why the Information Commission—encompassing the Central Information Commission (CIC) and State Information Commissions (SICs)—is typically classified as a statutory body rather than a constitutional one. This analysis is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
To address the core question, it's essential to differentiate between constitutional bodies and statutory bodies:
The Election Commission of India exemplifies the former, established under Article 324 of the Constitution. As noted in legal documents, The Election Commission of India is a constitutional body created under Article 324 of the Constitution of India. It is an independent body for conducting elections to the parliament and legislative bodies. Chandrakant s/o Nimba Patil vs State Election Commission, Through The Chief Election Commissioner - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 7104
In contrast, the Information Commissions are creatures of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
The RTI Act explicitly establishes the CIC and SICs as statutory entities. Section 12 of the Act provides for the constitution of the CIC, while Section 15 does the same for SICs. A key excerpt states: The headquarters of the State Information Commission shall be at such place in the State as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify and the State Information Commission may, with the previous approval of the State Government, establish offices at other places in the State. Public Information Officer Joint Secretary to the Governor Raj Bhavan VS Manohar Parrikar Leader of Opposition - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 1320
Further: The State Information Commission shall consist of... the State Chief Information Commissioner, and such number of State Information Commissioners, not exceeding ten, as may be deemed necessary. Public Information Officer Joint Secretary to the Governor Raj Bhavan VS Manohar Parrikar Leader of Opposition - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 1320
This legislative framework underscores their statutory origin. Unlike constitutional bodies, their appointment processes involve recommendations from a committee including the Prime Minister or Chief Minister, but ultimate authority rests with the executive, subject to parliamentary oversight.
The distinction becomes stark when juxtaposed with the Election Commission. Article 324 vests it with superintendence, direction, and control over elections, granting inherent independence. Courts have affirmed: The nature of the authority, appointment process, and constitutional provisions distinguish the Election Commission as a constitutional body from the Information Commission as a statutory body. Chandrakant s/o Nimba Patil vs State Election Commission, Through The Chief Election Commissioner - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 7104Public Information Officer Joint Secretary to the Governor Raj Bhavan VS Manohar Parrikar Leader of Opposition - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 1320
Moreover, Bodies created under a statute derive their authority from the legislation, whereas constitutional bodies derive their authority directly from the Constitution. Chandrakant s/o Nimba Patil vs State Election Commission, Through The Chief Election Commissioner - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 7104
The RTI Act itself acknowledges its roots in constitutional rights like Article 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech), but the Commissions are merely implementing mechanisms: The RTI Act is only giving effect to and implementing Constitutional mandate of 'Right to Know' which flows from the right to freedom and expression guaranteed vide Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Chandrakant s/o Nimba Patil vs State Election Commission, Through The Chief Election Commissioner - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 7104
Indian courts have consistently upheld this classification. In a landmark distinction, The distinction between a body created by the statute and a body governed in accordance with a statute has been explained by this Court in the Executive Committee of Vaish Degree College v. Lakshimi Narain, (1976) 2 SCC 58... RAJESH AWASTHI VS NAND LAL JAISWAL - 2012 7 Supreme 752
Other rulings echo this for similar commissions:
These cases illustrate that while statutory bodies may enjoy functional autonomy, they lack the constitutional sanctity and permanence of bodies like the Election Commission.
Does statutory status mean no independence? Not entirely. Information Commissions exercise quasi-judicial powers, hear appeals, and impose penalties under the RTI Act. However, their independence is legislative, not constitutional. For instance:
In cases involving public authorities under RTI, courts clarify that even government-aided entities aren't automatically constitutional; substantial control and financing are key, but this doesn't elevate the Commission itself. Air Force Sports Complex (AFSC) vs Lt. Gen S S Dahiya - 2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 31435
Some confusion arises from RTI's broad definition of public authorities (Section 2(h)), which includes government-controlled bodies. Yet, this applies to entities subject to RTI, not the Commission's own status:
Statutory bodies like the Disinvestment Commission or others derive powers from specific Acts, with final decisions vesting in government. Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank Ltd. VS State of Maharashtra - 2008 Supreme(Bom) 700
References:1. Chandrakant s/o Nimba Patil vs State Election Commission, Through The Chief Election Commissioner - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 7104: Constitutional status of Election Commission.2. Public Information Officer Joint Secretary to the Governor Raj Bhavan VS Manohar Parrikar Leader of Opposition - 2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 1320: RTI Act's establishment of Information Commissions.3. RAJESH AWASTHI VS NAND LAL JAISWAL - 2012 7 Supreme 752: Judicial distinction between statutory and constitutional bodies.
In summary, the Information Commission is a statutory body, not an independent constitutional entity. This positioning ensures accountability to Parliament while enabling effective RTI enforcement. For precise application to your situation, consult a qualified legal professional. Stay informed, exercise your right to know responsibly!
(Word count: approx. 1050. This post is based on referenced documents and general legal principles as of available data.)
#RTIAct, #InformationCommission, #LegalInsights
In other words just like a body owned or body substantially financed by the appropriate government, the control of the body by the appropriate government would also be substantial and not merely supervisory or regulatory. ... Commission. ... Commission. ... provided by the appropriate government is on the applicant who seeks information or the appropriate government and can be examined by the State Information Commission; (ii) where....
The action of the Appellant – State in issuing the Notification dated 27 November 2024 is in the exercise of its statutory power, and the Commission is proceeding in accordance with its statutory mandate. This Commission would function as an advisory body; its report is not binding or conclusive. ... The impugned judgment itself records that the Commission is only a fact- finding body and its recommendations are not binding. ... The Commission, in un....
In the present case, there is absolutely no control exercised by the Government over the petitioner and they are the private and independent body. ... In other words just like a body owned or body substantially financed by the appropriate government, the control of the body by the appropriate government would also be substantial and not merely supervisory or regulatory. ... The Apex Court also made it clear that the burden to show that a body or an organization is con....
The challenge in this writ petition is the order dated 17.08.2024 passed by the State Information Commission, Kerala, in Ext.P5 whereby the State Information Commission has directed the State Public Information Officer and Deputy Registrar (Administration), Office of the Joint Registrar Co-operative ... But the demand should have statutory backing.68. ... Section 3 of the Right to Information Act confers a right on the citizens of this Country to have information. The....
Central Information Commission & Anr., Neutral Citation No. – a href=".. ... Central Information Commission & Anr., stayed the operation of that order. This again indicates that the mere provision of government land or facilities does not automatically bring a private body under the definition of a public authority. 8. ... In such circumstances, the Respondent filed a second appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act against the aforenoted order dated 21st June, 2011, before the Central Informatio....
The Central Information Commission, utilizing these broad powers, has enacted 'The Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007.' ... The Central Information Commission (CIC), under the authority granted by Section 12(4) of the RTI Act, framed the Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007, to manage the affairs of the CIC effectively. ... The High Court, by the impugned order, quashed the Central Informa....
Under the RTI Act, a direction can be issued to an authority to furnish the documents, but there cannot be any direction from another body to a statutory authority to access the documents that it does not possess and hand them over to the Applicant. ... But the demand should have statutory backing.(Emphasis supplied) Thus, the information held by the Registrar is the one he can access. 13. ... The Division Bench, after considering the statutory provisions, observed that the State Chief Informa....
The CIC being a statutory body has to act strictly within the confines of the Act and is neither required to nor has the jurisdiction to examine any other controversy or disputes.” ... The Goa State Information Commission [2008 (110) Bom L R 1238], the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held as under: “….. In the first place, the Commission ought to have noticed that the Act confers on the citizen the right to information. ... …While deciding whether a citizen should or should not get a particular info....
This Commission is bound by the statutory provisions of RTI Act, being a creature of the Act and enjoys no plenary powers. ... The State Information Commission held that:- ... “8.It is equally true that merely because the information relates to a public official, it cannot be assumed in all circumstances that it would have a public interest element. ... It was pleaded that the complainant is seeking information merely to harass him and that #HL_START....
Where the body whose action is sought to be impugned as a corporate entity these tests have focussed, among other things on the nature of the functions performed by the relevant body, the question whether the state is the beneficiary of its activities, the manner of is constitution, whether by statutory ... whether by statutory incorporation or otherwise, the dependence of the body whose action is sought to be challenged on State funds, the degree of control exercised by the State, the existence i....
It is to function as an independent Statutory Body Corporate. The Commission has the power to act as an Arbitrator or to nominate Arbitrators to decide disputes between the licensees. The Commission is tasked with the power to grant licences under Section 19 of the Act.
The Commission is a statutory body created under an Act. It does not have any plenary or prerogative powers like the High Court.
Final decision on the recommendations of the Disinvestment commission was to vest with the government. The resolution stated that the Commission was established in pursuance of Common Minimum Programme of the United Front Government at the Centre. The resolution had referred to the Commission, precise Terms of Reference and thus, the commission was expected to draw a comprehensive overall long term disinvestment programme, to determine the extent of disinvestment, to monitor the progress of disinvestment process, to assist the government, to create public awareness of governments disinvestme....
( 20 ) THE Commission is an autonomous statutory body. The Commission is authorized to prescribe the performance standards to the licensees and by closely monitoring the same, protect the consumer interest. The Commission is also charged with functions as a quasi-judicial authority under Sections 37 and 38 of the Reform Act.
It is not subservient or subordinate to the directions of the State Government. ( 9 ) IN the aforesaid writ petition bearing No. 20726 of 1997, the Division Bench of this Court had made following observations : "the Commission is an independent and autonomous Statutory body, which has been created under Section 3 of the Commission Act, 1980.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
