TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner No. 2 cannot be included within the ambit of “public authority” as provided under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, is not acceptable and is devoid of substance. - Decided against the petitioner. - Writ Petition No. 590 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 10-10-2014 - R.M. Borde and V.K. Jadhav, JJ. Shri V.D. Hon, Senior Counsel for Petitioner. Shri S.B. Deshpande, Assistant Solicitor General L.V. Sangeet, Advocate, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Petitioner No. l Pravara Medical Trust is registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and is also registered as society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, on 28-12-1972. Petitioner No. 2 Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences is regis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Petitioner No. 2 does not receive any financial aid from the State or Central Government and is not a body owned, controlled or substantially financed by the appropriate Government nor a body financed directly or indirectly out of the funds provided by the appropriate Government and as such, does not come within the definition of public authority. It is the contention of petitioners that they are not bound to furnish information as requested by Respondent No. 3. It is further contended that Respondent No. 3 is a dismissed employee of petitioner No. 2 and application tendered by him, seeking information, is with mala fide intention and does not call for any consideration. 4. Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, provid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 are separate entities. The question, as such, falls for determination, in the instant petition, as to whether petitioner No. 2, which is a deemed university, answers the parameters laid down under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act to bring it within the fold of public authority . 6. It cannot be disputed that petitioner No. 2 has been established by a notification issued or order made by appropriate Government . The notification declaring petitioner No. 2 as deemed university has been issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources Development, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 and on the advice of University Grants Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioners is not acceptable for the reason that Section 2(h)(d) provides that if the public authority established or constituted by notification issued by the appropriate Government, that itself is good enough and clause (d) of Section 2(h) also includes (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; and (ii) non-Government organisation substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government. If the authority or body or an institution of self-Government is established or constituted by a notification issued by the appropriate Government, it is not necessary that in order to include such institution, body or authority within the definition of public authority , the same must receive finance f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by learned Counsel for petitioners that petitioner No. 2 cannot be included within the ambit of public authority as provided under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, is not acceptable and is devoid of substance. 14. So far as status of petitioner No. 1 is concerned, it is contended that petitioner No. 1 is a Trust and is not receiving any grant-in-aid or substantial finance from the State and as such, is not the public authority . The order impugned in this petition is directed against petitioner No. 2, which, according to petitioners, is an independent entity, i.e. Trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act and a society, registered under the Societies Registration Act and further has been declared as a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|