HC: Co-operative societies are public authorities, bound to give info under RTI

RAGHAV OHRI : Sat Sep 11 2010 : Chandigarh :

A division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday dismissed an appeal filed by a sugar mill co-operative society, which had refused to furnish information demanded under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Mukul Mudgal and Justice Ajay Tewari dismissed the appeal filed by the mill holding that co-operative societies are public authorities and are bound to furnish information under the RTI Act.

The mill, Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Limited, had refused to give certain information under the RTI as demanded by a resident of Haryana. Following this a petition was filed before the State Information Commission, Haryana, which directed the mill to furnish information holding that it was a public authority under the RTI Act, 2005.

The co-operative moved the High Court, but its appeal was dismissed by Justice Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia in May. It then moved an appeal against an order of the single judge.

Arguing before a division bench, counsel for the co-operative took the stand that the mill is neither a body owned, controlled or substantially financed by the government nor it is a non-government organisation substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate government.

Regarding funding, Justice Ahluwalia had held the mill had not divulged any details about share-holding of the government or any other finances which may have been provided by the government. The bench also noticed that having itself appointed a public information officer, the mill admitted it was a public authority.

Holding that “this case is distinguishable for the reason that the mill is managed by a managing director who is a civil service officer, the Bench dismissed its appeal.

“The mill has divulged no information regarding the extent of financial help/investment/equity participation made by the government in the mill. It is evident that this information if furnished may have gone against the stand taken by the mill. In the circumstances, no fault can be found with the judgment of the single judge and consequently it is dismissed,” the order reads.