Bar and Bench: Kerala: Friday, 23 May 2025.
State Information Commissioner Sreekumar S held that Bar associations can be considered a 'public authority' as defined under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act.
The Kerala State
Information Commission (KSIC/ SIC) recently ruled that bar associations in the
State fall under the ambit of the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) [Adv. TK
Sathianathan v. State Public Information Officer, Calicut Bar Association]
State Information Commissioner Sreekumar S held that a bar association can be considered a 'public authority' as defined under Section 2(h) of RTI Act.
"Sections 2(h)(c), 2(h)(d), and 2(h)(ii) of the Right to Information Act are applicable to all Bar associations across Kerala. Moreover, these associations are function under the under the Advocates' provisions of the Advocates' Act, 1961 and the supervision of the Bar Council of India. Therefore, all Bar associations in the various districts of Kerala fall under the definition of 'public authority," the order said.
This order was passed on a petition moved by Advocate TK Sathianathan against the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) of the Calicut Bar Association after the latter did not furnish the information he requested via an RTI application.
Sathianathan had sought details of the byelaws of the Association, the annual subscription fees paid by its members, amount spent on renovating its library, rent collected from the canteen etc.
The SPIO of the
association also did not answer to the KSIC's request for response to the
petition.
The KSIC then called for a report from the District Collector which revealed that the association's building and the land it stands on were government owned. The Association pays no rent for it.
The KSIC reasoned that this can be considered as indirect government funding, making the provisions of the RTI applicable to the bar body.
"As such, it should have all the transparency and accountability required of public institutions" the SIC order stated.
Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in DAV College Trust Management Society and Director of Public Instructions, the SIC concluded that the Calicut Bar Association and all other Bar associations in the State can be considered as 'public authorities'.
"Registered and recognised under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and functioning under the provisions of the Advocates' Act, 1961 and the supervision of the Bar Council of India, the Calicut Bar Association can be considered as a 'public authority'... Therefore, the Association is required to provide information in a timely manner to any citizen seeking information under the RTI Act," the SIC held.
The SIC also took a dim view of the lack of response from the association's SPIO. It, therefore, decided to initiate proceedings under Section 20 of the RTI Act. However, this is an interim measure which will be confirmed only if the SPIO does not appear before the SIC within 15 days, the Court said.
[Read Order]
State Information Commissioner Sreekumar S held that Bar associations can be considered a 'public authority' as defined under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act.
State Information Commissioner Sreekumar S held that a bar association can be considered a 'public authority' as defined under Section 2(h) of RTI Act.
"Sections 2(h)(c), 2(h)(d), and 2(h)(ii) of the Right to Information Act are applicable to all Bar associations across Kerala. Moreover, these associations are function under the under the Advocates' provisions of the Advocates' Act, 1961 and the supervision of the Bar Council of India. Therefore, all Bar associations in the various districts of Kerala fall under the definition of 'public authority," the order said.
This order was passed on a petition moved by Advocate TK Sathianathan against the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) of the Calicut Bar Association after the latter did not furnish the information he requested via an RTI application.
Sathianathan had sought details of the byelaws of the Association, the annual subscription fees paid by its members, amount spent on renovating its library, rent collected from the canteen etc.
The KSIC then called for a report from the District Collector which revealed that the association's building and the land it stands on were government owned. The Association pays no rent for it.
The KSIC reasoned that this can be considered as indirect government funding, making the provisions of the RTI applicable to the bar body.
"As such, it should have all the transparency and accountability required of public institutions" the SIC order stated.
Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in DAV College Trust Management Society and Director of Public Instructions, the SIC concluded that the Calicut Bar Association and all other Bar associations in the State can be considered as 'public authorities'.
"Registered and recognised under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and functioning under the provisions of the Advocates' Act, 1961 and the supervision of the Bar Council of India, the Calicut Bar Association can be considered as a 'public authority'... Therefore, the Association is required to provide information in a timely manner to any citizen seeking information under the RTI Act," the SIC held.
The SIC also took a dim view of the lack of response from the association's SPIO. It, therefore, decided to initiate proceedings under Section 20 of the RTI Act. However, this is an interim measure which will be confirmed only if the SPIO does not appear before the SIC within 15 days, the Court said.
[Read Order]
.JPG)
.JPG)
