The Tribune: New Delhi: Thursday, 9th July 2026.
The answer to why the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust is exempt from the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act lies not in the political prominence of the temple but in the legal framework governing its administration.
In a detailed 13-page
order, the Central Information Commission (CIC) last year held that the Ram
Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust was not a "public authority" under
Section 2(H) of the RTI Act and was therefore not obliged to appoint public information
officers or disclose information under the transparency law.
The CIC concluded that the Trust was an independent body created pursuant to the Supreme Court's 2019 Ayodhya judgment and was neither owned, controlled nor substantially financed by the Centre or Uttar Pradesh Government.
Calls for greater transparency in the functioning of the Trust have resurfaced following the recent controversy surrounding its affairs and alleged theft.
The CIC's reasoning relies on a crucial legal distinction. It held that when the Centre framed the scheme for constituting the Trust following the Supreme Court's verdict, it merely implemented the apex court's directions. The Trust itself was created through a trust deed and was not established by the Constitution, an Act of Parliament, a state law or a government notification creating a statutory authority, which are among the routes through which an institution can qualify as a "public authority" under Section 2(H) of the RTI Act.
According to the CIC, the Centre has no administrative or financial control over the Trust, government nominees do not enjoy voting rights in its meetings and vacancies among non-government trustees are filled internally. It also held that the Trust receives no government funding and therefore does not meet the statutory tests of government control or substantial financing required under the RTI Act.
Tirupati, Vaishno Devi and others come under RTI
The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams function under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, with its administration regulated under a statutory framework and subject to government oversight.
Similarly, the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board was established under the J&K Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act, 1988. The board is a statutory authority headed by the Lieutenant Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, making it subject to the RTI Act.
Most major temple administrations, including the Guruvayur Devaswom in Kerala, the Shri Jagannath Temple Administration in Odisha and Siddhivinayak Temple in Maharashtra, were constituted under specific state laws. Their powers, composition, administration and accountability mechanisms are laid down by legislation, bringing them within the definition of "public authority" under the RTI Act.
In each of these cases, the institutions derive their authority from statutes enacted by legislatures rather than from independent trust deeds.
Kashi Vishwanath is UP's notable exception
Within Uttar Pradesh, the Kashi Vishwanath Temple stands out as a notable exception.
Its affairs are governed under the Uttar Pradesh Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983, through which the state legislature created the Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Trust. Since the temple administration functions under a statutory framework and remains subject to government oversight prescribed under the Act, it falls within the ambit of the RTI Act.
The Ram Temple Trust, however, has no comparable governing legislation. Instead, it was constituted pursuant to the Supreme Court's directions in the Ayodhya judgment through a trust deed, with the government playing only the role assigned to it by the court in framing the scheme and facilitating the Trust's creation. The absence of a statute creating or governing the Trust ultimately became the defining factor behind the CIC's conclusion that it is not a "public authority" under the RTI Act.
With the CIC’s explanation in the order, it becomes clear that it is legal structure, not religious importance, which determines the RTI coverage of a temple institution.
The answer to why the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust is exempt from the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act lies not in the political prominence of the temple but in the legal framework governing its administration.
The CIC concluded that the Trust was an independent body created pursuant to the Supreme Court's 2019 Ayodhya judgment and was neither owned, controlled nor substantially financed by the Centre or Uttar Pradesh Government.
Calls for greater transparency in the functioning of the Trust have resurfaced following the recent controversy surrounding its affairs and alleged theft.
The CIC's reasoning relies on a crucial legal distinction. It held that when the Centre framed the scheme for constituting the Trust following the Supreme Court's verdict, it merely implemented the apex court's directions. The Trust itself was created through a trust deed and was not established by the Constitution, an Act of Parliament, a state law or a government notification creating a statutory authority, which are among the routes through which an institution can qualify as a "public authority" under Section 2(H) of the RTI Act.
According to the CIC, the Centre has no administrative or financial control over the Trust, government nominees do not enjoy voting rights in its meetings and vacancies among non-government trustees are filled internally. It also held that the Trust receives no government funding and therefore does not meet the statutory tests of government control or substantial financing required under the RTI Act.
Tirupati, Vaishno Devi and others come under RTI
The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams function under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, with its administration regulated under a statutory framework and subject to government oversight.
Similarly, the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board was established under the J&K Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act, 1988. The board is a statutory authority headed by the Lieutenant Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, making it subject to the RTI Act.
Most major temple administrations, including the Guruvayur Devaswom in Kerala, the Shri Jagannath Temple Administration in Odisha and Siddhivinayak Temple in Maharashtra, were constituted under specific state laws. Their powers, composition, administration and accountability mechanisms are laid down by legislation, bringing them within the definition of "public authority" under the RTI Act.
In each of these cases, the institutions derive their authority from statutes enacted by legislatures rather than from independent trust deeds.
Kashi Vishwanath is UP's notable exception
Within Uttar Pradesh, the Kashi Vishwanath Temple stands out as a notable exception.
Its affairs are governed under the Uttar Pradesh Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983, through which the state legislature created the Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Trust. Since the temple administration functions under a statutory framework and remains subject to government oversight prescribed under the Act, it falls within the ambit of the RTI Act.
The Ram Temple Trust, however, has no comparable governing legislation. Instead, it was constituted pursuant to the Supreme Court's directions in the Ayodhya judgment through a trust deed, with the government playing only the role assigned to it by the court in framing the scheme and facilitating the Trust's creation. The absence of a statute creating or governing the Trust ultimately became the defining factor behind the CIC's conclusion that it is not a "public authority" under the RTI Act.
With the CIC’s explanation in the order, it becomes clear that it is legal structure, not religious importance, which determines the RTI coverage of a temple institution.
.JPG)
.JPG)
