Bail Applicant Under Mandatory Obligation To Disclose Criminal Antecedents, Non-Disclosure Results In Erroneous Decisions: Andhra Pradesh High Court Judicial Decrees Cannot Be Set Aside By Administrative Orders After Decades; Long-Standing Revenue Entries Must Be Protected: Allahabad High Court 'Any Use Whatsoever' Includes Promotion & Events: Bombay High Court Restrains New Indian Express Group From Hosting Commercial Events Outside Southern States Reserved Category Candidates Who Qualify On Their Own Seniority Must Be Adjusted Against Unreserved Vacancies: Calcutta High Court Decree For Possession Can Be Passed If Landlord-Tenant Relationship & Termination Are Admitted; Unregistered Lease Is Month-To-Month: Delhi High Court Prosecution Against Co-Accused Not Sustainable When Main Accused Is Discharged On Same Facts: Jharkhand High Court Admission Of Handwriting On Account Statement Is Not Admission Of Its Contents; Corroborative Evidence Necessary To Prove Claim: Gujarat High Court Omission Of Label Defects In Food Inspector's Spot Memo Fatal To Prosecution For Misbranding: Himachal Pradesh High Court RBI Must Consult State Government, Not Just Registrar, To Supersede Co-operative Bank Board; Principles Of Natural Justice Excluded Under Section 36AAA: Kerala High Court Suit Filed Before IBC Proceedings Cannot Be Dismissed Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC; Section 96 Moratorium Only Stays Pending Actions: Calcutta High Court Senior Citizens Not Technologically Savvy Cannot Be Penalized For Not Checking Case Status On Court Website: Tripura High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Case Against CM Revanth Reddy Over 2019 Election Roadshow, Cites Bar Under Section 195 CrPC Maintenance Tribunal Orders Passed Without Mandated Three-Member Coram Are A Nullity: Punjab & Haryana High Court School Register Entry Regarding Date Of Birth Lacks Probative Value Unless Source Of Information Is Proved: Madhya Pradesh High Court Sets Aside POCSO Conviction Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Will | Disinheriting Caring Spouse In Favour Of Non-Relatives Is An ‘Unnatural Disposition’ Raising Grave Suspicion: Supreme Court Registration Does Not Automatically Validate Will If Process Is Shrouded In Suspicion; Testator's Illiteracy Increases Burden On Propounder: Supreme Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court

Public Trusts Under RTI: Distinct from Educational Institutions They Run, Bound by RTI Based on Financial Support from State - Bombay High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Bombay High Court clarifies the application of the Right to Information (RTI) Act to Public Trusts and educational institutions managed by them. The key issue was whether Public Trusts registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act 1950, and running institutions receiving state grants, are duty-bound to supply information under the RTI Act 2005.

The appeal raised the question of whether a Public Trust, receiving state grants for its institutions, falls within the scope of 'public authority' under the RTI Act, thereby obligating it to provide requested information. The court examined several previous judgments reflecting discordant views on the issue, focusing on the distinction between Public Trusts and the educational institutions they administer.

The Court differentiated between Public Trusts and their educational institutions. It was observed that Public Trusts are not created by statute but are recognized and registered based on their trust deed, making them largely private bodies. The Court emphasized that only if these Trusts or their institutions receive substantial financing from the State do they come under the ambit of RTI. Justice Gharote noted, "The educational institutions, owing their existence to the Public Trust, do not automatically make the Trust a public authority under the RTI Act."

The Court further observed that financial assistance to educational institutions must be evaluated in the context of state policy and the extent of financing. It clarified that merely receiving state grants does not make a Public Trust a 'Public Authority' under RTI unless it is substantially financed by the government.

The Court held that a Public Trust is not obligated to supply information under the RTI Act unless it falls within Section 2(h)(i), implying substantial state financing or control. Educational institutions managed by Public Trusts may fall under RTI if state financing is substantial. The Charity Commissioner is not bound to provide information collected under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act if it falls under exempted categories of the RTI Act.

Decision Dated - 1st March 2024.

"People Welfare Society vs State Information Commissioner & Ors." -

Latest Legal News