Ref: Is Public Charitable Trust a legal person?
28 Mar, 2013Comment: There is a land mark Decision given by Nagpur Information Commissioner Shri Vilas Patil G on Dated 1.09.2008 Shree Raj Kumar versus Yeswant Rao Chawan Eng.College , Nagpur.
Once the institute covers under the definition of the "Public Authority", the employees of the institutions are also covered under the R.T.I. Act
15. The educational institutions discharge public function by way of imparting education to students. They are subject to rules and regulations of the affiliating university. Their activities are closely supervised by the University Authorities. Employment in such institutions, therefore, is not devoid of any public character (The Evolving Indian Administratative Law by M.P. Jain (1983) P-226). So are the service conditions of the academic staff when the university takes a decision regarding their pay scales, it will be binding on the management. The service conditions of the academic staff are, therefore, no purely of a private character. It has super-added protection by university decisions creating a legal right-duly relationship between the staff and the management."
Although it is observed in respect of aided colleges it is applicable to non-aided colleges/institutions and, therefore, their information cannot be called as a personal information for which shelter of section 8 (1) cannot be taken. The apex court, again in Unni Krishnan JP v. State of Andhra Pradesh, MANU/SC/0333/1993 held that when a private body carries on public duty, as in the case of an institution whereby recognitions and affiliations are to be granted with conditions.
Before the State Information Commission, Maharashtra-Appeal under Section 19(3) A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission: Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission: Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. of RTI Act, 2005.
Appeal No.2008/73A/02 Vegan Inc. P.R.S. Legal Adv. Sanjeev Poonalekar, 315, Birya House, 265 Perin Nariman Street,Fort,Mumbai–400001
Appellant V/s First Appellate Officer or Chairman / Secretary BED/DED College, Swayam Sidhi Mitra Sangh College of Education, Bhiwandi-Kalyan Road,
Thane. … Respondent
GROUNDS
This appeal has been filed Under Section 19(3) A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission: Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission: Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. of the Right Information Act, 2005. The appellant has sought information regarding Trustees, Teachers, and Recognition of the Institution, College and Hostel etc. The case was fixed for hearing on 16.05.2008. The appellant is not present but the respondent is present. The respondent’s plea is that they are not covered under the Act.
They have given detail submission to the commission. It was pointed out to them that the Department of Education Govt. of Maharashtra itself has clarified that all education institutions whether aided or not aided are covered under the Act. The information sought by the appellant are relevant and is supposed to be with the institution. It may sound inconvenient to the respondent as we are used to keep such information with us otherwise. This is a typical case where information sought is simple and likely to cause no adverse impact on the institution. The reluctance is not proper and goes against the spirit of the Act. After going through the papers and considering the pleading I am of the view that the information sought should be furnished. I pass the following order.
The appeal is allowed. Respondent to furnish information within 30 days.
Dr Mukesh Babu Goyal