Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 2207 (RAJ)

Manipal University Jaipur v. Anuj Mathur

2018-11-19

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

body2018
JUDGMENT : Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J. 1. The petitioner assails the order dated 30.05.2017 passed by Information Commissioner Rajasthan State Information Commission Jaipur and submits that in view of the definition of 'public authority' under Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short 'the Act of 2005'), the petitioner-University formed under the act, of 2011 would not fall within the said definition of 'public authority' and would therefore, not come within the ambit of the Act, 2005 and is not necessarily required to give any information sought for under the Act of 2005. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Manipal University is neither owned nor financed or controlled by the State Government in any manner and therefore, it would not come within the ambit of 'public authority' as defined u/Sec. 2(h) of the Act of 2005. Learned counsel submits that only those public authorities of having a body of self Government shall be (a) by or under the Constitution (b) by any other law made by Parliament (c) by any other law made by State Legislature (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government would be governed under the Act of 2005. Since, the Manipal University is not an authority which is of self Government or body of self Government or an institution of self Government, the definition would not cover the petitioner-university. If the Rule-making authority wanted to include all public authorities, it would not mention word 'Self Government'. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also examined the provision. Section 2(h) of the Act of 2005 defines the 'public authority' as under:- "public authority" means any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted: (a) by or under the Constitution (b) by any other law made by Parliament; (c) by any other law made by State Legislature; (d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any- (i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; (ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;" 4. Bare perusal of the aforesaid definition shows that the definition is inclusive definition and has to be understood accordingly. Bare perusal of the aforesaid definition shows that the definition is inclusive definition and has to be understood accordingly. The words used "any authority or body or institution of self Government mean three different types of authority namely: (i) any authority (ii) any body and (iii) any institution of self Government, established/constituted by or under the Constitution; by any other law made by the Parliament, by any other law made by State Legislature or by notification issued by appropriate Government or order made by the appropriate Government. It also includes any authority or body or institution of self-Government which is owned, controlled or substantially financed directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government and by non-Government organizations substantially financed directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government. 5. The contention that the said definition exhausted is wholly misconceived and on the other, hand it takes into its ambit of all kinds of authorities which maybe self-government or which are formed under any statute by Parliament, State Legislature or by any notification or order by the appropriate Government. 6. In view thereof, an authority means a body which exercises power, right, jurisdiction, control or command a person or certain activities. Thus, any authority which has been framed or constituted under the Act passed by the State Legislature like the Manipal University which admittedly has been framed under the Act passed by the State Legislature in the year 2011 as State Private University and being empowered to award degrees and having the control on its students would come within the ambit of the definition of public authority under Section 2(h) of the Act of 2005. 7. Accordingly, the contention of the petitioner that the words self Government would be indicative for defining authority, body or institution, if accepted, would amount to perversity. Accordingly, the order dated 30.05.2017 passed by the Rajasthan State Information Commissioner holding the University amenable to the Act of 2005 does not call for any interference. 8. The writ petition being misconceived is dismissed.