'substantially financed' while defining any organization to be Public Body.

[kushal]

To determine, for the purpose of RTI Act, whether an organization is a public authority or not, we have to have recourse to Section 2(h) of the said Act, which reads:

‘public authority’ means any authority or body or institution of self
government established or constituted –

1. by or under the Constitution
2. by any other law made by Parliament
3. by any other law made by State Legislatures;
4. by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government;and includes any –
   1. body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
   2. non governmental organization substantially financed;
   3. directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government.

The term “Substantially financed” is not defined in the RTI Act. When a term is not defined in an Act, the normal rule is to find the definition of the term in a relatable statute or legislation and apply the same. The definition is given in Section 14(1) of CAG Act-1971 for the term “substantially financed”.

According to this Section, when the loan or grant by the government to a body/authority is not less than Rs 25 lakhs and the amount of such loan or grant is not less than 75% of the total expenditure of that body/authority, then such body/authority shall be deemed to be substantially financed by such grants/loans. Direct funding could be by way of cash grants, reimbursement of expenses etc., and indirect funding could be meeting the expenses directly or in kind.

The case under reference is Appeal No.163/ICPB/2006, F.No.PBA/06/158, Dated November 28, 2006
Appellant: Shri Veeresh Malik, New Delhi
Public authority: Indian Olympics Association / Deptt. of Sports

[brijeshbhatt]

Thanks for providing excillent stuff.

[maneesh]

Thats a great info Kushal. Keep it up.

[karira]

The CIC has given detailed arguments in determining if IFCI is a Public Authority (PA) or not, under the RTI Act.
Although both IFCI and the Ministry Of Finance contended that IFCI is not a PA, CIC has finally ruled that it is indeed a PA under RTI.
Some of the arguments given by CIC are worth noting for future interpretations of whether anyone is "PA" or not.
Please see the full decision of CIC at:

http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_31052007_01.pdf

[maneesh]

This is a good decision Karira,

Even if this is the case, the law is clear that funds need
not be directly provided to constitute substantial finance to a body. In this case it
stands admitted that indirect finance of 23.53% exists, which cannot be
construed to be insubstantial.

An indirect linkage also make an organization Public Authority

[kushal]

If we can continue the discussions regarding 'decision of Public Body' here, it will be of greater importance;

'substantially financed' while defining any organization to be Public Body.

Regards

[karira]

Kushal,
I am sorry, i should have done a search of the forum before posting.
Is it possible to "merge" the two threads ?
Thanks.

[kushal]

Thank You for understanding. Thread merged.

[karira]

Another helpful decision of the APSIC about "Public Authority".

Birla institute is a ‘public authority’

Special Correspondent




Hyderabad: State Information Commissioner Ambaty Subba Rao on Friday held that the Birla Archaeological and Cultural Research Institute in the city was a ‘Public Authority’ as per Section 2 (H) of the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005.

He expressed this view while disposing a petition by Y. Ravi Kiran, a resident of Hyderabad who had asked for information and documents under Section 6 (1) of the RTI Act, but was denied the same on the plea that the institute was neither under the control of the State nor the Central Government and did not fall within the meaning of the expression ‘Public Authority’ under the provision of the RTI Act.

Mr. Rao contended that the institute was registered under Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Public Societies Registration Act, 1350 Fasli (Act 1 of 1350 F) and the State Government had made available vast extent of land.

The Hindu : Andhra Pradesh / Hyderabad News : Birla institute is a ‘public authority’

[Rvai Kiron]

Dear Friends:
When Birla's said that they do not come under RTI Act. I wrote to various sources(using RTI) from where the funds were given.
The details of the society are as under:
1. Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute, 2. The H. Qrts 1/12A & 80G/22/94-95 dt. 22-09-94 of the Commissioner of Income-Tax, A.P.-l,
Hyderabad has given Income Tax Exemptions.
3. The land is allotted to Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute, Hyderabad by Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O. (Ms) No.84 M.A. dated 14th February 1986.
4. The Exhibitions were donated to Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute by Govt. of Andhra Pradesh G.O. Ms. No. 166 dated 30.06.1992.
5. Funds were received (from 1989-1995) in the form of Grants in Aid from Department of Ocean Development (now the Ministry of Earth Sciences), Govt. of India
6. Donations of Computer systems were given by ECIL for display/exhibition at the Centre. Annual payment towards projection of Corporate video (ECIL) is received by Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute.
7. National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA) has fixed a permanent exhibition in the museum depicting various developments in the Space and Remote Sensing Technology by providing all the exhibits and paying Rs 3,86,250/-
8. Geological Survey of India has donated fossils of Dinosaurs dating back to 150 million years to display at Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute.
9. Department of Space, Govt. of India has given grant in aid to Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute.
10. As per Department of Science & Technology, Govt. of India, MoU on a Joint Laboratory for Applicable Mathematics and Information Sciences between the University of Udine and the B.M.Birla Science Centre (division of Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute) is signed.
All the above facts state that Birla Archeological and Cultural Research Institute falls within the ambit of Section 2(h) of RTI Act-2005.

However the problem comes where the funding are of state and central, whether we must write to SIC or CIC. But as it was registered under A.P. Societies act...I approached SIC.
Since it is a big fish in the net, SIC first released it to press. I did not receive the copy.
Thanks
Ravi

[karira]

Ravi,

From the information detailed in your above post, it can be very well argued that the Birla Arch. & Cultural institute is a PA.
Since APSIC has already decided on that, if you feel that your purpose of applying under RTI Act will be well served by APSIC, you can stop at that.
If you have any doubts and want to use a "pincer" attack, then approach the CIC also because several of the fund givers are under the central govt.

[Rvai Kiron]

Hi Karira:

That is a good idea of attempting CIC but now the time between
Appellate authority and CIC has crossed 8 months. Again I must start a fresh process. Let Birla's go to High Court. I got lot of information from Municipal Corporation saying that their activities are totally illegal. I filed one at Vigiance and other at MCH asking them why they are not taking action against Birla's etc.

Let me see what happens.

Regards.

Ravi

[rajatnarain]

Originally Posted by karira

The CIC has given detailed arguments in determining if IFCI is a Public Authority (PA) or not, under the RTI Act.
Although both IFCI and the Ministry Of Finance contended that IFCI is not a PA, CIC has finally ruled that it is indeed a PA under RTI.
Some of the arguments given by CIC are worth noting for future interpretations of whether anyone is "PA" or not.
Please see the full decision of CIC at:

http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_31052007_01.pdf

Friends ,

Recently I had occasion to approach IFCI for info under RTI. Informally , they seem to claim having obtained a stay from the Delhi High Court against the CIC ruling of May 2007. Am awaiting formal reply.

Rajat Narain