An Adjunct Decision by CIC on application under RTI
The managing committee of our society has also been behaving in an absolute autocratic manner and several complaints referred to RCS have never been even acknowledged.
I made an application under RTI to the President/Hony. Secretary of the group housing co-op society of which I am a member in the month of May 2011 seeking certain information pertaining to the society capital expenditures and other arbitrary expenses. Since the requested information did not come in I followed the routine procedure of filing an appeal with Registrar of Society and then with the CIC.
The CIC after hearing in the matter directed the respondent to submit the information within 15 days. Since the respondent still did not respondent as directed by the CIC, I took up the matter with CIC again who issued a notice to the respondents and notified a date for the hearing. During the hearing the respondents were represented by an advocate, who stated ‘the said society has not been formed by any act of Parliament or Legislature or notification issued by the Government. He also stated that it is not owned or controlled nor has it been financed by the Government. He therefore contended that the society is not a Public Authority under section 2(h) of the RTI Act.’
Based on the respondents submission The CIC has given an Adjunct decision which is quoted below:
“The society does not appear to be Public Authority as per the provisions of section 2(h) of the RTI Act and therefore is not subject to the provisions of the RTI Act”
I must confess that I am not well aware of the rules and therefore, request for further guidance from DF.
Meanwhile I have requested the CIC for review citing (i) DCS Act 2004 notified vide extra ordinary notification no. F-14(31) LA-2004 dated 17.01.2005 in part-IV Delhi Gazette and (ii) mentioning that section 2(h) should be read along with section 2(f) and 2(j)
However, I feel if the order is not challenged, it will not be in the interest of members of the co-operative societies.
I also like to mention that I was personally not present during the hearing due to bad health and also was not called for the hearing.
P.N.Gupta