Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose under the Right to Information Act, 2005 regarding whether a cooperative society that is not a public authority could be required to supply information through the Registrar. Multiple letters patent appeals were filed by three cooperative societies against the dismissal of their writ petitions by the learned Single Judge. The respondents included the State Information Commissioner, Assistant Registrars, and RTI applicants. On 10-07-2009, an applicant sought information from the appellant society under the RTI Act. The society's Information Officer refused, claiming the RTI Act was not applicable. The applicant filed a first appeal before the Assistant Registrar, who by order dated 27-08-2009 directed the society to supply the information. The applicant then preferred a second appeal before the State Information Commission, which on 23-06-2010 held that the Assistant Registrar could obtain relevant information from the society under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and supply it to the applicant, directing compliance within four weeks. The society's review application was rejected on 20-09-2010. The society filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The learned Single Judge held that the society was not a public authority under the RTI Act but upheld the Commissioner's direction because the Assistant Registrar could statutorily access information under Section 2(f) and the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. The societies appealed. The core legal issues were whether the society was a public authority under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, whether the Registrar could access and supply information under Section 79 and Rule 65, and whether the direction was valid subject to Section 8(1) exemptions. The appellants contended that the society was not a public authority, not substantially financed or controlled by the government, and could not be compelled under the RTI Act. They argued that Section 2(f) could not include information accessible by the Registrar. They cited Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala and argued that Jalgaon Jillha Urban Co-operative Banks Association Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra was wide and without noticing the Supreme Court. The respondents relied on Thalappalam to argue that the Registrar as a public authority could gather information within statutory powers and supply it, referring to Section 79 and Rule 65. The court noted that the society was registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, obliged to file returns and statements under Section 79, and maintain accounts and books under Rule 65. The Registrar was empowered to ensure compliance. Therefore such material was statutorily accessible to the Registrar. Relying on Thalappalam, the Supreme Court had held that the Registrar under the Co-operative Societies Act was a public authority and could gather information from a society under supervisory or administrative control; the registrar was not obliged to disclose information under Section 8(1)(j) unless larger public interest justified disclosure. Applying this, the court found that the Assistant Registrar could obtain information under the Act of 1960 and supply it under the RTI Act, but exemptions under Section 8(1) applied. The court also noted that Jalgaon Jillha was wide and without noticing Thalappalam, thus following the Supreme Court. The High Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the learned Single Judge's judgment, affirming the State Information Commissioner's direction, but subject to Section 8(1) exemptions. Information accessible to the Registrar under Section 79 and Rule 65 could be supplied to the RTI applicant.
Headnote
A) Right to Information - Public Authority - Section 2(h) of Right to Information Act, 2005 - A cooperative society registered under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 is not a public authority unless substantially financed or controlled by appropriate Government. The learned Single Judge held that the society was not a public authority under the RTI Act. The High Court accepted this finding and proceeded to examine the Registrar's statutory access to information (Paras 2,5-7). B) Right to Information - Access to Information from Cooperative Societies - Sections 79, 79(1), 79(1A), 79(2) Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and Rule 65 Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 - Information statutorily accessible to Registrar can be supplied to RTI applicant through Registrar. The High Court held that the society is obliged to file returns and maintain books under these provisions and the Registrar can compel furnishing of such information, which can then be supplied under Section 2(f) of RTI Act subject to exemptions (Paras 5-8). C) Right to Information - Exemptions - Section 8(1)(j) of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Personal information exemption applies to information obtained by Registrar. Registrar is not obliged to disclose personal information unless larger public interest justifies disclosure for reasons recorded in writing. The High Court ruled that restrictions under Section 8(1) apply to information supplied through Registrar (Paras 6,8). D) Precedent - Binding Precedent - Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala, (2013) 16 SCC 82 - Supreme Court held that Registrar functioning under Co-operative Societies Act is a public authority under RTI Act and can gather information from society under supervisory control. The High Court followed this precedent and distinguished Jalgaon Jillha Urban Co-operative Banks Association Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, 2017(4) Mh.L.J. 301 as being wide and without noticing Thalappalam (Paras 3,6-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a cooperative society registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 which is not a public authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005 can be directed to supply information to an applicant through the Registrar/Assistant Registrar under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act subject to Section 8(1) exemptions; and whether the State Information Commissioner's direction was valid.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the learned Single Judge's judgment, affirming the State Information Commissioner's direction. The court held that information statutorily accessible to the Registrar under Section 79 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and Rule 65 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 could be supplied to an RTI applicant through the Registrar, subject to exemptions under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, including Section 8(1)(j).
Law Points
- Cooperative society not public authority under RTI unless substantially financed or controlled by appropriate Government
- Registrar can statutorily access society records under Section 79 and Rule 65
- Information accessible to Registrar can be supplied under RTI Act subject to Section 8(1) exemptions
- Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala followed
- Personal information exemption under Section 8(1)(j) applies
