Bombay High Court Allows Petition of Deemed University and Trust Against RTI Disclosure Order — Pravara Medical Trust Not a Public Authority Under Section 2(h) of Right to Information Act, 2005. Deemed University Status Under Section 3 of University Grants Commission Act, 1956 Does Not Automatically Make Institution a Public Authority.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 64
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Pravara Medical Trust (a trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and Societies Registration Act, 1860) and Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences (a deemed university declared under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956), challenged a direction from the University Grants Commission (UGC) to provide information to Respondent No. 3 under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The UGC had informed the petitioners that all deemed universities are covered by the RTI Act, relying on a communication from the Central Information Commission. The petitioners argued that they are not 'public authorities' under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act and thus not obligated to provide information. The court analyzed the definition of 'public authority' under Section 2(h), which includes bodies established or constituted by the Constitution, by law made by Parliament or state legislature, by notification or order of the appropriate government, or bodies owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government. The court found that the petitioners were not established by any government notification or order, nor were they owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government. The mere fact that the institute was declared a deemed university under the UGC Act did not make it a public authority. The court held that the petitioners are not public authorities under the RTI Act and quashed the UGC's direction to provide information. The writ petition was allowed.

Headnote

A) Right to Information Act - Public Authority - Deemed University - Section 2(h) of Right to Information Act, 2005 - The court examined whether a deemed university declared under Section 3 of the UGC Act, 1956, and its sponsoring trust, fall within the definition of 'public authority' under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. The court held that a deemed university, though declared by the Central Government, is not a 'public authority' unless it is established or constituted by a notification or order of the appropriate government, or is owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government. The mere fact of being a deemed university does not bring it within the ambit of the RTI Act. (Paras 1-10)

B) Right to Information Act - Public Authority - Trust - Section 2(h) of Right to Information Act, 2005 - The court held that a trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, and Societies Registration Act, 1860, which sponsors a deemed university, is not a 'public authority' under the RTI Act unless it is established or constituted by the government or is substantially financed by the government. The trust's activities, though in the field of education, do not make it a public authority. (Paras 1-10)

C) University Grants Commission Act - Deemed University - Section 3 of University Grants Commission Act, 1956 - The court noted that a deemed university is declared by the Central Government under Section 3 of the UGC Act, but such declaration does not transform the institution into a government entity. The institution remains a private entity unless it meets the criteria under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. (Paras 1-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a deemed university declared under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, and its sponsoring trust, are 'public authorities' under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and thus obligated to provide information under the RTI Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the direction of the University Grants Commission to the petitioners to provide information under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The court held that the petitioners are not 'public authorities' under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act.

Law Points

  • Right to Information Act
  • 2005
  • Section 2(h) definition of public authority
  • Deemed university status
  • University Grants Commission Act
  • 1956
  • Section 3
  • Bombay Public Trusts Act
  • 1950
  • Societies Registration Act
  • 1860
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (BOM) (10) 10

Writ Petition No. 590 of 2009

2014-10-10

R.M. Borde, V.K. Jadhav

Mr. V.D. Hon (Senior Counsel for petitioners), Mr. S.B. Deshpande (Assistant Solicitor General for Respondents No.1 & 2), Mr. L.V. Sangeet (advocate for Respondent No.3)

Pravara Medical Trust and Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences

Union of India, University Grants Commission, and Vilas Bikulal Mundada

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging a direction from the University Grants Commission to provide information under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought quashing of the UGC's direction to provide information to Respondent No. 3 under the RTI Act.

Filing Reason

Petitioners contended that they are not 'public authorities' under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act and thus not obligated to provide information.

Previous Decisions

The Central Information Commission had informed the UGC that all deemed universities are covered by the RTI Act, leading to the UGC's direction to the petitioners.

Issues

Whether a deemed university declared under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, is a 'public authority' under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Whether a trust sponsoring a deemed university is a 'public authority' under the RTI Act.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that they are not established or constituted by the government, nor owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government, and thus not public authorities under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. Respondents argued that the deemed university status and the nature of educational activities bring the petitioners within the ambit of the RTI Act.

Ratio Decidendi

A deemed university declared under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, and its sponsoring trust, are not 'public authorities' under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, unless they are established or constituted by the government or are owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government. The mere declaration as a deemed university does not bring the institution within the definition of public authority.

Judgment Excerpts

Petitioner No.1 Pravara Medical Trust is registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and is also registered as society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, on 28.12.1972. Petitioner no.2, by virtue of notification issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India on 29.09.2003, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, has been declared to be a deemed university.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 590 of 2009 before the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) challenging the UGC's direction to provide information under the RTI Act. The court reserved judgment on 11 September 2014 and pronounced it on 10 October 2014.

Acts & Sections

  • Right to Information Act, 2005: Section 2(h)
  • University Grants Commission Act, 1956: Section 3
  • Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950:
  • Societies Registration Act, 1860:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Unaided Private School to Fix Fees Subject to Reasonable Regulation. Fee Fixation Must Be Transparent and Not Excessive Under Grant in Aid Code and Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 198...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Demolition of Illegal Construction in Residential Zone. Unauthorized construction in residential zone without valid development permission is liable for demolition under MRTP Act and BMC Act.