CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000954/9753
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000954
Complainant : Mr. Sultan Gangar
B 1, 1610, Vasant Kunj
Delhi - 110070
Respondent : Secretary
Delhi State Fruit & Vegetables Consumers
Cooperative Federation Ltd.
15-A, Ward No. 1, Mehrauli
New Delhi-110030
Facts arising from the Complaint:
Mr. Sultan Gangar filed a RTI application with the Delhi State Fruit & Vegetables
Consumers Cooperative Federation Ltd. on 24/04/2010 asking for certain information. Since no
reply was received within the mandated time of 30 days, he had filed a Complaint under Section
18 of the RTI Act with the Commission. On this basis, the Commission on 19/07/2010 issued a
direction to both the parties to provide evidence regarding whether the said organization is a
public authority or not for the purpose of the RTI Act.
Subsequently, the Commission received a response from the Cooperative Federation vide
letter dated 03/08/2010. It has been submitted in the latter response that the said Federation is not
a public authority as defined under the RTI Act as the Federation has not been established by a
law made by the parliament or the state legislature or by notification by the government, it is
further shown not to have been substantially financed or controlled by the government, directly
or indirectly.
The Commission also received a response from the Complainant to the Commission's
letter dated 19/07/2010, wherein the Complainant has put forth various reasons by which the said
Federation can be considered a public authority under section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. The
prominent grounds of the latter response included the fact that the Federation was registered
under the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act which has been passed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
It was further submitted that the funds of the federation was derived from the shareholders
holdings which comprised registered cooperative societies and Govt. of NCT of Delhi. Therefore
in the light of the above circumstances, the Complainant submitted the Federation to be a public
authority.
Section 2(h) of the RTI Act provides as follows:
"2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires-
...
(h) “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 the Parliament;
(c) by any other law made by State Legislature;
(d) by notification issued or made by the appropriate Government,
and includes any-
(i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
(ii) non- Government Organisation substantially financed,
directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;”
From a plain reading of the aforesaid, the main issue before the Commission is to
determine whether the Respondent is a “public authority” under Section 2(h)(d)(i)of the RTI Act.
The definition of “public authority” under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act brings within its ambit
bodies which are substantially financed directly or indirectly by the appropriate Government.
In the instant case, no evidence has been produced before the Commission which
establishes that the Respondent is a public authority. Hence the Complainant has no legally
enforceable right under the RTI Act.
Decision:
The Complaint is dismissed.
The Delhi State Fruit & Vegetables Consumers Cooperative Federation Ltd is not a public
authority as defined under Section 2 (h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this order will be provided free of cost as per section 7(6) of RTI, Act, 2005.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
12/10/2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(JA)