Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/WB/A/2008/001132-SM dated 15.02.2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated 27.03.2009
Appellant : Col. Ashok Deshpande
Respondent : Army Headquarters, Ministry of Defence
The Appellant is present.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following are present:-
(i) Brig. Ved Parkash
(ii) Maj. M. Gahlot
(iii) Col. P.K. Sabharwal
(iv) Hav. R.B. Prasad
The brief facts of the case are as under.
2. The Appellant had sent an application to the CPIO on 15 February 2008 seeking a
number of information regarding allotment of houses by the AWHO. The CPIO in his reply dated
26 March 2008, informed the Appellant that the AWHO was not a Public Authority as defined in
the Right to Information (RTI) Act and, thus, not covered under the said act. Not content with his
reply, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the first Appellate Authority on 29 April 2008. The
first Appellate Authority decided the appeal in his order dated 9 May 2008 and endorsed the
CPIO’s decision. Now the Appellant has come before us in second appeal against the order of
the first Appellate Authority.
3. During the hearing, the Appellant submitted that in a number of decisions, the Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi had held that the AWHO was both a state within the meaning of the term
under the Constitution of India and that it was a Public Authority to which the Writ jurisdiction of
the High Court extended. Based on this, the Appellant was of the view that the Right to
Information (RTI) Act should extend to this organisation and they should provide information to
the citizens. The Respondent submitted that a full Bench of the CIC had earlier considered the
status of the AWHO and had held that it was not a Public Authority within the meaning of the term
as defined in Section 2(h) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act and, thus, the Act would not apply
to this organisation. We carefully considered the relevant orders of the Hon’ble High Court and
found that, indeed, it had held that the AWHO was both a ‘State’ and a ‘Public Authority’.
However, in the said orders, the question of whether the AWHO should be deemed to be a Public
Authority for the purpose of the Right to Information (RTI) Act had not been considered and the
CIC/WB/A/2008/01132-SM
Hon’ble Court had not given any ruling on this specific issue. On the other hand, this Commission
had already gone into the various aspects of the organisation and had held that it would not come
within the meaning of the term Public Authority for the purpose of the Right to Information (RTI)
Act and that the Act would not extend to this organisation. In view of this decision of the CIC, we
do not intend to go afresh in to the question of whether the AWHO should be treated as a Public
Authority and whether the Right to Information (RTI) Act should extend to it.
4. We, thus, dispose off the appeal.
5. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Satyananda Mishra)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and
payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2008/01132-SM