Karnataka High Court
Pio & The Project Director vs The State Information Commissioner on 6 August, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 52581 OF 2017 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN
PIO & THE PROJECT DIRECTOR
NIRMITI KENDRA
NEAR MEDAHALLI
CHITHRADURGA DISTRICT-577502
REPTD BY ITS DIRECTOR
MUDALGIRIAPPA
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL., SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. RAHUL.P., ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
MAHITHI SOUDHA
104, 1ST FLOOR
Digitally signed
by SHWETHA DEVRAJ URS ROAD
RAGHAVENDRA BEHIND KPSC OFFICE PREMISES
Location: HIGH OPP:VIDHANA SOUDHA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA WEST GATE-2
BANGALORE-560001
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT
CHITRADURGA
3. SRI H R THIMMAIAH
PRESIDENT
COUNCIL MEMBER
BHARAT KRISHIKA SAMAJ
HIRIYUR
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-573143
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
4. S.K. MALAGATHI,
S/O KALAKAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
NANDI NAGAR,
KOPPAL.58231
(IMPLEADED BY AN ORDER DATED 05.03.2025)
.... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. SRINIVAS KUMAR., HCGP FOR R2;
SRI. RAJASHEKAR K., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. J. PRASHANTH., ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. AMRUTHESH.N., ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN KIC 13961 APL
2015 DATED 29.8.2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS AND HAVING
BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 24.07.2025, THIS DAY, THE
COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CAV ORDER
1. The Petitioner, PIO and the Project Director, Nirmiti
Kendra, near Medahalli, Chitradurga District, is
before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
i. To issue a writ of certiorari by quashing the
impugned order in KIC 13961 APL 2015 dated
29.08.2017 as per Annexure-A passed by the 1st
Respondent.
ii. To call for the entire records in KIC 13961 APL 2015
dated 29.08.2017 from the 1st respondent from
Karnataka Information Commission CH No.3.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
iii. To pass an appropriate order/s as deems fit by this
Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice and equity.
2. The Petitioner-Nirmiti Kendra is stated to be
registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration
Act, 1960, and is governed by the Rules and
Regulations of the Societies Registration Act. It is
contended that the Nirmiti Kendra is a private
Society and it is not financed or aided by the State or
Central Government.
3. The object of the Nirmiti Kendra being to develop
skills in the construction area and carry out the civil
contract/s assigned by the State. It is contended that
the Nirmiti Kendra is governed by its governing body
and as such, would not come within the purview of
the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the RTI Act‘ for short).
4. In that background, Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, learned
Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would
submit that;
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
4.1. The Nirmiti Kendra is not a Public Authority
under the RTI Act. The endorsement issued by
the Nirmiti Kendra on an application submitted
by the 3rd Respondent for furnishing of
information is proper and correct. The order of
the 1st Respondent, the State Information
Commissioner, dated 29.08.2017, directing the
PIO of Nirmiti Kendra to furnish the
information/documents sought for as also
imposing a penalty of Rs.25,000/-, is not
sustainable
4.2. His submission is that the Nirmiti Kendra not
being a Public Authority, it would not be
amenable to the rigor of the RTI Act. As such,
no information is required to be furnished by
the Nirmiti Kendra to any applicant under the
4.3. On the above grounds, he submits that the
above petition is required to be allowed by
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
setting aside the order passed by the 1st
respondent, the State Information
Commissioner.
5. Sri.J.Prashanth, learned counsel appearing for
Respondent No.3 submits that;
5.1. The Nirmiti Kendra has been established for the
purpose of carrying out activities on behalf of
the State. In terms of Section 2(h) of the RTI
Act, 2005, it is a Public Authority and it is
controlled or substantially financed by the
Government. There is no requirement for any
notification to be issued or an order to be
made. The mere fact that it is controlled or
substantially financed would be sufficient for
the Nirmiti Kendra to be included as a Public
Authority in terms of Section 2(h)(d)(i) of the
RTI Act.
5.2. His further submission is that even if the Nirmiti
Kendra were held to be a Non-Government
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
Organisation, it is substantially financed directly
or indirectly by funds provided by the
appropriate Government. As such, it is a Public
Authority in terms of Section 2(h)(ii) of the RTI
Act.
5.3. The Nirmiti Kendra is constituted for the
development of a low-cost technical alternative
in housing. The Rural Development and
Panchayath Raj Department had made a
proposal for setting up the Nirmiti Kendras in
seven centres of the State. The funds for the
project are to be made available by HUDCO
under the scheme for setting up of the Nirmiti
Kendras.
5.4. It is by virtue of a Government order that the
Nirmiti Kendras were constituted at Tumkur,
Bellary, Kolar, Mandya, Gulbarga, Mysore and
Bangalore with the assistance of Karnataka
Land Army Corporation/Technology Research
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
Organisation. The Nirmiti Kendras operate
under the Chairmanship of the Secretary, Rural
Development and Panchayath Raj, and 11 other
members are provided to give requisite
technical inputs.
5.5. The working group consisted of the Secretary of
Government of Karnataka, Public Works
Department, the Chief Engineer,
Communications and Buildings, Bangalore, the
Engineer-in-Chief, Multipurpose Division and
the Director, Area Development Programme
(ADPR).
5.6. On that basis, he submits that the
establishment of the Nirmiti Kendra, being by
way of a Government Order, funding being
through HUDCO, the activities of the Nirmiti
Kendra being as recommended by the Rural
Development and Panchayath Raj Department,
the Nirmiti Kendra would be a public Authority.
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
5.7. Insofar as control is concerned, he submits that
it is the Chief Secretary of the Zilla Panchayath,
who is the Chairman. The Deputy Secretary of
the Zilla Panchayath is the Vice Chairman and
the Deputy Commissioner is a member. Thus,
the operation and management of the Nirmiti
Kendra are conducted by the Government
officers in terms of the Government Order
dated 06.03.1995. Subsequently, vide
Government Order dated 04.01.2005, the
CEO’s of the Zilla Panchayaths were appointed
as the Presidents of various Departments,
including the Nirmiti Kendras.
5.8. He also relies upon the byelaws of the Petitioner
to contend that the funds and budget shall
include and consist of grants from the
Government and any other State Government
and the Government of India, and as such,
there is substantial funding by the Government.
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
5.9. His submission is also that the Nirmiti Kendra is
carrying out various works on behalf of the
State, and it is the sovereign functions which
are discharged by the Nirmiti Kendra.
5.10. He refers to the Government Order dated
03.04.2014 to contend that a special audit of
the Nirmiti Kendras at various centres in
Raichur, Belgaum, Dharwad, Hassan, Mandya,
Bellary and Chitradurga has been entrusted to
the Principal Accountant General, Karnataka,
which also indicates the supervision exercised
by the Government. On that basis, he submits
that the Nirmiti Kendra is a Public Authority.
6. Sri.N.Amruthesh, learned counsel appearing for
Respondent No.4, who was impleaded subsequently,
adopts the arguments of Sri.J.Prashanth, learned
counsel for respondent No.3, he further submits that
6.1. Many of the works of the Government being
discharged by the Nirmiti Kendra, there are
– 10 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
crores of rupees of public money which are
spent by the Nirmiti Kendra and by claiming
that it is not a Public Authority, the Nirmiti
Kendra has so far avoided disclosure of its
activities, thereby the Nirmiti Kendra has been
used as a tool for carrying out opaque
operations, giving a go by to transparency. The
RTI Act was promulgated for the purpose of
bringing about transparency. The Nirmiti
Kendra cannot seek to escape its liability from
disclosure of its activities where permissible
under the RTI Act.
6.2. He relies upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in the case of D.A.V COLLEGE TRUST
AND MANAGEMENT SOCIETY AND OTHERS
Vs. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
AND OTHERS1, more particularly, paras 12,
1
(2019) 9 SCC 185
– 11 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
15, 16 and 17, which are reproduced hereunder
for easy reference.
“12. The next contention is that a public authority
can only be an authority or body or institution which
has been established or constituted (a) under the
Constitution; (b) by any law of Parliament; (c) by
any law of State Legislature or (d) by notification
made by the appropriate Government. It is the
contention of the appellants that only those
authorities, bodies or institutions of self-government
which fall in these four categories can be covered
under the definition of public authority. It is also
contended that in Thalappalam case [Thalappalam
Service Coop. Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala, (2013)
16 SCC 82] the Court did not consider the effect of
clause (d) on the remaining portion of the definition.
15. If we analyse Section 2(h) carefully it is obvious
that the first part of Section 2(h) relates to
authorities, bodies or institutions of self-government
established or constituted (a) under the
Constitution; (b) by any law of Parliament; (c) by
any law of State Legislature or (d) by notification
made by the appropriate Government. There is no
dispute with regard to clauses (a) to (c). As far as
clause (d) is concerned it was contended on behalf
of the appellants that unless a notification is issued
notifying that an authority, body or institution of
self-government is brought within the ambit of the
Act, the said Act would not apply. We are not
impressed with this argument. The notification
contemplated in clause (d) is a notification relating
to the establishment or constitution of the body and
has nothing to do with the Act. Any authority or
body or institution of self-government, if established
or constituted by a notification of the Central
Government or a State Government, would be a
public authority within the meaning of clause (d) of
Section 2(h) of the Act.
16. We must note that after the end of sub-clause
(d) there is a comma and a big gap and then the
– 12 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
definition goes on to say “and includes any” and
thereafter the definition reads as:
“(i) body owned, controlled or substantially
financed;
(ii) non-government organisation substantially
financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by
the appropriate Government;”
The words “and includes any”, in our considered
view, expand the definition as compared to the first
part. The second part of the definition is an inclusive
clause which indicates the intention of the
legislature to cover bodies other than those
mentioned in clauses (a) to (d) of Section 2(h).
17. We have no doubt in our mind that the bodies
and NGOs mentioned in sub-clauses (i) and (ii) in
the second part of the definition are in addition to
the four categories mentioned in clauses (a) to (d).
Clauses (a) to (d) cover only those bodies, etc.,
which have been established or constituted in the
four manners prescribed therein. By adding an
inclusive clause in the definition, Parliament
intended to add two more categories, the first being
in sub-clause (i), which relates to bodies which are
owned, controlled or substantially financed by the
appropriate Government. These can be bodies which
may not have been constituted by or under the
Constitution, by an Act of Parliament or State
Legislature or by a notification. Any body which is
owned, controlled or substantially financed by the
Government, would be a public authority.”
6.3. By relying on Dav College‘s case, he submits
that where there is substantial funding made,
all the funds of the Nirmiti Kendra being
received from the State and/or its
– 13 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
instrumentalities, the RTI Act, would be
applicable to the Nirmiti Kendra.
6.4. Lastly, he submits that all the officers manning
the Nirmiti Kendra are Government Officers,
who are also paid by the Government. Thus,
both on account of the control of the Nirmiti
Kendras by Government Officers, as also on
account of the State funding, the payment of
persons manning the Nirmiti Kendra, the Nirmiti
Kendra would be a Public Authority.
6.5. On that basis, he submits that the above
petition is required to be dismissed.
7. Heard Sri.Jayakumar S. Patil, learned Senior Counsel
for the petitioner. Sri.J.Prashanth, learned counsel for
Respondent No.3, Sri Amruthesh N., learned counsel
for Respondent No.4 and Sri.Rajashekar K., learned
counsel for Respondent No.1 and learned AGA for
Respondent No.2. Perused papers.
– 14 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
8. The short question that would arise for consideration
in the present matter is:
“Whether the Nirmiti Kendra would be a Public
Authority in terms of Section 2(h) of the Right to
Information Act, 2005?”
9. The constitution of the Nirmiti Kendra, though as a
Society, is in terms of a direction issued by the
Government of Karnataka; there is a proceeding held
in this connection. The Rural Development and
Panchayath Raj Department, having examined the
proposal to set up the Nirmiti Kendras in seven
centres, held several meetings. The proceeding of the
Government of Karnataka and the Government Order
in this regard is reproduced hereunder for easy
reference:
“PROCEEDINGS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF
KARNATAKASub: Starting of “Nirmiti Kendra” for Developing Low
Cost Technology alternatives in housingPREAMBLE: The Rural Development and Panchayath Raj
Department has examined the proposals to set up
“Nirmiti Kendras in 7 centers for developing low cost
– 15 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017HC-KAR
technology alternatives in housing. These Technology
centers are essentially meant to serve the purpose of
Technology transfer, skill up-gradation, a low cost
materials manufacturing centre and such other activities
as may promote low cost housing in the rural area.
In the preliminary meeting convened by the
Development Commissioner on 5.8.88 it was decided
that (i) to begin with at least 20 centers, one in each
district could be set up over a project period of 2 years
i.e., 1988-90.
(ii) The details of the training programmes, selection of
trainees, adoption of relevant technology and other
details of the technology centers would be done jointly
by the Karnataka Land Army corporation, the Zilla
Parishad’s concerned and some of the technology
Research organizations such as Astra, KORID, etc.,
among others.
(iii) The funds for this project should be drawn from the
grants to be made available HUDCO as provided for
under their scheme for setting up of Nirmiti Kendras.
(iv) The Technology Centers would take up as part of
their training programme, setting up of live housing
clusters of atleast 100 houses for each center. If need
be the funds required would be supplemented from out
of NRBP/Food grains additionality grants;
In a subsequent meeting held on 6-9-1988 it was
decided that start with 7 centers would be set up
immediately to be sponsored by HUDCO under their
scheme for setting up Nirmiti Kendras. The details of the
Centers to be set up are fallows:
i) Technology Centers would be set up at Tumkur and
Bellary with the assistance of the jointly run by KDAC
and Astra
ii) The building centre at Kolar would be set up with the
assistance from KORID, one center at Mandya with the
assistance of CTTRD and one center as Gulbarga with
the assistance of the MYRADA.
– 16 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
iii) Once centers would be set up at Mysore with the
assistance of the Engineering Dn. Of Jayachamarajendra
College, Mysore (IV) one Technology entre will be set up
at Bangalore jointly by KHB and Astra.
Each of these 7 centers shall with the assistance of the
Research organizations so nominated take up Training of
Masons, Carpenters, Artisans and also develop low cost
Technology alternatives including monitoring of low cost
housing immediately.
The Karnataka Land Army Corporation will be the Nodal
Agency for these centers and the centers will be
supervised and monitored by the Zilla Parishad’s
concerned.
As part of their Training Programme each of the centers
will take up 100 live houses in clusters of at-least 40
each to demonstrate the effective3 use alternatives. of
low cost technology
GOVERNMENT ORDER NO. RDP.ADP.96.HRD.88/
BANGALORE, DATED 09.11.88
In view of the details at the preamble cited above
sanction is hereby accorded for setting up of Seven
Nirmiti Kendra (Technology Centres) one each at
Tumkur/Bellary/Kolar/Mandya/Gulbarga/Mysore and
Bangalore with the assistance of the Karnataka Land
Army Corporation/Technology Research organization as
detailed in the preamble to this order. The funds for this
project shall be met out of HUDCO grants admissible
under the scheme for setting up of Nirmiti Kendras. If
necessary and to the extent required the funds shall be
supplemented from out of NREP/Food grants additionally
grants.
This order issued with the concurrence of IFA, Rural
Development and Panchayath Raj Department.
BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME
OF THE GOVERNOR OF
KARNATAKA
Sd/-
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
Area Development
Programmes & B/o.
Deputy Secretary to Govt.
Rural Development & P. Raj
Dept."
10. From the above proceedings, it is clear, firstly, that
the initiative to establish the Nirmiti Kendra was taken
up by the Rural Development and Panchayath Raj
Department. The objects of the same were discussed
and finalised. Funds for the project were to be drawn
from HUDCO. In pursuance thereof, a Government
Order had been issued whereunder a sanction was
granted for setting up of seven Nirmiti Kendras,
including the petitioner.
11. A working group was appointed under a Government
Order dated 22.03.1990, which was entrusted with the
responsibility of supervising and overseeing the
progress and programs of the Nirmiti Kendra. The
proceedings of the Government of Karnataka in that
regard are reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
– 18 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017HC-KAR
“PROCEEDINGS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
Sub: Construction of Standing Committee to oversee
The programme of Nirmiti Kendras.
Read: 1. Proceedings of the meeting held on
07.10.89 To review the progress in the
construction of Nirmiti Kendras.
2. Govt. Order No.RDP 52 TSM 87 dated 1.2.90
Issued by the Director, Special Economic
Programme, RD & PR Department.
Preamble:
In the review meeting of Nirmiti Kendras of the State
held on 7.10.89, it was decided to constitute a Standing
Committee to oversee the programme of Nirmiti Kendras.
In Govt. Order Under reference at (2) above, a Working
Group has been constituted under the Chairmanship of the
Secretary, RD & PR and other 11 members to provide the
requisite technical inputs into the scheme of low cost
housing and to ensure the use of local materials in low cost
technology on systematic basis. This Working Group serves
the purpose for which the Standing Committee is proposed
to be set up.
The Development Commissioner has opined that there
cannot be too many committees for the same purpose and
first the Technical Group which has been set up for low cost
housing Technology must also cover the overseeing of the
Nirmiti Kendras. Hence this Order.
Govt. Order No. RDP.ADP.148, NK, 89, Bangalore,
Dated 22.3.1990.
In the circumstances as explained in the Preamble,
the Government is pleased to entrust the Responsibilities of
supervising the progress and programmes of Nirmiti
Kendras in the State to the ‘Working Group’ constituted vide
G.O.No.RDP.52.TSM.87, dated 1.2.90.
In Order to enable the Working Group to discharge
the added responsibilities in respect of Nirmiti Kendras, the
– 19 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017HC-KAR
constitution of the Working Group is enlarged as to include
the following additional members.
1. Secretary to Govt. of
Karnataka, PW-1 Member
2. The Chief Engineer
Communication & Buildings, B’lore Member
3. The Engineer-in-chief
PHE, Multipurpose Engineer Dvn.,
Bangalore Member
4. The Director,
Area Development Programmes,
RD & PR Department,
Bangalore. Member
5. Prof. Kantharaj
Officer-in-charge MemberThe revised constitution of the Working Group has
come into force with immediate effect and would be inforce
until further orders.
By Order in the name of
Governor of Karnataka
Sd/-
(Director)
Area Development Progammes &
E/O Deputy Secretary to Govt.
Rural Development & P.Raj Dept.
12. It is in pursuance thereof that the petitioner was
registered as a Co-operative Society. The governing
– 20 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
body of the Nirmiti Kendra, as per the byelaws, is as
under:
“4. GOVERNING BODY:-
a) There shall be a Governing Body of 13 members.
b) the Governing Body shall be composed of.
1.Chief Secretary, ZP Chitradurga-
Chairman
2. Deputy Secretary (Dn) ZP Chitradurga- Vice
Chairman
3.Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga-
Member
4.Ex.Engineer, ZP Eng. Division Chitradurga-
Member
5.Ex.Engineer, ZP Eng. Davanagere-
Member
6.Deputy Director, KLAC, Chitradurga-
Member
7.Asst. Director, KLAC, Chitradurga-
Member
8.Chief Planning Officer, Chitradurga-
Member
9.Regional Chief HUDCO, Bangalore-
Member
10.Chief Advisor TESCSOK Bangalore-
Member
– 21 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
11. Officer in Charge N.B.O Bangalore University
Bangalore- Member
12. Principal JMIT Engg, College Chitradurga-
Member
13. General Manager, DIC, Chitradurga-
Member
The byelaws while dealing with funds, notes
as under:
The Funds of the Kendra shall consist of the
following:-
i. Grants from the Government and any other State
Government and the Government of India.
ii. Grants and contributions from other corporate
bodies, agencies, institutions and persons in India
and outside.
iii. Loans from Government, any other state
Government, the Government of India, and other
financing institutions.
13. The above would indicate that the control and
supervision of the Nirmiti Kendra is by Government
Officers, the funding is from HUDCO, which is again a
Government entity, and contracts are issued by the
government for the works done. There is a preference
– 22 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
for the Nirmiti Kendra to carry out works of the
Government.
14. Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act is
reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
Section 2. Definitions. 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 Parliament;
(c) by any other law made by State Legislature;
(d) by notification issued or order 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;
15. A perusal of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, would
indicate that it is not only funding, but also control,
which would have to be considered to determine
whether it is a public authority or not.
– 23 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
16. Insofar as control is concerned, the above extracts
make it clear that, firstly, Nirmiti Kendras were
established on the recommendation of the Rural
Development and Panchayat Raj Department. A
working committee comprising Government Officers
was created, comprising Secretaries, Chief Engineers,
etc., to supervise the working of the Nirmiti Kendra.
17. The general body of the Nirmiti Kendra consists of all
the top officers of each District, and the day-to-day
activities of the Nirmiti Kendra are run by officers
belonging to the State Government, many of whom
belong to the Indian Administrative Service and the
Karnataka Administrative Service. Thus, it is clear that
Nirmathi Kendra is under the complete control of
Government servants.
18. Insofar as the funding is concerned, as observed
supra, the funding is by HUDCO, Government
organisations, and financial institutions, and these
– 24 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
funds are used for the implementation of public works.
Thus, not only is the funding provided by the
Government, but the works carried out by Nirmathi
Kendra are also considered Government works.
19. I answer the question framed by holding that, a
Nirmathi Kendra would be a public authority in terms
of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act.
20. In that view of the matter, the finding and conclusion
of the Karnataka Information Commission and the
direction issued to furnish the document sought for
cannot be faulted. It is not expected of a
Governmental authority and the officers of the
Nirmathi Kendra, who are Government officers, to
have taken such a stand that a Nirmathi Kendra would
not come within the purview of the RTI Act. All the
Government offices and Departments are subject to
RTI Act and are required to make available the
information sought for. The attempt made by the
– 25 –
NC: 2025:KHC:30716
WP No. 52581 of 2017
HC-KAR
officers of Nirmathi Kendra to suppress such
transparency leaves much to be desired and does not
inspire confidence. By way of such conduct, the
petitioner Nirmathi Kendra has successfully avoided
disclosure of information and details. In that view of
the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the
costs would also have to be imposed on the Nirmathi
Kendra.
21. In view of my finding, no grounds being made out, the
petition stands dismissed by imposing a cost of
Rs.50,000/- payable to the Karnataka State Legal
Service Authority, within a period of three weeks from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
SD/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
KTY/AP
List No.: 8 Sl No.: 1
[ad_1]
Source link