Case Law Details
G. Rajenderanath Goud Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh (High Courat Hyderabad)
Conclusion: Religious institutions like temples, churches, mosques, which were not financed/funded by government did not fall within the purview of Right to Information Act, 2005. However, it is desirable to amend the Act at least to bring in its fold all the registered temples/institutions having income over and above a particular limit, to furnish information so as to have a greater vigil with respect to utilization of the monies, conducting affairs transparently and to achieve the objects of the RTI Act.
Held: In the instant case, various religious institutions, charitable endowment trusts and trustees had filed writ petition for challenging the circulars issued by government directing respective organizations to designate and constitute ‘Public Information Officers’ and other officers to operationalize the mechanism for providing information under the RTI Act. It contended that temples / charitable institutions did not answer the description ‘public authority’, as defined under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, hence, there was no obligation on Trustees, Chairpersons, Trust Boards and Executive Officers of the subject institutions to respond and furnish ‘information’ in relation to the temples/institutions under the RTI Act. In the case of Bhanunni v. Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (Admn.) Department, it was held that the Hindu Religious Institutions and endowments were not the ‘public authorities’ as defined in the RTI Act and the provisions of that Act did not apply to those institutions and their offices, officers and employees and the Executive Officer. On a close examination of Section 2(h), applying the tests laid in the definition, it would be clear that the same did not fall under Section 2(h)(a)(b) and (c) as the temple was not established or constituted by or under the constitution, or by any other law made by the Parliament or State Legislature. Though a temple could be said to be a non-governmental organization, as it did not depend for its finances, in any away, much less substantially, on the government either directly or indirectly, the same was also outside the purview of Section 2(h)(d)(ii). At last, it was further held that it is desirable to amend the Act at least to bring in its fold all the registered temples/institutions having income over and above a particular limit, to furnish information so as to have a greater vigil with respect to utilization of the monies, conducting affairs transparently and to achieve the objects of the RTI Act.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGEMENT
These Writ Petitions filed by various religious institutions, charitable endowment trusts and some of the trustees / Executive Officers of temples are heard together, as, they all, in essence, questioned either invocation of the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short, ‘the 2005 Act’) with respect to their organizations or the circulars issued by the government directing the respective organizations to designate and constitute ‘Public Information Officers’ and other officers to operationalize the mechanism for providing information under the 2005 Act.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
