S.R. Narayanamurthy vs Poornapragna House Building Co-operative Society and Others

Vineet Saran, J—The moot question in these appeals is as to whether a private co-operative society would be amenable to the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005. Learned Single Judge has, after relying on the decision of this Court in the case of Dattaprasad Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Karnataka State Chief Information Commissioner and Another, AIR 2009 Kar 1 : (2008) ILR (Kar) 4105 : (2009) 1 KarLJ 641 : (2008) 4 KCCR 2357 , held that since the petitioner-Society is not financed directly or indirectly by the appropriate Government, it would not fall under the definition of public authority and therefore, the provisions of the RTI Act would not be applicable. Heard learned Counsel for parties.

Learned Counsel for the appellant has strenuously argued that the overall supervisory control over the co-operative societies would be of the State Government and its officers and thus, would be falling within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, more so as the Society is also registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 and would have to comply with the provisions of the said Act.

Just by being registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act, without the Government having any control or having financed the society, in our view, it would not fall within the definition of ''Public Authority'' as given under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Further, the Apex Court, in the case of Thalapvalam Service Co-operative Bank Limited and Others v. State of Kerala and Others AIR 2013 SC (Supp.) 437 : (2003) 16 SCC 82 : 2013 AIR SCW 5683, has also held that co-operative societies which do not have substantive control by the Government and over which there is only supervisory or regulatory control, would not be amenable to the provisions of the RTI Act. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstance of this case and in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Thalappalam''s case, we do not find merit in these appeals. Appeals are accordingly, dismissed. However, there would be no order as to costs.