the legal battle in gujarat is your battle

Our colleagues from Gujarat are fighting a court battle that will affect RTI users all over the country.
Please support their battle. After all it is your own battle.
-----------------

Prakash kardaley wrote on june 06 on hum janenge board

the guj decision recd ad interim stay from a vacation judge of the the ahmedabad h c on may 25th. the matter is coming up on the first day after the vacation, i e, june 18th. some of the aggrieved reqisitioners, supported by our friends rti crusaders from ahmedabad, are gearing themselves up for the defence.

if they fail to get the ad interim stay vacated before the matter is
admitted, there is a danger of the interim stay becoming permanent until the final disposal of the matter.

-----------------------

BACKGROUND

Disposing of 28 complaints and appeals, the state chief information
commissioner of gujarat mr r n das on may 15, 2005, gave a decision/order that all cooperative societies are public authorities under the rti act (irrespective of whether substantially aided or not):

quoting the decision:

quote

Decision/Order.

(i) All co-operative societies registered under the Gujarat State Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 are bodies controlled falling within the ambit of the definition of "public authority" given at section 2(h)(i) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and, therefore, are public authorities.

(ii) All Co-operative banks since all such banks are registered as co-operative societies are also bodies controlled falling within the ambit of the definition of "public authority" given at section 2(h)(i) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and, therefore, are public authorities.

(iii) In view of the above decision, all co-operative societies and co-operative banks are required to abide by the relevant provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 particularly, Chapter II thereof, dealing with obligations of public authorities, including providing information to the citizen subject to the provisions contained in section 8 (1), 9 and 10 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

unquote

----

full text of the 43-page order has been uploaded by vishal kudchadkar on

http://www.mediamax.com/humjanenge/Hosted/decision/GIC_Coop_Banks_Socieites_15052007.pdf

-----

in para 8 of its decision, the info commission examines at length if the cooperatives fall under the definition of pubic authority given in s 2 (h) (i) with the opening remark:

``8. To determine "functional realism" and "substance" one needs to examine if the functions of the co-operative societies/banks are of public importance or the nature of their functions is public, if the said functions are " tied or entwined with Government" and to what extent their functions are controlled by the Government. In short whether they are bodies controlled.''

it is difficult to reproduce here the elaborate argument advanced by the info commission to conclude that this definition applies to all cooperatives.

i urge all of you to access the full text through the link given and go through the details in 17 sub-paras of para 8 of the decision.

----

Ten days later, on may 25, 2007, the vacation bench of the gujarat high court, in response to three civil applications, granted ad interim stay to the info commission order.

full text of the high court order is quoted below

quote

SCA/13457/2007 3/3 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13457 of 2007

WITH

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13458 OF 2007

WITH

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13459 OF 2007

=========================================================

GUJARAT URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK FEDRATION & 1 - Petitioner(s)

Versus

GUJARAT INFORMATION COMMISSION
BUREAU OF ECONOMICS & STATIS-

& 2 - Respondent(s)

=========================================================
Appearance :
MR TUSHAR MEHTA for Petitioner
None for Respondent(s) : 1, 3,
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 2,
=========================================================

CORAM :

HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI

Date : 25/05/2007

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned Advocate Mr.Tushar Mehta for the petitioners in each of these petitions.

The learned Advocate has drawn attention of the Court to the definition of public authority as defined under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, which reads as under :

S2(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 the 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 organization substantially financed, directly or
indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;âý

It is pointed out that, insofar as the Cooperative Societies registered under the Cooperative Societies Act are concerned, the same do not fall within any of the categories enumerated thereunder. However, insofar as the impugned order passed by the Chief Information Commissioner, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar is concerned, the relevant category would be [c] i.e. any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted by any other law made by the State Legislature. Referring to para 7 of the impugned order passed by the Chief Information Commissioner, it was pointed out that the authority has held that it is immaterial whether the cooperative society is established or constituted by or under the statute. It is submitted that the basic reasoning of the authority is fallacious. Learned advocate has submitted that a body or institution of self-government established or constituted by any other law made by the State Legislature can never be construed to mean as having been established by or under such law.

In view of the above discussion, Rule returnable on 18th June, 2007. Ad-interim relief in terms of paragraph 6(D) till then. Direct service is permitted today.

The Registry is directed to keep a copy of this order in each matter.

[HARSHA DEVANI, J.]

unquote
-------------------------------

the matter is coming up on june 18th - the first day after the vacation. i have been insisting that RTI crusaders from ahmedabad seek the support of a senior counsel to defend at least one of the respondents from among the original (and aggrieved) requisitioners of information, who have been impleaded by the petitioners in the high court, as the court matter stands to affect all RTI users in the country.

the high court stay will surely be quoted by all info commissions in the country in most probably upholding second appeals against denial of information to citizens from cooperatives.

ahmedabad-based RTI crusaders led by harineshbhai and the respondents in the matter, accordingly have approached a senior counsel who has agreed to take up the matter.

as i said, details are awaited from rahul in ahmedabad.

---

rahul and self will get back with details, in individual mails, to all friends who respond to this appeal.

regards

Prakash kardaley wrote on june 12 on hum janenge board

shri harineshbhai and rahul mangaonkar from ahmedabad informed me this evening that they have succeeded in getting the support of a senior counsel to take up the matter on behalf of aggrieved requisitioners. however, the total cost of taking up the litigation is expected to be rs 100 k. (that is what i had expected, anyway).

this is an appeal to everyone. look at this as your own case. let us try to raise as much funds as possible to cover, as far as possible, the entire cost, so that our gujrat friends can have spare capacity to take the legal battle further, if circumstances force.

the funds generated by us ideally should go to them directly. i am awaiting detailed advice from ahmedabad on formalities.in the meantime, pl treat this as an alert. those offering any contributing may pl write immediately to rahul on mail4rahul@gmail.com
with a copy to me: prakash.kardaley@gmail.com

regards


Rahul mangaonkar wrote on june 15
Dear Fellow RTI Crusaders,

To begin with on behalf of MAGP, its member organizations, individuals and institutions thank you for the offer of support to fight to fight the legal battles in the Gujarat High Court on RTI issues. These are well appreciated, and accepted humbly, on both counts of, moral as well as the financial resources offered.

Financial assistance may please be made out by way of demand draft in favor of, 'Janpath', (payable in Ahmedabad)...and to be sent to;

Mahiti Adhikar Gujarat Pahel
C/o Janpath
B/3, Sahjanand Towers
Jivraj Park
Ahmedabad 380 051
Gujarat, India

Prakash kardaley wrote on june 29:
contributions are trickling in. three have sent. pl forgive me if i have missed out any name. rahul may please give us an update. contributions sent by: Sandeep Jalan, Mumbai, Anil Heble, Delhi, sridhar chakravarthy, Bangalore, i am sending mine tomorrow.
Rahul mangaonkar wrote on june 30 on hum janenge board
Ajay Marathe and Pravin Dali also have sent mails that they are sending drafts...

Rahul

------------------

UPDATE:

A senior counsel from Ahmedabad is representing a respondent cooperative society backed by RTI crusaders.

The cousel on June 18 sought further time to study the matter and come forth with his defence.

---