P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Public Information Officer, Department of Space - (Central Information Commission) (13 Jun 2016)

Juristic person’ has no right to seek information under RTI

MANU/CI/0139/2016

Right to Information

Companies seeking information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 cannot raise an RTI request under their own name, the Central Information Commission reminded.

The Respondent, Department of Space had denied information to the Appellant on the ground that it was not a natural person but a company. Before the CIC, Appellant contended that by recent High Court decisions, non-individual entities like companies and partnerships were entitled to receive information under the RTI Act.

Rejecting its claim, the Commission concluded that application made to Respondent was made not by Appellant’s Company Secretary, either in his position within company nor as an individual. Instead, the application, like the appeal before CIC, was in the name of the company. Section 3 of the Act permitted only citizens to seek information under the legislation, not juristic persons.

In earlier proceedings involving the same parties, the High Court had held the Respondent to be estopped from denying that the Appellant is entitled to receive information under the RTI Act. However, in the instant case, the Commission chose to not adhere to such a ‘hyper technical view’. Though persons employed with a company were not estopped from raising RTI requests, corporations did not comprise citizenry, it concluded.

Relevant : Section 3 Right to Information Act, 2005

Tags : RTI   CORPORATION   CITIZEN   APPLICATION   LEGAL ENTITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved