RTI Act applicable to Century Club as it is a ‘public authority': Karnataka High Court
Patron-in-chief
The club was started by then Maharaja of Mysore Narasimha Raja Wadiyar, who was its patron-in-chief, and Sir M. Visvesvaraya. '... if the valuation of the land of 7.5 acres as of today is taken into consideration, the same would run into hundreds of crores if not thousands, and the contribution made by the members of the club, as membership fees or any other head of account, pales into insignificance. In that view of the matter, it is clearly and categorically established that there is a substantial contribution made by the State, i.e. the erstwhile Kingdom of Mysore, through the Maharaja of Mysore', the court said.
Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the order while dismissing a petition filed by the club, which had questioned the 2018 order passed by the State Information Commission (SIC).
Land given by govt.
The SIC had said that the club has to be treated as a 'public authority' under the RTI Act as it has benefited from the land given by the State government in 1913 while directing the club to provide information under the RTI Act to the public.
The court said that the club had not made any payment to the then Maharaja of Mysore or the Kingdom of Mysore for the land and no specific document has been placed on record to indicate that the said land belonged personally to the Maharaja of Mysore.
Not personal property
'The grant made in the name of the Maharaja of Mysore would also indicate that it is not the personal property of the Maharaja,' the court noted.
On the club's contention that day-to-day activities, expenses, maintenance etc., are carried out from the contribution of the members, the court said that the fact still remains that without the land, the activities of the club could not be run.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
Beed sarpanch murder: proof points to Walmik Karad's crime syndicate links, court said while rejecting MCOCA discharge plea
In its detailed order rejecting a discharge plea by Walmik Karad, the main accused in the murder of a sarpanch in Maharashtra's Beed district, a special court has said that there is prima facie evidence to show that he is a member of an organised crime syndicate. The plea was rejected on July 22, and the full order was made available this week. Karad – a close aide of former NCP minister Dhananjay Munde – and others have been booked under the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) for the murder of Santosh Deshmukh on December 9, 2024. 'Validity of prior permission or sanction shall not be doubted at this juncture. Thus the statements of witnesses, material, technical, digital, scientific and forensic evidence prima facie reveal that the offence is committed by the applicant and co-accused persons,' the detailed order by special judge V H Patwadkar said. The prosecution said that between October and December 2024, the accused, including Karad, conspired and demanded ransom from a company to run their business in the district. When Massajog sarpanch Deshmukh intervened, a plan was made to abduct and murder him. Deshmukh was subsequently killed. The prosecution has claimed that the co-accused videographed the act and also made a video call to Karad. The prosecution cited 20 previous crimes filed against Karad, including that of unlawful assembly and attempt to murder, and said he was also convicted in one case. It added that the other accused were following the instructions of Karad, who is a member of the crime syndicate. Karad had filed the discharge plea stating he was falsely implicated for political reasons, and there was no crime syndicate as claimed by the police. He also questioned the validity of the sanction under the MCOCA given in February, claiming that due procedure was not followed while invoking the Act. He said no role was specified when it came to his involvement in the crime. Karad said the police deliberately hid the fact that among the cases cited, he was cleared in almost 15 of them, including the case in which he was convicted, and that the Bombay High Court had acquitted him in the appeal stage. Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam submitted that the sanction for MCOCA was taken as per procedure and if it is dropped, the crime syndicate will continue its work, resulting in a grave law and order problem.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Centre hiding data on unfilled posts meant for SC/STs, OBCs: RTI activist
BENGALURU: Director of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) and RTI activist Venkatesh Nayak, has claimed that the the Union government is deliberately attempting to conceal critical data on unfilled reserved posts for Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Against the backdrop of a national debate on caste-based equity, Nayak points to systemic failures in transparency and inclusivity within the country's bureaucracy. Nayak posed RTI queries based on a December 2024 Parliamentary committee report on the welfare of SC/STs, which criticised the government for persistent backlog in vacancies and the near-total absence of SC/ST representation in decision-making roles across public sector undertakings (PSUs), ministries and banks. The report rejected claims of a "lack of suitable candidates" as baseless, attributing the issue to systemic exclusion and urging immediate corrective measures. Seeking data on backlog vacancies and the appointment of liaison officers to enforce reservation policies, Nayak had filed RTI requests with various departments. But central public information officers (CPIOs) gave him irrelevant recruitment statistics from earlier years and failed to address his specific queries, he said. "This is either a deliberate attempt to obscure politically sensitive data or evidence of a dysfunctional tracking system," Nayak said.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
President reference ‘misleading', wants SC to sit on appeal against its own verdict in TN Governor case: Kerala to SC
The State of Kerala on Monday (July 28, 2025) urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the Presidential Reference seeking clarity on whether judiciary can fix timelines for the President and State Governors to clear State Bills, saying it is a ruse to make the apex court sit in appeal of its own authoritative pronouncement in the Tamil Nadu Governor case. The Constitution, the State said, does not allow the apex court to sit in appeal of its own judgments, nor can the President vest appellate jurisdiction in the court through a Presidential Reference. The State said the Reference was 'misleading' and 'suppressed facts'. Kerala, represented by senior advocate K.K. Venugopal and C.K. Sasi, said the President can only refer questions to the Supreme Court under its advisory jurisdiction of Article 143 of the Constitution if they had not been decided by the apex court. Quoting judicial precedents, including the 1993 Reference in the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the State said powers of the Governors and the President under Article 200 and 201 of the Constitution have been the subject of three separate authoritative judgments in the cases filed by the States of Telangana, Punjab and, finally, Tamil Nadu on April 8. 'When the Supreme Court in its adjudicatory jurisdiction pronounces its authoritative opinion on a question of law, it cannot be said that there is any doubt about the question of law or the same is res integra so as to require the President to know what the true position of law on the question is. The decision of this court on a question of law is binding on all courts and authorities. Hence, the President can refer a question of law only when this court has not decided it,' Kerala submitted. The State pointed out that the Tamil Nadu Governor case judgment authored by Justice J.B. Pardiwala on April 8 has already addressed in detail the questions raised in the Presidential Reference in May. If the government wanted to challenge the April 8 judgment, it should have filed a review or a curative petition in the apex court, and not take the route of Presidential Reference, Kerala said. The State argued the very fact the government has not sought a review of the April 8 judgment, establishing it as settled law. 'The Union of India has not filed any review or curative petition against the judgment delivered by the court in the Tamil Nadu case, and has thus accepted the judgment…The judgment, having not been assailed or set aside in any validly constituted proceedings, has attained finality and is binding on all concerned under Article 141, and cannot be challenged obliquely in collateral proceedings such as in the instant reference. The President and the Council of Ministers have to act in aid of the Supreme Court under Article 144 of the Constitution,' the State of Kerala reasoned. EOM
