CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES | BOUND UNDER RTI ACT
Right to Information Act 2005 (RTI Act) was enacted with the object to provide citizens with secure access to information under the control of public authorities so as to promote transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities. In the recent case of JalgaonJillah Urban Cooperative Banks Association Ltd v The State of Maharashtra andothers (Jalgaon Association Case), the Bombay High Court held that Cooperative Societies are bound under the provisions of the RTI Act.
Brief Facts of the Jalgaon Association Case:
- The Petition was filed by the association of Jalgaon Jillah Urban Cooperative Banks, Credit Societies and other financial institutions registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (MCSA) seeking reliefs from the Bombay High Court, for restraining the Respondents, i.e. the officers under the MCSA and their subordinates from supplying any information in respect of the conduct of business etc of the societies to members or general public as the Petitioner contended that the same is confidential in the commercial interest of the societies.
- It was contended by the Association that in view of the provisions of Section 2 (h) of the RTI Act, cooperative institutions registered under the MCSA cannot be treated as public authorities under the RTI Act and stand exempted from disclosure of information under Section 8 of the RTI Act. Further, it was contended that under Section 34A of the Banking Regulation Act 1949 such institutions were not bound to disclose information which was confidential according to them.
- In support of their contention, Association relied upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Agricultural Produce Market Committee v Meghraj Pundlikrao Dongre and others (Agricultural Produce case) wherein it was held that the provisions of the RTI Act cannot be used against cooperative institutions registered under MCSA.
- The counsel for the Respondent contended that the case cited by the Association could not be relied upon in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Reserve Bank of India v Jayantilal N. Mistry (RBI Case). In this case the Supreme Court held that RBI and financial institutions do not share a fiduciary relationship as specified under Section 8 (1) (e) of the RTI Act. Further, the Supreme Court held that even if it were to be considered that the RBI and financial institutions share a fiduciary relationship, under the definition of ‘information’ under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, the same would be accessible by public under the RTI Act.
Issue for determination: Whether the Petitioner was covered under the RTI Act so as to be bound to give information to the Authority under the MCSA, its members and / or general public?
Judgment / Analysis:
- It was held by Bombay High Court that the Association, its members and cooperative institutions registered under the MCSA are bodies created by a statute and from its formation until its liquidation the Cooperative Societies are controlled by the Authority created under MCSA. The Cooperative Societies cannot act independently as apex bodies have been created for them. Under the MCSA, such authorities can audit and inquire into irregularities, and if damage or loss is caused to the institution by its directors, promoters etc such authorities can access the damage and recover the same from such persons, remove members and suspend the managing committee etc. For all these purposes and other purposes mentioned in MCSA the Cooperative Societies are bound to supply such information to such Authorities.
- Further, it was observed by Bombay High Court that everything mentioned in definition of ‘information’ under Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act would have to be supplied to the Authorities created under the MCSA by the Cooperative institutions. It was further observed that officers like the Registrar and other subordinate officers are appointed under the MCSA thereby falling under the purview of the definition of ‘public authority’ under Section 2 (h) of the RTI Act as such public authority can be created by any law made by the State Legislature. Bombay High Court relied upon the aforesaid Supreme Court judgment and observed that the same can be safely used when the information is sought by authorities under the MCSA. Therefore, the reliefs prayed for by the Association were rejected as such reliefs could be directly or indirectly used by the Cooperative institutions to deny the supply of information.
MHCO COMMENT
Under the garb of Section 2(h) and Section 8 of the RTI Act, for years Cooperative Societies have refrained from providing any information regarding the conduct of their business, working, management, etc. However by way of this judgment, the Bombay High Court has clarified the position of law so as to ensure that such information is not denied to members and / or general public through the Authority under MCSA.
