Exts.P1 to P4 petitions were submitted by the respondent Nos.3 to 6, in which, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P5 letter dated 30.06.2012 to the petitioner for getting information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 [for brevity “RTI Act”]. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner approached this Court for immediate interference. 2. Admittedly there was a dispute as to whether the Co-operative Societies would be covered under the RTI Act, which has now been resolved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, by the decision reported in Thalappalam S.C.B. Ltd. v. State of Kerala [2013 (4) KLT 232 (SC)]. The Supreme Court, while finding that the societies would not be covered under the enactment, had provided a rider, insofar as the W.P.(C) No. 16392 of 2012 (Y) 2 societies owned and controlled or substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by the funds provided by the appropriate Government.
3. When an application under the RTI Act is filed, before the authority constituted under the enactment, necessarily the authority would have to look into whether the society would come within the ambit of the RTI Act, as declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the afore-cited decision. The said aspect would have to be considered by the authority itself on the parameters laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the afore-cited decision.
4. Writ petition is disposed of, leaving liberty to respondent Nos.3 to 6 to urge for a consideration of the application; before the appropriate authority, but, however, on discharging the burden to substantiate that the society would come within the W.P.(C) No. 16392 of 2012 (Y) 3 ambit of the RTI Act as prescribed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Parties are left to suffer their respective costs.
AMV/24/11/ Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE