RTI and co-operative societies: supervisory control alone does not make them public authorities, and private member bank details remain protected.

Co-operative societies registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act are not "public authorities" under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act unless they fall within the statute's specific categories or are owned, controlled, or substantially financed by Government. Mere statutory supervision, regulatory oversight, audit, inspection, or supersession powers do not amount to the substantial control required, and an administrative circular cannot enlarge the statutory definition. Personal bank-account and similar private information of members is also protected from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) unless larger public interest justifies release. The societies' status as public authorities was rejected, and the contrary circular and letter were quashed to that extent.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether co-operative societies registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 are "public authorities" within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005; (ii) Whether mere statutory supervision or regulatory control by the Registrar, or the issuance of a circular treating such societies as public authorities, is sufficient to bring them within Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005; (iii) Whether information concerning personal bank accounts and similar private information of members of a society can be compelled to be disclosed through the Registrar under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Issue (i): Whether co-operative societies registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 are "public authorities" within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Analysis: The definition of "public authority" in Section 2(h) is exhaustive and covers only the bodies expressly mentioned in the provision. The societies in question are not bodies or institutions established or constituted by the Constitution, by Parliamentary law, by State law, or by notification/order of the appropriate Government. They are also not shown to be owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the Government. They are body corporates governed by the Co-operative Societies Act, with final authority vested in the general body and management vested in the committee, not in the Registrar or the State Government.

Conclusion: The societies are not public authorities under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Issue (ii): Whether mere statutory supervision or regulatory control by the Registrar, or the issuance of a circular treating such societies as public authorities, is sufficient to bring them within Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Analysis: The expression "controlled" in Section 2(h) requires substantial control over the management and affairs of the body, not mere supervision or regulation. Powers such as audit, enquiry, inspection, surcharge, or even supersession in specified situations are regulatory in character and do not amount to deep and pervasive control. The circular and governmental letter could not expand the statutory definition or create public-authority status in the absence of the statutory conditions being satisfied.

Conclusion: Mere supervisory or regulatory control does not make the societies public authorities, and the circular to that extent could not be sustained.

Issue (iii): Whether information concerning personal bank accounts and similar private information of members of a society can be compelled to be disclosed through the Registrar under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Analysis: Even where information is otherwise within the control of a public authority, disclosure is restricted by Section 8(1)(j), which protects personal information where disclosure has no relationship to public activity or interest or would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy, unless larger public interest justifies disclosure. The Registrar can provide only such information as he is legally entitled to access under the governing statute, and personal banking details of members are not automatically open to disclosure.

Conclusion: Such personal information is not mandatorily disclosable merely because it is sought through the Registrar.

Final Conclusion: The impugned view treating the societies as public authorities was set aside, the challenged circular and governmental letter were quashed to the extent they applied to the societies concerned, and the appellants succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A co-operative society becomes a public authority under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 only if it falls within the statute's specific categories, and mere regulatory or supervisory oversight by the State is insufficient without substantial ownership, control, or financing.

---