The Hindu : Tamil Nadu / Chennai News : TNRDC writ appeal dismissed

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Aug 14, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu - Chennai

TNRDC writ appeal dismissed

Shyam Ranganathan

Asked to furnish details of its IT corridor road project

TNDRC had claimed RTI Act not applicable to it
State Information Commission asked it to provide details

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Road Development Company (TNRDC) and asked the company to furnish details of a project involving the company. The TNRDC has filed a writ appeal against the ruling and orders are awaited.

An RTI petition filed by an individual on October 21 last year had asked the TNRDC to furnish the following details on the IT corridor road project: the contractors for constructing the IT corridor, copies of contract agreements with the contractors and copies of documents published by the TNRDC or other consultants about the corridor.

When this information was not provided on the ground that the Act was not applicable to TNRDC, the petitioner appealed to the State Information Commission (SIC) which held, in a ruling on May 21, that the TNRDC was a “public authority” for the purposes of the RTI Act, and had to provide the requested information.

The TNRDC had filed a writ petition against the SIC ruling, and counsel for the petitioner held that it was not “substantially financed” by the government as a significant portion of the project was being funded by “loans raised at competitive rates and tenor.” Of the Rs. 290 crore budgeted for the IT corridor project, the State Government had provided only Rs. 21.5 crore which had to be returned to the government free of interest, counsel held.

Counsel also said that the State Government did not own 51 per cent or more of the shares in the company, as contemplated under the Indian Companies Act, and was “not functionally and administratively dominated by the government,” and hence could not be classified a “public authority.”

The respondents held that the petitioner was controlled by the government as the entire project was sanctioned by the government and the TNRDC was directed to take up the project by a government order. They also said the RTI Act was larger in scope than the Companies Act. The construction and maintenance of roads was an activity of the State and would have to be transparent, they said.

The Act, which mandates that all “public authorities” should disclose their records related to public affairs, has defined a public authority to include all government bodies and any “i) body owned, controlled or substantially financed; ii) non-Government organisation substantially financed, directly or indirectly, by funds provided by the appropriate government.”

The High Court ruling said that “substantially” was not clearly defined in the Act, and interpreted the word “substantial” as “practicable” and “real or actual as opposed to trivial.” It held that the petitioner was a public authority in view of the “financial assistance and also exclusive privilege conferred … in exclusion of others to lay the road which is one of the governmental functions of public importance…”

Stating this, Justice A. Kulasekaran dismissed the petition as devoid of merits and directed the TNRDC to furnish the required information within two weeks. The TNRDC has preferred an appeal against this ruling and orders are awaited on the writ appeal.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Tamil Nadu