- NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
- shows RTI
- RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
- 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
- The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
- Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
- Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
This topic is now closed to further replies.
I would like to know Is Maharashtra Badminton Association (MBA) and Badminton Association of India (BAI) are declared as public authority under the RTI act. There is no information about APIO and SPIO on their website.
BAI is apex body for controlling Badminton game in Indialace. MBA is affiliated to BAI and Maharashtra Olympic Association.
How I can proceeds in this case. Are there any clarification / circular on including such sport association under RTI act by the government or by State or Central Information Commission?
BCCI not covered by RTI law
Press Trust of India
Friday, January 25, 2008 7:42 PM (New Delhi)
Reported by NDTV.com: BCCI not covered by RTI law
The country's apex cricket governing body BCCI could not be made accountable to provide information to citizens under the Right to Information law, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has held.
In a recent order, the CIC rejected a citizen's plea to seek from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) certain information about its affairs.
Nagpur-based Anil Chintaman Khare in his RTI application had submitted that BCCI was registered under the Societies Registration Act and should be termed a "public authority" for the purposes of making it accountable under the transparency law.
The BCCI, however, contested the applicant's claim stating that despite being registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, it was not constituted under the Constitution or any law made by the Parliament or any state legislature.
Concurring with BCCI's stand, Information Commissioner Padma Balasubramanian said: "Registration under an Act is different from being established under it. Merely because BCCI is registered under the Societies Registration Act, does not bring it under the purview of RTI Act."
In its arguments before the Commission, the BCCI had contended that it did not receive any funds, directly or indirectly, from the Centre and also did not have on its board any nominee from any government.
The applicant said BCCI received a lot of tax benefits from the government and hence should be made answerable to the people of the country.
The Commission came to its decision after finding that BCCI did not fall under any of the categories required to bring any public office under the RTI Act.