To determine, for the purpose of RTI Act, whether an organization is a public authority or not, we have to have recourse to Section 2(h) of the said Act, which reads:
A public authority means any authority or body or institution of self
government established or constituted
by or under the Constitution
by any other law made by Parliament
by any other law made by State Legislatures;
by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government;and includes any â€“
body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
non governmental organization substantially financed;
directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government.
The term Substantially financed is not defined in the RTI Act. When a term is not defined in an Act, the normal rule is to find the definition of the term in a relatable statute or legislation and apply the same. The definition is given in Section 14(1) of CAG Act-1971 for the term substantially financed.
According to this Section, when the loan or grant by the government to a body/authority is not less than Rs 25 lakhs and the amount of such loan or grant is not less than 75% of the total expenditure of that body/authority, then such body/authority shall be deemed to be substantially financed by such grants/loans. Direct funding could be by way of cash grants, reimbursement of expenses etc., and indirect funding could be meeting the expenses directly or in kind.
The case under reference is Appeal No.163/ICPB/2006, F.No.PBA/06/158, Dated November 28, 2006
Appellant: Shri Veeresh Malik, New Delhi Public authority: Indian Olympics Association / Deptt. of Sports
This article has been posted on our wiki here: Substantially Financed [Right to Information Wiki]
Isn't it desirable for all publicly listed companies in NSE and BSE to comply with RTI?