Central Information Commission
Neeraj Sharma vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 6 June, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
केन्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
शिकायत संख्या / Complaint No. CIC/MHOME/C/2021/612823
Shri Neeraj Sharma शिकायतकताा /Complainant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Ministry of Home Affairs ...प्रततवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 04.07.2022, 25.02.2025
Date of Decision : 08.07.2022, 04.06.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 20.01.2021
PIO replied on : - -
First Appeal filed on : - -
First Appellate Order on : - -
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 07.04.2021
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 20.01.2021 seeking information on the following points:-
2.1 "Please provide the details of Central public information officers and First Appellate Authority for the public authority "Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra"
created with notification CG-DL-E-05022020-215935 dated 5 February 2020 by Govt. of India.
According to RTI section 5 of RTI act CPIO & FAA should be appointed within 100 days.
2.2 Please also update the details of Central public information officers and First Appellate Authority for the public authority "Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra"
on the website https://srjbtkshetra.org."
Dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information from the CPIO, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A written submission dated 30.06.2022 has been received from the CPIO/DS(Arms & NI/Ayodhya) reiterating aforementioned PIO's reply. The Complainant had filed an Page 1 of 7 online First Appeal dated 24.02.2021 which had also been decided by FAA's order dated 08.03.2021 upholding the PIO's reply and stating that: CPIO is bound to provide only that information which is available with him. It is important to note that only such information can be supplied under the Act which is available and existing and in held by the public authority or is held under the control of the public authority. The Public information officer in not supposed to create information or to do research on behalf of any citizen.
Records of the case reveal that the instant case with three other connected cases had been heard by the Bench of the erstwhile Chief Information Commission on 04.07.2022, and decided as under:
" Upon perusal of the facts of the case, the Commission is of the considered opinion that the reply of the PIO is not in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act because though information sought by the Applicant has not been provided to him, none of the provisions of the RTI Act has been cited for the tacit denial. Therefore, the reply sent by the PIO is found untenable in law.
Under the circumstances, the Commission directs Shri Harish Kumar Wadhwa, CPIO and Dy Secretary, Arms and NI/ Ayodhya, M/o Home Affairs to re-examine the RTI application and provide a revised point wise response strictly in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 to the Applicant within three weeks of receipt of this order. The Respondent shall submit a compliance report in this regard alongwith necessary proof of service by 31.07.2022. It is made clear that non-compliance of these directions shall attract penal action, as per law. The aforementioned cases are disposed off accordingly."
In compliance of the aforementioned directions of the Commission, the PIO, JKL Division/Ayodhya Section, MHA sent a communication dated 28.07.2022 to the Complainant stating as under:
(1) The information sought by you is not held in this office. (2) Further, section 2(h) of RTI Act, 2005 defines "Public Authority" as any authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted:-
(a) by or under the Constitution;
(b) by any other law made by Parliament;
(c) by any other law made by State Legislature;
(d) by notification issued or order made by the appropriate Government, and includes any -
(1) body owned, controlled or substantially financed;
(ii) non-Government organization substantially financed, directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate Government;
3. The Trust has been constituted as per directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court given in its judgment dated 09.11.2019 in C.A. No. 10866-67 of 2010 and registered on 05.02.2020. The said Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust is a body which is neither owned, controlled nor financed by Government of India; and is an independent and autonomous organization/body itself. As such, it does not fall within the definition of public authority as given in section of 2(h) of RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, the RTI applications in question cannot be transferred to the trust under section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005.
The Complainant approached the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi filing writ petition No. WP(C) No. 17602/2024 impugning the aforementioned order dated 08.07.2022 passed Page 2 of 7 by the Commission and the compliance thereof vide PIO's letter dated 28.07.2022. The Hon'ble Court disposed the Writ petition vide order dated 20.12.2024 in the following manner:
(a) The CIC shall consider and decide the question as to whether the Trust named "Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra" is a public authority under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005.
(b) The aforenoted decision shall be rendered by the CIC, after affording opportunity of hearing to both the Petitioner as well as Respondents No. 1 and 2 as expeditiously as possible.
The Respondent - CPIO, JKL Division, Ayodhya Section, MHA has sent a communication dated 20.02.2025 reiterating the chronological sequence of aforementioned events and added as under:
"10. it is pertinent to mention here that as per the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court contained in its judgment dated 09.11.2019 in C.A. No. 10866-67 of 2010, Central Government has formulated the Scheme envisaging setting up of the Shri Ram Janambhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust with Board of Trustees etc. without any financial, administrative or other interference either of the Central Government or of the State Government. The Central Government has become the Settler of the Trust in view of the directions contained in para 805(2)(i) of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 09.11.2019 and shall not be construed as the Central Government to have any financial, administrative or other stake either in the functioning or any other activity of the Trust.
11. It is reiterated that Shri Ram Janambhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust is an independent trust. This trust is neither owned, controlled nor financed by the government. Further, either Central Government or the State Government does not release any funds to the Trust. The Government does not have any administrative or financial stake in the Trust. Constitution of the Trust was the only role played by the Government, which was carried out in accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As the Trust is an Independent organization without any financial support or administrative control of either the Central Government or the State Government, the Trust will not come under the purview of the RTI Act, 2005 Facts emerging in Course of Hearing: 25.02.2025 I. The Respondent - CPIO, JKL Division, Ayodhya Section, MHA has sent a communication dated 20.02.2025 reiterating the chronological sequence of aforementioned events and added as under:
"10. it is pertinent to mention here that as per the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court contained in its judgment dated 09.11.2019 in C.A. No. 10866-67 of 2010, Central Government has formulated the Scheme envisaging setting up of the Shri Ram Janambhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust with Board of Trustees etc. without any financial, administrative or other interference either of the Central Government or of the State Government. The Central Government has become the Settler of the Trust in view of the directions contained in para 805(2)(i) of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 09.11.2019 and shall not be construed as the Central Government to have any financial, administrative or other stake either in the functioning or any other activity of the Trust.
11. It is reiterated that Shri Ram Janambhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust is an independent trust. This trust is neither owned, controlled nor financed by the Page 3 of 7 government. Further, either Central Government or the State Government does not release any funds to the Trust. The Government does not have any administrative or financial stake in the Trust. Constitution of the Trust was the only role played by the Government, which was carried out in accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As the Trust is an Independent organization without any financial support or administrative control of either the Central Government or the State Government, the Trust will not come under the purview of the RTI Act, 2005 II. A combined written submission dated 21.02.2025 with respect to the four related cases has been filed by the Advocate representing the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust stating as under:
"5. It is submitted that the Trust is creation of a trust deed. It is neither established not constituted by a notification of the Government. It is not directly or indirectly funded/financed by the Government. In fact, the notification of the government directs that all rights, title and interests in the acquired land vests in the Trust.
6. It is needless to say that the Trust is neither established not constituted under the Constitution or by any law made by the Parliament or State Legislature.
7. It is further submitted that neither the nominees of the government nor the District Collector have any voting rights in the meetings of the Trust. In the event of any vacancy arising in the trustees who are not nominated by the government; it is only the non-government-nominated trustees to fill such vacancy by a majority resolution.
8. In view of the above, it is clear that Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust is not a public authority under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. It is not bound to comply with the provisions of the said Act. Accordingly it is prayed that all the complaint(s) and appeal(s) in this regard may kindly be dismissed. The answering Respondent representing the Trust has sought a change of address for communication to Accounts Office, Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Mandir Nirman Karyashala, Ramghat Chauraha, Ayodhya.
III. The Complainant has also filed a combined written submission dated 27.02.2025 rebutting the Respondent's contentions stating that the Trust in question falls within the categories of bodies which qualify to be Public Authorities under the RTI Act. It has been stated by the Complainant that:
"..It is submitted that Section 2(h) of the RTI Act lays down 6 distinct categories and if a body falls within any of those categories, it would qualify to be public authority under the RTI Act. Clauses (a) to (d) and clauses (i) and (ii) are distinct. Clauses (i) and (ii) are not meant to be read in conjunction with clause (d), rather they represent distinct and additional categories. Therefore, if a body qualifies under clause (d) it is not necessary that it also qualify under (i) and (ii) and similarly if a body qualifies under (i) or (ii), it is not necessary that it also qualify under clause (d). This was also the interpretation of the Supreme Court in its judgement in D.A.V. College Trust And Managing ... vs Director Of Public Instructions dated 17 September, 2019 (relevant paragraphs reproduced below). Therefore, it is submitted that the CIC has to determine whether the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust (henceforth referred to as 'Trust') falls within any one or more of those 6 categories under Section 2(h) The Complainant has also emphatically submitted that:Page 4 of 7
a. Trust's Website Explicitly states that It Was Set Up by the Central Government b. Response by MHA stating that Trust has been constituted by Government of India Vide response dated January 28, 2021, the MHA CPIO JKL Division/Ayodhya Section stated, "This is to inform you that undersigned is Central Public Information Officer in respect of Ayodhya Section of JKL Division of Ministry of Home Affairs. This is further to mention here that Shri Ram Janambhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust has been constituted by the Government of India as per the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court given in its judgment dated 09.11.2019 in C.A. No.10866-67 of 2010 vide notification dated 05.02.2020. The said Trust is an autonomous organisation /body......
Further, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), in its written submission dated 20- feb 2025, has itself stated that the "Central Government has formulated the Scheme envisaging setting up of the Shri Ram Janambhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust with Board of Trustees etc." Refer point number 10 and "Constitution of the Trust was the only role played by the Government: which was carried out in accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.. c. Publicly Available information regarding the Constitution of the Trust Gazette Notification No. CG-DL-E-05022020-215935 dated 05th February 2020 states inter alia:
..in compliance with the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, dated 9th November, 2019 the Government of India has approved the Scheme, vide, Order No. 71011/02/2019-AY dated 5th February, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the said Scheme) and the said Scheme has made necessary provisions in regard to functioning of the trust including matters relating to management of the trust, powers of the trustees including construction of the temple and all necessary, incidental and supplemental matters thereto.
AND WHEREAS in accordance with the said Scheme, a Trust by the name "Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra" (hereinafter referred to as the said Trust) has been registered ..
Discussing the aspect of Government control and funding of the Trust, the Complainant has stated that:
a. Central government scheme to regulate functioning and management of the Trust and also powers of trustees:- the Central government exercises control over the functioning and management of the Trust and powers of the Trustees and thus the Trust would be a public authority under clause (i) of section 2(h) of the RTI Act. b. Nominations of members of the Trust by the Government Confirms Government Control:- The Trust's website further reveals that out of 15 members of the Trust, 12 members were nominated by the Government of India and during the first meeting additional 3 members were selected. (Refer the annexure A1) Thus, 80% of the members of the Trust were nominated by the government and this shows government control over the Trust and therefore it falls within the ambit of clause
(i) of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. A majority of trustees are appointed by the government, making it accountable under RTI provisions.
c. Central Government Transferred Land to the Trust showing Substantial Financing by the government: Central Government transferred nearly 70 acres of land to the Trust. This land was vested in the Central government and therefore, this transfer of public property amounts to substantial finance as per Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. d. Management of property by Government: the property vested in the Central Government under section 3 shall be managed by the Central Government or by a Page 5 of 7 person or body of persons or trustees of any trust authorised by that Government in this behalf.
The Complainant has referred to the decision in the case of National Stock Exchange vs. CIC decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
IV. The Advocate representing the Trust has filed another written submission dated 07.03.2025 contending that the Trust in question was created under a Trust Deed, as per directions of the Supreme Court; it was neither established nor constituted by the Government's notification, but the Government envisaged the setting up of the Trust, and also facilitated the same as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Shri Ram Janm Bhoomi Case 2020(1) SCC 1. The Trust is neither owned nor controlled or substantially financed or funded, directly or indirectly by the Government. Hence the Trust does not fall within the ambit of the Section 2(h)(d)(i) or (ii) of the RTI Act. The Trust has been created as a self operating body whose management or functioning is decided by the Trust itself.
Reliance has been placed on the fourth para of the notification dated 05.02.2020 notes the fact that the notification was published in Official Gazette after the Trust was already registered. The Respondent has further stated that the above said notification serves twin purposes:
(i) The Central Govt, after consultation with the State Govt of Uttar Pradesh, decides to effectuate the allotment of a suitable land admeasuring five acres to Sunni Waqf Board.
(ii) The Central Govt directs that all rights, title and interests in relation to the entire acquired area shall vest in the Trust.
Vesting of land can by no stretch of imagination be equated to constituting the Trust.
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
Complainant: Present with Ms. Amrita Johri Respondent: Shi P Venukuttan - DS and Shri K R Murmu - US, MHA and Ms. Manisha Agarwal - Advocate for the Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust were present during hearing.
Parties present during hearing reiterated their respective contentions as borne out from the records discussed hereinabove.
Decision: 04.06.2025 Upon perusal of the records of the case and after hearing the averments of the Respondent it is noted that information as available on record with the public authority, viz. MHA and as permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act had been furnished to the Complainant in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act.
Since the Complainant has chosen to approach the Commission with this Complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act, the only question which requires adjudication is whether there was any willful concealment of information. Records of the case reveal that the Respondent had sent the information, following due course of law as envisaged under the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no question of deliberate or wilful denial Page 6 of 7 of information arises in this case. It is worthwhile to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Chief Information Commissioner and Another v. State of Manipur and Anr. in Civil Appeal Nos. 10787-10788 of 2011 dated 12.12.2011, relevant extract whereof is as under:
"...30. ...The only order which can be passed by the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, under Section 18 is an order of penalty provided under Section 20. However, before such order is passed the Commissioner must be satisfied that the conduct of the Information Officer was not bona fide."
31. We uphold the said contention and do not find any error in the impugned judgment of the High court whereby it has been held that the Commissioner while entertaining a complaint under Section 18 of the said Act has no jurisdiction to pass an order providing for access to the information." In the given circumstances, the Commission is of the opinion that information provided by the Respondent suffers from no legal infirmity and neither any case of deliberate or malafide denial or concealment of information by the Respondent is found in this case. Hence, no action under Section 18 of the RTI Act is required.
The case is disposed off as such.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मख् ु य सच ू ना आयक् ु त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाभित सत्याभित प्रभत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के. चिटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/011-26186535 Page 7 of 7 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)