Karnataka High Court directs State Information Commission to examine whether Bangalore Airport is public authority under RTI Act

The Karnataka High Court recently directed the Karnataka Information Commission to examine whether Bangalore International Airport Limited (BIAL) is a public authority for the purposes of the Right to Information Act [BIAL v Karnataka Information Commission]..A bench comprising Justices Alok Aradhe and S Vishwajith Shetty observed that the issue needs to be viewed through the lens of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Thalappalam Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. v State of Kerala.“The Supreme Court, in the aforesaid decision, inter alia, has laid down the criteria for determination of an authority as public authority,” stated the division bench..The Court was hearing an appeal against a single-judge order which upheld the information commission’s decision finding that BIAL was, in fact, a public authority as defined under the RTI Act.In light of this finding, BIAL was asked to furnish information to a private individual, which it had earlier refused stating that it was not a public authority..BIAL urged the division bench to remit the case back to the commission as the criteria was already laid down by the Supreme Court and now, the issue was limited to a question of fact.However, the respondents argued that the commission had already considered all relevant aspects..The Court discussed the judgment in Thalappalam and found that the question was whether BIAL was a body owned, controlled or substantially financed by the funds provided by the 'appropriate government'.It was noted that as per the top court, ‘substantially financed’ meant that a body practically runs on the funding of the government and would struggle to exist without it.The bench further highlighted that the burden of proving that the body was owned, controlled or substantially financed by the government was on the applicant seeking the information.“The aforesaid question requires adjudication of facts. Therefore, we are inclined to remit the matter to the Commission,” the order thus said..With this, the earlier orders of the commission and single-judge were set aside and the case was directed to be considered afresh within three months..Senior Advocate KG Raghavan and Advocate Manu Kulkarni appeared for the petitioner.The respondents were represented by Senior Advocate Vikram A Huilgol and advocates GB Sharath Gowda, Avani Chokshi, Clifton D'rozario, TP Vivekananda, and AGA Namitha Mahesh..[Read Order]