Re: [rti_india] Public Limited Companies should also be in ambit of RTI Act

Monday, May 17, 2010

Re: [rti_india] Public Limited Companies should also be in ambit of RTI Act

To add your knowledge, u can not sue a company other than original jurisdiction place. This was held in Jairam Ramesh Vs. ICICI case. The practical difficulty as observed by the Supreme Court was that " people hailing from distant cases were filing various cases against the company solely to extort money. Even a person holding single share of Rs. 1 was able to file case of Mumbai based company in Meghalaya. The company was bound to protect its interest at the cost of other shareholders. Many companies were finding it difficult to engage counsel at different places in the country in their limited resources. As such to some extent this kind of observation was in the best interest of company.

But now the gullible promoter have immensely benefited from this interpretation.

Today as per the Companies Act 1956, except directors, no one has access to minutes of the company. Shareholders have access to past AGM minutes only in next AGM.

Regards

Trivendra

--- On Mon, 17/5/10, sarbajit roy <mail.sarbajitroy@gmail.com> wrote:

From: sarbajit roy <mail.sarbajitroy@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Public Limited Companies should also be in ambit of RTI Act
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, 17 May, 2010, 2:10 PM

1) I am given to understand that all these similar orders have been stayed, some by thr Supreme Court, and some by the DB of High Court.

2) The more so-called "civil society" asks for changes in RTI Act, the easier it makes it for the Govt to justify that the RTI Act needs to be amended.

Sarbajit

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:15 PM, ysingh rajput <ysingh_rajput@ yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear All
The Delhi High Court judgment -"Private companies with minor Govt stake under RTI" is a land mark judgment and opens a large vista for public accountability. It aught not to be the private companies having minor stake of Govt stake only, but should also cover the 'Public Limited Companies.'

No doubt the public limited companies have a number of legal obligations to comply with including disclosure of its many activities to the share-holders and general public by way of statutory retunes with ROC. Yet the people at the top easily manage a number of illegal and criminal activities with impunity for long periods. Satyam case is classical example of the manipulations in connivance with auditors etc.

The Government must amend the RTI act and include the Public Limited Companies also in its ambit. The company law should also be amended to suitably that the registration of as a public limited company would attract RTI Act.
Y Singh N Rajput
Vadodara
17-5-10