Re: [RTI INDIA] Re: " section 2(h)" substantial , IC want it to be specified

Dear Mr. Karira

thanks for below. I have read all those HC rulings and even quoted in my written argument but IC wants me to derive value of subsidy which is really confusing and could be counter productive as IC may say that figure which i have arrived on apprx amount can be termed a meager where as High court rullings specially  in 

1. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI  Indian Olympic Association, Sanskriti School v. Veeresh Malik  [judgment dated 7th January 2010 , court observed

This court therefore, concludes that what amounts to "substantial" financing cannot be straight-jacketed into rigid formulae, of universal application. Of necessity, each case would have to be examined on its own facts. That the percentage of funding is not "majority" financing, or that the body is an impermanent one, are not material. Equally, that the institution or organization is not controlled, and is autonomous is irrelevant; indeed, the concept of non- government organization means that it is independent of any manner of government control in its establishment, or management. That the organization does not perform or pre-dominantly perform "public" duties too, may not be material, as long as the object for funding is achieving a felt need of a section of the public, or to secure larger societal goals. To the extent of such funding, indeed, the organization may be a tool, or vehicle for the executive governments policy fulfillment plan."

please advise what course of action shall i follow

regards

mohit 

---

From: C J Karira <cjkarira@gmail.com>
To: rti_india@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, 6 October, 2010 11:41:05 AM
Subject: RE: [RTI INDIA] Re: " section 2(h)" substantial , IC want it to be specified

 

Just keeping the relevant parts of the earlier email and deleting

the rest.

 

Subsidies, Tax Conscessions, Tax exemptions, etc. do

constitute "indirect" financing and are covered under

2(h)(d)(ii):

 

d)    by notification issued or order made by the appropriate

Government, and includes any—

1     body owned, controlled or substantially financed;

2     non-Government organization substantially financed,

directly or indirectly by funds provided by the appropriate

Government;

 

This has already been interpreted by various HC's , including

the Kerala HC, Madras HC ( Madurai Bench) and Punjab & Haryana HC

 

The other contention, regarding 2(f) should only be used

by the applicant after carefully reading various powers of the DEO

under other Acts or Laws currently in force.

 

C J Karira

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: rti_india@googlegroups.com [mailto:rti_india@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of sroy1947
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 11:01 AM
To: RTI India : Right to Information, CIC
Subject: [RTI INDIA ] Re: " section 2(h)" substantial , IC want it to be specified

 

>  

> 2) If NO, then you must show that school is a "non-governmental

> organisation"

> substantially financed, owned or controlled by appropriate Govt. The

> evidences

> you are putting up "land at Rs 10", "2 govt nominees" etc do not fall

> under these

> provisos to 2.h.d. The first is a SUBSIDY (as distinguished from

> "finance").

> The second one is meaningless. because as per the DSEAR there is a

> separation

> between the Society and the school's management.

>  

> Sarbajit.