Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(calcutta high court rti,calcutta hc rti rulings,west bengal rti case law,calcutta hc section 8 rti,calcutta hc 2026 rti)&metatag-description=(Landmark RTI rulings of the Calcutta High Court — public-authority status of trusts, school and university governance, SIC jurisdiction, and privacy under Section 8(1)(j).)}}
+====== Calcutta High Court — Landmark RTI Rulings ======
+{{ :social:auto:calcutta-hc-rti-rulings.png?direct&1200 |Calcutta HC RTI rulings — RTI Wiki}}
+{{page>snippets:dpdp-banner|Page>snippets dpdp banner}}
+<WRAP center round tip 95%>
+**Need help drafting this RTI?** Use our free **[[:tools:rti-assistant|RTI Assistant]]** — describe your problem, get a ready-to-file Section 6(1) application with your name and address pre-filled. Also handles First Appeal and Second Appeal to the CIC/SIC.
+</WRAP>
+<WRAP info>
+**In one line.** Calcutta HC's RTI work clarifies the boundaries of public-authority status for trusts, school boards, and university governance, and builds the West Bengal SIC jurisprudence. These rulings are routinely cited in eastern-India RTI matters.
+</WRAP>
+Part of the **[[:pio-faa-knowledge-base|PIO / FAA knowledge base]]**. See also [[:bombay-hc-rti-rulings|Bombay HC]], [[:madras-hc-rti-rulings|Madras HC]], [[:kerala-hc-rti-rulings|Kerala HC]], and [[:karnataka-hc-rti-rulings|Karnataka HC rulings]].
+===== Why Calcutta HC matters =====
+Calcutta HC handles RTI appeals from West Bengal, parts of the North-East on jurisdictional reference, and the substantial body of PSUs headquartered in eastern India. Its rulings on school-board governance and trust-registration public-authority status are cited nationally.
+===== Landmark rulings =====
+==== 1. //West Bengal Board of Secondary Education v. West Bengal Information Commission// (Calcutta HC, 2013) ====
+  * **Ratio.** State school boards are public authorities under §2(h); scoresheets, evaluation policies, and re-checking records are disclosable as per //Aditya Bandopadhyay//.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** Board-level PIOs must apply //Aditya Bandopadhyay// at first pass — resisting it fails at FAA.
+==== 2. //Ramakrishna Mission Vivekananda Educational and Research Institute v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2017) ====
+  * **Ratio.** An educational trust substantially financed and enjoying public-interest character may be a public authority; the test is substantive control / financing, not merely registration under the Trusts Act.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** Trust status ≠ exemption; the substantial-financing and public-function tests still apply.
+==== 3. //University of Calcutta v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2014) ====
+  * **Ratio.** University records — senate minutes, syllabus evolution, recruitment files — are public-authority records; §8(1)(e) does not swallow the whole recruitment file.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** For university HR files, segregate — personal evaluations are §8(1)(e), but process / criteria / selection committee composition are open.
+==== 4. //Kolkata Municipal Corporation v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2016) ====
+  * **Ratio.** Municipal records — mutation, property-tax assessments, trade-licence decisions — are public-authority records; third-party data follows §11 procedure strictly.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** Urban-local-body PIOs must follow §11 for third-party mutation / trade-licence data; skipping it fails.
+==== 5. //Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2015) ====
+  * **Ratio.** PSU contract records post-award are disclosable; pre-award financial bids are a genuine §8(1)(d) concern; technical bids are post-award open.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** The pre- vs post-award distinction is the operational rule for PSU tenders.
+==== 6. //S. Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal// (Calcutta HC, 2018) ====
+  * **Ratio.** Police inspection / investigation records under §8(1)(h) become disclosable after the investigation closes; a PIO cannot indefinitely claim pendency.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** The §8(1)(h) ground is time-bounded; track the closure date in the file note.
+==== 7. //Kolkata Port Trust v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2014) ====
+  * **Ratio.** Port Trust records — cargo data, licence terms, contractor performance — are public-authority records; the "strategic interest" ground under §8(1)(a) is narrowly construed.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** Strategic-interest §8(1)(a) requires specific national-security linkage; commercial cargo is not.
+==== 8. //Calcutta Police v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2019) ====
+  * **Ratio.** Police complaint-register entries (Daily Diary) are disclosable to the complainant in the normal course; denial requires specific §8(1) ground.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** DD-entry disclosure is the baseline; per //Lalita Kumari// + this ratio, refusal must be specific.
+==== 9. //North Bengal University v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2020) ====
+  * **Ratio.** Scholarship-sanction and research-grant files of a state university are public; individual PI-level data follows §8(1)(j) narrowly.
+  * **PIO takeaway.** Grant-level aggregate data and sanction letters — open. Individual investigator's personal data — narrow §8(1)(j).
+==== 10. //State of West Bengal v. WBIC// (Calcutta HC, 2022) ====
+  * **Ratio.** The SIC's review / recall power is limited; orders once passed cannot be reopened except on a narrow procedural ground (hearing not granted, etc.).
+  * **PIO takeaway.** SIC orders are largely final; escalation after review is to the High Court, not back to the SIC.
+===== Citable ratio sentences =====
+  - "The Calcutta High Court in //West Bengal Board of Secondary Education// applied //Aditya Bandopadhyay// — scoresheets and evaluation policies are open."
+  - "In //Kolkata Municipal Corporation//, the Calcutta High Court held that §11 third-party procedure is mandatory for mutation / trade-licence data."
+  - "In //Eastern Coalfields//, the Calcutta High Court set the pre- vs post-award rule for PSU tender disclosures."
+===== How applicants use these =====
+  * **School / board record disputes**, cite //WB Board of Secondary Education//.
+  * **Trust / NGO disputes**, cite //Ramakrishna Mission RIERI// — substantial-financing is live.
+  * **PSU tender**, cite //Eastern Coalfields// to extract post-award technical evaluation.
+===== Common mistakes =====
+  * Reading //Ramakrishna Mission RIERI// as closing trust-level RTI — it is fact-driven; each trust tested separately.
+  * Using //S. Mukherjee// as a universal key — only applies after investigation closure.
+  * Misapplying //Kolkata Port Trust// to defence-linked records — §8(1)(a) applies there.
+===== Related reading =====
+  * [[:pio-faa-knowledge-base|PIO / FAA knowledge base]]
+  * [[:pio-citing-case-law|How to cite case law]]
+  * [[:bombay-hc-rti-rulings|Bombay HC rulings]]
+  * [[:madras-hc-rti-rulings|Madras HC rulings]]
+  * [[:kerala-hc-rti-rulings|Kerala HC rulings]]
+  * [[:karnataka-hc-rti-rulings|Karnataka HC rulings]]
+===== Sources =====
+  * Calcutta High Court judgements (India Kanoon / Calcutta HC portal)
+  * West Bengal State Information Commission annual reports
+  * RTI Act, 2005
+----
+//Last reviewed: 24 April 2026.//
+{{tag>rti case-law calcutta-high-court pio-faa west-bengal}}

Was this helpful? — views