1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4278 OF 2010 (Sindhu Education Society, Nagpur vs. Maharashtra State Information Commission, Nagpur & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. OCTOBER 20, 2010. Heard Shri Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Patil, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No. 1. It is not in dispute that School of the petitioner “public trust” is an aided institution. The perusal of application dated 24.02.2009, filed by Respondent No. 2 for supplying information shows that it is addressed to a person mentioning him Secretary of Public trust and also Head Master of a High School. In this situation, only to show bonafides, Shri Naik, learned counsel states that the School will supply requisite information to Respondent No. 2 in accordance with law if the penalty imposed is set aside. Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel has stated that Respondent No. 2 is interested only in information and not in any penalty. Shri Patil, learned counsel has invited attention to various provisions of School Secondary Code 2 to urge that the petitioner – Trust is receiving non salary grants and therefore the directions issued by the appellate authority to it to appoint Public Information Officer to comply with the provisions of law is within its jurisdiction and no interference is warranted with it. Shri Anil Kumar and Shri Patil have relied upon the judgment of Division Bench dated 10.08.2010 in Writ Petition No. 5067 of 2009 (Shikshan Prasarak Mandal & Anr. vs. State Information Commissioner & Ors.). The perusal of said judgment shows fact that the College run by petitioner there was receiving grants in aid and grants in aid received by the College from the Government were managed by the Society was not in dispute. The Hon'ble Division Bench, therefore, has explained the judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Nagar Yuwak Shikshan Sanstha, Nagpur & Anr. vs. Maharashtra State Information Commission, Vidarbha Region, Nagpur & Anr., reported at 2009 (6) Mh. L.J. 85 accordingly. Here, the facts on record are not sufficient to conclude that the grants in aid are being received by the petitioner – public trust or they are managing those grants on behalf of the School. Shri Naik, learned counsel has also tried to show that aid received has to be substantial in order to constitute the authority receiving such aid a public authority under Right to Information Act. In this situation, I find it proper to leave the 3 question open for adjudication in appropriate proceedings. It is made clear that as facts on record are not sufficient to conclude the controversy, the finding recorded by State Information Commission in this respect and penalty imposed is set aside. However, the petitioner shall arrange to provide information as sought for vide application dated 24.02.2009 within a statutory period from today in accordance with law. The information shall be supplied by the Head Master of Mahatma Gandhi Centennial Sindhu High School, Jaripatka, Nagpur. Writ Petition is, therefore, partly allowed with no order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.