The Supreme Court Today (Aug 25) stayed the Kerala High Court’s order that held Cochin International Airport Limited (CIAL) to be a ‘public authority’ under the RTI Act. The case now awaits a detailed hearing after CIAL argued it is a private company, not a government-created body.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday put a stay on the Kerala High Court judgment that had declared Cochin International Airport Limited (CIAL) as a ‘public authority’ under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act).
This meant that, as per the High Court’s ruling, the airport company was bound to share information under RTI requests.
The stay was ordered by a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, while hearing an appeal filed by CIAL against the High Court’s decision.
CIAL’s lawyer argued before the Supreme Court that the airport is a private company under the Companies Act and is not formed by Parliament, nor directly financed by the government.
“The question is whether Cochin International Airport is ‘public authority’ under RTI, Act. The High Court judgement is untenable. The petitioner is company under Companies Act and hasn’t been created by an Act of Parliament like LIC etc. I am not funded by government,”
-the counsel submitted.
After considering this, the Supreme Court issued its order:
“Leave granted. In meantime the effect and operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed,”
-the top court said.
Earlier, on August 5, a Division Bench of Justices SA Dharmadhikari and Syam Kumar VM of the Kerala High Court had upheld earlier decisions of a single-judge Bench as well as the State Information Commission (SIC), holding CIAL to be a public authority.
“It is held that CIAL is a ‘public authority’ under Sec. 2(h)(d)(i) of the RTI Act. The view taken by SIC in the impugned order dated 20.06.2019 is affirmed, holding that CIAL is bound to divulge necessary information and meet the statutory obligations placed upon its shoulders vide the various provisions of the RTI Act, including the appointment of PIO and divulging of necessary information in the said regard,”
-the High Court had said in its judgment.
The High Court had further directed CIAL to fully comply with the RTI Act and submit a compliance report.
It also criticized the fact that CIAL’s Managing Director filed the appeal without the approval of the Board of Directors, and without even consulting the Chief Minister, who is the Chairman of the company’s Board.
The Court had asked the Chief Secretary of Kerala, also a member of the Board, to take action against the Managing Director. As a penalty for such unauthorized actions, the Court imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on CIAL, directing the amount to be paid to the Kerala High Court Advocates’ Association.
In its defense before the High Court, CIAL had mainly argued that it was not ‘owned’, ‘controlled’, or ‘substantially financed’ by any government body, and therefore, could not be classified as a public authority under Section 2(h)(d)(i) of the RTI Act.
It claimed that it was incorporated under the Companies Act and not created by any Government Order (GO).
The High Court, however, rejected this argument. It noted that CIAL had succeeded the Kochi International Airport Society (KIAS), which was set up through a GO. Since CIAL inherited all land, assets, funds, and capital from KIAS, the Court concluded that it too owed its existence to the same GO.
The Court also clarified that the ‘ownership’ under Section 2(h)(d) does not have to be complete or absolute—it can even be partial. The judges pointed out that the presence of the Chief Minister and other cabinet ministers on the Board of Directors meant that government influence was evident.
Further, considering that CIAL had received large amounts of financial support from both the State and Central governments before and after its incorporation, the Court found that the company had been ‘substantially financed’ by government agencies.
Finally, the Kerala High Court concluded:
“Therefore, all the limbs of being a ‘public authority’ are duly satisfied and we must hold that CIAL is a ‘public authority’ amenable to disseminate information under the provisions and rigours of RTI Act,”
-the judgment stated.
This High Court decision was then challenged by CIAL before the Supreme Court, which has now stayed its effect until further hearing.
CASE TITLE:
M/S. Cochin International Airport Limited Versus The State Information Commission and Anr.
SLP(C) No. 23330-23345/2025 XI-A.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on RTI
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
