The Karnataka High Court dismissed the Century Club's appeal, confirming the 2017 State Information Commission order that classifies the club as a public authority under the Right to Information Act. The 7.5‑acre land granted by the Maharaja in 1913 now falls under public scrutiny.

Key Takeaways (मुख्य बिंदु)

  • Century Club declared a public authority
  • 7.5 acres of government land granted free of cost
  • Subject to RTI Act’s transparency provisions

The Karnataka High Court on Friday rejected an appeal filed by the Century Club in Bengaluru and upheld the State Information Commission’s 2017 order that designates the club as a ‘public authority’ under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The ruling hinges on the fact that the club operates on 7.5 acres of land originally allotted by the Maharaja of Mysuru in 1913 without any rent or royalty.

Historical Background

Founded by Maharaja Narasimha Raja Wodeyar and Sir M. Visveswaraya, the Century Club was intended as a social and sporting hub in the heart of Cubbon Park. The grant of 7.5 acres was a sovereign act, predating Indian independence, and has since been treated as state‑owned property rather than a private transaction.

Legal Arguments and Court Reasoning

The club contended that it is a private members’ organization, not a statutory body, and therefore falls outside the scope of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act. Advocate Prashanth Murthy argued that extending the RTI definition to the club would contravene the statute’s plain language. Conversely, Advocate S. Umpathy maintained that any entity receiving substantial state support—directly or indirectly—qualifies as a public authority. The bench, comprising Justices Anu Sivaraman and Venkatesh Naik T, concluded that the gratuitous land grant constitutes significant indirect financing, making the club subject to RTI scrutiny.

Implications and Future Outlook

By classifying the Century Club as a public authority, the court mandates disclosure of its financials, membership fees, and operational decisions under the RTI Act. This decision sets a precedent for other private institutions that benefit from state‑provided assets or subsidies, potentially expanding the reach of transparency obligations. The ruling underscores that even nominal member contributions cannot offset the magnitude of state‑funded land value, which today would be valued in the hundreds of crores.

In dismissing the appeal, the court reaffirmed that the provisions of the RTI Act apply to the Century Club, reinforcing the principle that public support, regardless of its form, invites public accountability.