Archive · 6 Aug 2026
High Court stays order naming Chandigarh Golf Club 'public authority'
Imagine a very fancy club where people play golf.
Some people wanted information about this club, so they asked for it under a special law called the Right to Information Act.
This law helps people get information from the government and from groups that work very closely with the government.
A single judge said the golf club should be treated as a 'public authority,' which means it would have to share information like a government office.
The club did not agree and asked a bigger group of judges to review the decision.
The club said the judge's reasons were unfair.
The judge thought the club pays very little rent for its land and has some government members on its board.
The club also said the judge was wrong to write that the club's building was built with public money.
The bigger group of judges decided the club does not have to follow the order for now.
They will hear the full case again on October 14.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed a single-judge order declaring the Chandigarh Golf Club a 'public authority' under Section 2(h)(ii) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
The interim stay was passed on August 3 by a division bench of Justices Jasgurpreet Singh Puri and Sanjiv Berry.
The matter has been adjourned to October 14 for final arguments.
The single judge's ruling was based on the club paying subsidised rent — less than one per cent of market value — and having three government nominees on its 15-member Board of Governors.
The club's petition also says the judgment wrongly recorded that its building was constructed from public funds.
- Who
- A division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court comprising Justices Jasgurpreet Singh Puri and Sanjiv Berry, and the Chandigarh Golf Club, represented by Senior Advocate Chetan Mittal and Advocate Amit Sharma.
- What
- Stayed the single-judge order that declared the Chandigarh Golf Club a 'public authority' under Section 2(h)(ii) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
- When
- Interim order passed on August 3; the impugned single-judge judgment was dated May 29, 2026; next hearing on October 14.
- Where
- Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.
- Why
- The club challenged the single judge's grounds — subsidised rent and government nominees on the board — for declaring it a public authority, and disputed the claim that its building was built from public funds.
Single judge's public authority ruling
Chandigarh Golf Club's challenge
Public authority status under RTI
Single judge's public authority ruling
The club qualifies as a public authority because it pays rent below one per cent of market value, a subsidised rate, and has three government nominees on its 15-member Board of Governors, indicating substantial governmental control.
Chandigarh Golf Club's challenge
The club should not be declared a public authority; the cited grounds are incorrect, and the judgment wrongly recorded that the club building was constructed from public funds.
- Court
- Punjab and Haryana High Court
- Bench
- Justices Jasgurpreet Singh Puri and Sanjiv Berry
- Interim order date
- August 3
- Impugned judgment date
- May 29, 2026
- Next hearing
- October 14
- Legal provision
- Section 2(h)(ii), Right to Information Act, 2005
- Grounds challenged
- Subsidised rent (below 1% of market value) and three government nominees on the 15-member Board of Governors
- Club
- Chandigarh Golf Club