The Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust remains outside the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act due to its legal structure, not its religious or political prominence. In a detailed 13-page order last year, the Central Information Commission (CIC) ruled that the Trust is not a "public authority" under Section 2(H) of the RTI Act, and therefore not obliged to appoint public information officers or disclose information.
CIC’s Reasoning: Trust Deed vs. Statute
The CIC concluded that the Trust was an independent body created pursuant to the Supreme Court's 2019 Ayodhya judgment. It was neither owned, controlled, nor substantially financed by the central or Uttar Pradesh governments. The Commission emphasized that the Trust was established through a trust deed, not by the Constitution, an Act of Parliament, a state law, or a government notification—all of which are routes through which an institution can qualify as a public authority under the RTI Act.
According to the CIC, the central government has no administrative or financial control over the Trust. Government nominees do not enjoy voting rights in its meetings, and vacancies among non-government trustees are filled internally. The Trust receives no government funding, thus failing the statutory tests of government control or substantial financing required under the RTI Act.
Comparison with Other Major Temples
Other major temple administrations in India fall under RTI because they are governed by specific state laws. For instance, the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams functions under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, with statutory government oversight. The Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board was established under the J&K Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act, 1988, and is headed by the Lieutenant Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, making it subject to RTI.
Similarly, the Guruvayur Devaswom in Kerala, the Shri Jagannath Temple Administration in Odisha, and the Siddhivinayak Temple in Maharashtra were all constituted under specific state laws. Their powers, composition, administration, and accountability mechanisms are laid down by legislation, bringing them within the definition of "public authority" under the RTI Act. In each case, the institutions derive their authority from statutes enacted by legislatures, not from independent trust deeds.
Kashi Vishwanath: A Notable Exception in Uttar Pradesh
Within Uttar Pradesh, the Kashi Vishwanath Temple stands out as an exception. Its affairs are governed under the Uttar Pradesh Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act, 1983, through which the state legislature created the Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Trust. Since the temple administration functions under a statutory framework and remains subject to government oversight prescribed under the Act, it falls within the ambit of the RTI Act.
The Ram Temple Trust, however, has no comparable governing legislation. It was constituted pursuant to the Supreme Court's directions through a trust deed, with the government playing only the role assigned by the court in framing the scheme and facilitating the Trust's creation. The absence of a statute creating or governing the Trust became the defining factor behind the CIC's conclusion that it is not a "public authority" under the RTI Act.
Implications and Calls for Transparency
Calls for greater transparency in the functioning of the Trust have resurfaced following a recent controversy involving alleged theft and mismanagement of donations. However, the CIC's ruling makes it clear that legal structure, not religious importance, determines RTI coverage. As the CIC order explains, the Trust is not a statutory body and thus not obliged to disclose information under the transparency law.
