Supreme Court: Co-operative Society Member Can Get Society Records Under RTI Through the Registrar

Case  The Muppathadam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. The State Chief Information Commissioner & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 13906 of 2026 (with C.A. No. 13907 of 2026)
Citation  2026 INSC 1153
Bench  J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ. (judgment by K. Vinod Chandran, J.)
Decided  26 October 2026

In brief

Background

A member of a Kerala co-operative bank applied under the RTI Act to the Joint Registrar (General) of Co-operative Societies for two documents: the bank’s construction agreement with a labour co-operative society that had been awarded a building contract, and the minutes of the bank’s last General Body Meeting. After two rounds of litigation, the State Information Commission, a Single Judge and a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court upheld his right to the documents. The bank appealed to the Supreme Court.

What the bank argued

• It is not a “public authority” under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act (relying on Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala, (2013) 16 SCC 82).
• Under Sections 65 and 66 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, the Registrar can access its records only after recording satisfaction that an inquiry is needed. No such inquiry was pending, so the Registrar had no “access”.
• The documents were protected by Section 8(1)(d) (commercial confidence) and Section 8(1)(j) (personal information).

What the Supreme Court held

1. “Information” includes records the Registrar can access

Section 2(f) of the RTI Act covers not only material physically held by a public authority but also information relating to a private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law. Where a statute gives that access, the power cannot be cut down. The Court read paragraph 21 of CPIO, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal, (2020) 5 SCC 481, as meaning that where access is subject to a condition, access becomes available whenever the condition is met. It does not fetter the access.

2. No pending inquiry is required for access

The Court rejected the argument that the Registrar can see a society’s records only after deciding to hold an inquiry. The Registrar must first look at the records to decide whether an inquiry is needed at all. So access cannot depend on a prior satisfaction. The prior satisfaction is needed only to start the inquiry. The Court also relied on the Registrar’s separate supervisory and inspection power under Section 66 of the Kerala Act, which can be exercised as often as the Registrar considers necessary.

3. Section 8(1)(d) did not apply

A building contract that had already been awarded after bidding involves no trade secret, intellectual property or commercial confidence affecting anyone’s competitive position. Its terms are a legitimate concern of every member.

4. Section 8(1)(j): a member stands on a different footing from an outsider

The Court accepted that “personal information” can extend to a private entity such as a society, and that an unconnected third party asking for the same documents may be refused unless a public activity or interest is involved. But the contract and the general body minutes concern the members themselves. A member cannot be denied them on the ground that they are personal to the society or involve no public interest.

5. Thalappalam distinguished

Thalappalam held that co-operative societies are not public authorities, but it expressly preserved the Registrar’s power to obtain information from societies under the co-operative statute and to supply it to RTI applicants, subject to Section 8 exemptions. The information in Thalappalam was members’ bank deposit details, which fall under Section 8(1)(j). Contract terms and general body minutes do not.

The appeals were dismissed. The Joint Registrar was directed to call for both documents immediately and supply them to the member within two weeks.

Practical steps for members

1. Ask the society first. Housing society members have a statutory right to inspect and obtain copies of society records under Section 154B-8 of the MCS Act (members of other societies under Section 32). Make a written request and pay the prescribed fee. The Bombay High Court has upheld the disqualification of managing committee members who failed to furnish documents under these provisions.
2. If refused, file an RTI application with the Registrar’s office. Address it to the PIO in the office of the Deputy or Assistant Registrar with jurisdiction over the society. Identify the documents precisely, state that you are a member, and cite Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and this judgment.
3. Use the appeals. If the PIO refuses or does not reply within 30 days, file a first appeal, and then a second appeal before the Maharashtra State Information Commission.

Limits to keep in mind

• The Section 8 exemptions still apply. Records containing other members’ personal details, such as individual deposit or loan accounts, may still be refused.
• The member/outsider distinction matters. A non-member seeking the same records will have to show a connection with a public activity or interest.
• The RTI route supplements, and does not replace, a member’s rights under the MCS Act and the society’s bye-laws.

---

This note is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should refer to the full text of the judgment and seek advice on the facts of their own case.