The Supreme Court upheld a Kerala High Court order declaring CIAL a public authority under the Right to Information Act . The judgment reinforces the principle of transparency for entities with substantial government control. Key Developments Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta dismissed CIAL’s challenge and waived the Rs.1 lakh cost imposed by the High Court. The Court affirmed that Kerala’s 32.42% shareholding and guarantee of loans constitute "deep and pervasive control" over CIAL. CIAL must now respond to pending RTI applications within the statutory timeline. Important Facts In 2019, the State Information Commission classified CIAL as a public authority, directing it to disclose information. CIAL contested this, arguing that the Kerala government had no decisive control over its Board of Directors. However, the High Court observed that the airport’s assets, land acquisition, and financing were orchestrated by the state, establishing a clear nexus. The High Court’s reasoning hinged on the company’s Articles of Association and the composition of its Board of Directors , which allowed the government to influence appointments and strategic decisions. UPSC Relevance This case illustrates how the judiciary interprets "public authority" under the RTI framework, a recurring theme in GS‑2 (Polity). Aspirants should note the criteria used: shareholding percentage, guarantee of loans, control over assets, and influence on governance documents. Understanding these parameters aids in answering questions on transparency, accountability, and the limits of public‑private partnerships. Way Forward Post‑judgment, CIAL is required to comply with RTI requests, setting a precedent for other PPP entities with significant state involvement. Future litigants may reference this decision to argue for or against RTI applicability, making it a benchmark case for legal scholars and policymakers alike.