As per case facts, DAV Police Public School challenged an Order by the State Information Commissioner declaring it a 'Public Authority' under the RTI Act. The School claimed it was ... unaided, but a Memorandum of Understanding revealed the Haryana Police Department provided land, building, amenities, and covered 100% of the school's deficit. The Police Welfare Association (which funds the school) also receives State Government contributions. The school's Local Managing Committee has strong police representation. The question arose whether the school is a 'Public Authority' under the RTI Act, specifically if it is substantially financed or controlled by the State Government. Finally, the High Court found the State Information Commission's order perverse. It noted the Commission failed to determine if the Police Welfare Society received substantial government contribution and wrongly placed the onus on the school. Citing Supreme Court precedent, the High Court set aside the order and remitted the case for a fresh decision, stating the onus is on the applicant to prove substantial financing/control.