Authority: Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005, Securities and Exchange Board of India

Order Date: August 13, 2026

Case Overview

The appeal was filed by Narendran K against the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of SEBI, Mumbai regarding responses to an RTI application dated June 26, 2026. The appellant sought two specific pieces of information: (1) the number of current vacancies in Officer Grade A (Assistant Manager) on General Stream, and (2) whether recruitment was planned in 2026 for Officer Grade A in any streams, requesting tentative vacancy numbers if applicable.

The CPIO responded on July 16, 2026, stating that the information sought constituted clarification/opinion rather than "information" as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Notwithstanding this position, the CPIO provided contextual information that vacancies arise due to promotions, resignations, and retirements, and that SEBI undertakes recruitment and promotion exercises periodically, with details published on its website.

The appellant filed an appeal on July 17, 2026 (Registration No. SEBIH/A/E/26/0264) on grounds of receiving incomplete, misleading, or false information.

The Appellate Authority examined the application, response, and appeal, concluding the matter could be decided based on available records. For query No. 1 regarding current vacancies, the authority found the CPIO's response adequate as it provided available information about how vacancies occur and where recruitment details are published.

For query No. 2 regarding future recruitment plans, the authority concurred with the CPIO that this sought clarification/opinion/confirmation rather than recorded information. The authority cited the precedent Azad Singh vs. CPIO, Oriental Insurance Company Limited (March 23, 2021), where the Central Information Commission ruled that CPIOs are not required to create, interpret, or compile information according to an appellant's desires, but only communicate existing recorded information.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed, with the Appellate Authority finding no deficiency in the CPIO's response and no need to interfere with the decision. The ruling affirms that queries seeking future plans, opinions, or clarifications fall outside the scope of "information" as defined by the RTI Act, and public authorities are not obligated to provide such forward-looking or interpretive responses.

Topics: RTI Act Compliance, SEBI Recruitment, Regulatory Transparency