Authority: Appellate Authority under the RTI Act, Securities and Exchange Board of India

Order Date: June 22, 2026

Case Overview

The appellant, Gurmail Singh, filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 on April 09, 2026, seeking information related to his refund application and land allotment status in the PACL matter. The respondent, CPIO of SEBI, Mumbai, responded via a letter dated April 21, 2026, stating that the requested information was not available with SEBI. The appellant, being aggrieved by this response, filed a first appeal dated May 25, 2026 (Registration No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00194).

The principal issue considered by the Appellate Authority was the timeliness of the appeal. Under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act, a first appeal must be filed within thirty days from the receipt of the CPIO's response. The impugned response was dated April 21, 2026, making the appeal due on or before the expiry of thirty days from its receipt. The appeal was received on May 25, 2026, which was after this permissible period. The appellant neither requested condonation of this delay nor provided any submission explaining the reasons for it.

The substantive queries in the appellant's RTI application sought:

1. The complete status of his refund application in the PACL matter.

2. Details on whether any land or plot had been allotted against his specific PACL Certificate Number (U312005xxx).

3. If allotted, a copy of the allotment letter, plot number, full address, location, and date of allotment.

4. A record of whether physical possession of the land was ever given.

5. The basis and documents relied upon to mark his application as 'land allotted'.

6. Information on whether any verification was conducted before marking his claim as land allotted.

7. Information on his eligibility for a refund if no actual land or possession was given.

8. The procedure to get his claim reconsidered.

In its response, the CPIO informed the appellant that the information sought was not available with SEBI. The respondent also directed the appellant to the SEBI website, where details of PACL Matters—including Public Notices, Press Releases, Status Reports, and FAQs—are available.

The Appellate Authority, in its reasoning, cited a precedent from the Hon'ble Central Information Commission (CIC) in the matter of Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO, SEBI (Decision dated July 8, 2013), which held that if SEBI does not have information in its possession, the CPIO cannot invent it for the appellant's benefit.

The Authority also noted that the responsibility for the disposal of properties and repayment to investors in the PACL case is entrusted to the Justice (Retd.) R. M. Lodha Committee. This committee was constituted pursuant to an order dated February 2, 2016, from the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed on two grounds. Primarily, it was dismissed as time-barred due to being filed after the statutory 30-day limit without a request for condonation or an explanation for the delay. Secondarily, on merit, the Authority found no deficiency in the CPIO's response, upholding that the information was not available with SEBI and that the appellant should refer to the publicly available information on SEBI's website and the Lodha Committee for matters related to PACL refunds and land disposal. The decision of the respondent CPIO was upheld, and no further action was directed.

Topics: RTI Appeal, PACL Refund, Regulatory Procedure