Case Details

  • Entity Involved: PACL Ltd (Pearls Agrotech Corporation Limited)
  • Appellant: Saket Dewangan, family member of PACL refund applicants
  • Respondent: CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai
  • Appeal Number: 6869 of 2026
  • Order Date: June 02, 2026
  • Appellate Authority: Ruchi Chojer, Appellate Authority under RTI Act, SEBI
  • RTI Application Date: April 27, 2026 (received through RTI MIS portal)
  • Response Date: May 05, 2026
  • First Appeal Date: May 06, 2026 (Registration No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00167)

Persons Involved

  • Saket Dewangan: Appellant and family member of PACL refund applicants
  • CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai: Respondent in the case
  • Ruchi Chojer: Appellate Authority who issued the order
  • Justice (Retd.) R. M. Lodha: Chairman of the committee responsible for PACL property disposal and investor repayment

Violations and Allegations

The appeal was filed on the ground that the appellant was provided "incomplete, misleading or false information" by SEBI's CPIO in response to his RTI application seeking information about PACL refund status.

Penalties, Settlement Terms & Rulings

The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal and upheld the CPIO's response, finding no deficiency in the response. The key rulings include:

  • Cited Hon'ble Central Information Commission precedent from Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO, SEBI (Decision dated July 8, 2013) which stated: "if it (SEBI) does not have any such information in its possession, the CPIO cannot obviously invent one for the benefit of the Appellant. There is simply no information to be given."
  • Confirmed that the requested information about PACL refund applications is not available with SEBI
  • Noted that the responsibility for disposal of PACL properties and repayment to investors is entrusted with the Justice (Retd.) R. M. Lodha Committee, constituted pursuant to the February 2, 2016 order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India

Actions, Compliance, and Future Obligations

The respondent had provided links for accessing Status Reports, FAQs, Press Releases and Public Notices pertaining to PACL Ltd. matter, which are available in the public domain on SEBI website. The appellant was directed to be guided accordingly and approach the Justice Lodha Committee for refund-related matters.

Final Ruling and Enforcement

The appeal was dismissed with no further action required. The Appellate Authority found no need to interfere with the decision of the respondent CPIO.

Information Sought in Original RTI Application

The appellant sought detailed information about four specific PACL refund application registration numbers:

  • Registration No N152xxxx
  • Registration No N152050xxx
  • Registration No N152050xxx
  • Registration No N1521xxxx

Specific queries included:

  • Current status of refund applications (approved/rejected/pending)
  • Amount currently under process for refund (latest available data)
  • Procedure to correct land allotment mistake from YES to NO
  • Expected timeline for processing correction and releasing refund
  • Detailed reasons for rejection/pendency and copies of relevant records
  • Copies of guidelines/rules regarding correction of PACL refund application errors
  • Land details and ownership papers if land was allotted against specific registration numbers
  • Procedure to change account number due to Dena Bank merger with Bank of Baroda