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

Order Date: November 12, 2026

Case Overview

The appellant, Imran, a claimant/investor of PACL Limited (Certificate No. U01635xxxx), filed an appeal against the response provided by the CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai, to his RTI application dated September 16, 2026. The application sought information regarding the correction of an inadvertent error in his PACL refund claim application, specifically the mistaken selection of 'Yes' for the 'Land allotted' field, which had halted the processing of his claim. The appellant requested details on the possibility, procedure, and governing rules for correcting this field and reprocessing his claim. The respondent CPIO, in a letter dated September 23, 2026, stated that the information sought was not available with SEBI and directed the appellant to publicly available resources on the SEBI website.

The appellant filed the appeal on October 18, 2026 (Reg. No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00400), on the grounds that the response was incomplete, misleading, or false. The Appellate Authority perused the application, the response, and the appeal.

The authority noted the respondent's clear statement that the information was not available. It referenced 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 a CPIO cannot invent information if it is not in their possession.

The authority further observed that the responsibility for the disposal of PACL's properties and repayment to investors is entrusted to the Justice (Retd.) R. M. Lodha Committee. This committee was constituted pursuant to an order dated February 2, 2016, of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The respondent had also provided links to Status Reports, FAQs, Press Releases, and Public Notices related to PACL Ltd. available on the SEBI website.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed. The Appellate Authority found no deficiency in the CPIO's response and concluded there was no need to interfere with the decision. The appellant was guided to the Justice Lodha Committee and the public resources on SEBI's website for further information pertaining to his PACL refund claim.

Topics: RTI Appeal, PACL Refund, SEBI Compliance