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

Order Date: October 29, 2026

Case Overview

This order pertains to Appeal No. 7116 of 2026 filed by appellant Saroj Sharma against the CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai. The appellant had filed an RTI application on August 30, 2026, seeking detailed information regarding the IPO process of Jio Platforms Limited. The respondent CPIO provided a response on September 28, 2026, which the appellant found incomplete and misleading, leading to this appeal.

The appellant sought nine specific pieces of information, including:

1. The date SEBI received Jio Platforms' IPO/DRHP application and its reference number

2. The date SEBI issued final observations or approval

3. A certified copy of the final observation/approval letter

4. The current status of the IPO application

5. Names and designations of officers processing the application

6. Date-wise processing history of the application

7. Copies of queries, observations, or deficiencies issued by SEBI

8. Application of severability under Section 10 of RTI Act for exempt information

9. Clarification on any part of the application

The appellant argued that this information was of substantial public interest given the multi-billion dollar size of the proposed IPO and its significance for market transparency and investor confidence.

Final Outcome

The Appellate Authority, Ruchi Chojer, dismissed the appeal and upheld the CPIO's response in its entirety. The Authority made the following specific determinations:

  • For Query 1: SEBI correctly disclosed that it received the DRHP of Jio Platforms Limited on June 19, 2026, and provided the application reference number.
  • For Query 2: SEBI correctly disclosed that it issued final observations on August 28, 2026.
  • For Query 3: The Authority concurred that correspondence between SEBI and issuer companies/lead managers is fiduciary in nature and exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, citing relevant court precedents.
  • For Query 4: The respondent adequately addressed this by stating the DRHP was filed on June 19, 2026, and observations were issued on August 28, 2026.
  • For Query 5: The Authority upheld that names and designations of SEBI officers constitute personal information exempt under Sections 8(1)(g) and 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, citing relevant case law.
  • For Queries 6, 7, and 9: The Authority found these queries vague and non-specific, not constituting "information" as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.
  • For Query 8: No information was sought by the appellant through this query.

The appeal was dismissed with no further action required.

Topics: RTI Appeal, IPO Process, Regulatory Transparency