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

Order Date: August 14, 2026

Case Overview

The appellant, Valji Narayan Bhadra, filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005, on July 15, 2026, seeking certified copies of specific land allotment records for PACL Registration No. U171356xxx (certificate no 2544xxx dated June 19, 2009). The information requested included the land allotment letter, plot allotment record with details like plot number and survey number, possession documents, investor acknowledgment documents, and any internal records or file notings relied upon to conclude that land was allotted for this registration. The CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai, responded on July 20, 2026, stating that the information sought was not available with SEBI and that all communication regarding refund status is handled by the Justice (Retd.) R.M. Lodha Committee. The appellant was advised to approach that Committee and informed that details on PACL matters are available on the SEBI website. The appellant filed an appeal (No. 6989 of 2026, Reg. No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00268) on July 21, 2026, on the ground that he was refused access to the requested information.

The Appellate Authority, after perusing the application, response, and appeal, found no deficiency in the CPIO's response. It relied on 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 the information in its possession, the CPIO cannot invent it. The Authority also noted that the responsibility for disposal of properties and repayment to investors is entrusted to the Justice (Retd.) R. M. Lodha Committee, constituted pursuant to a February 2, 2016 order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Citing another CIC decision (M Shanmugam v CPIO, Pearls Agrotech Corporation Ltd. & Or., dated March 14, 2024), the Authority noted that the Justice Lodha Committee is not a public authority under section 2(h) of the RTI Act.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed. The Appellate Authority found no need to interfere with the decision of the respondent CPIO and concluded that no further intervention was warranted. The appellant's request for the forum to direct the respondent to transfer his application to the concerned public authority was not acted upon.

Topics: RTI Appeal, PACL Refunds, Investor Protection