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

Order Date: September 21, 2026

Case Overview

The appellant, Kailash Kumar, filed an RTI application dated August 10, 2026 (received by SEBI on August 13, 2026) seeking extensive information regarding the inclusion of his property/khasra number in the asset list of PACL Ltd. for refund purposes. The application contained 10 specific queries requesting: proof of inclusion in PACL's property list; related file notings, correspondence, and approvals; source of his property details in PACL records; verification by revenue authorities before inclusion; details of the official who included the property; any court/SEBI/competent authority orders regarding inclusion; procedures for removal/modification of property from the list; all related documents and file notings; any liens, claims, or restrictions on the property; and transfer of application to another public authority if information not held by SEBI.

The CPIO of SEBI responded on August 20, 2026, stating that the requested information was not available with SEBI and advising the appellant to approach the Justice (Retd.) R.M. Lodha Committee, which handles all communication regarding refund status. The CPIO also informed that details of PACL matters including public notices, press releases, status reports, and FAQs are available on SEBI's website.

The appellant filed an appeal dated August 27, 2026 (Registration No. SEBIH/A/P/26/0060, received on September 01, 2026) expressing dissatisfaction with the response and requesting the Appellate Authority to direct the respondent to transfer his application to the concerned public authority if the information was not available with SEBI.

The Appellate Authority examined the application, response, and appeal, noting that the respondent had categorically stated the information was not in SEBI's possession. The authority cited the Hon'ble Central Information Commission's decision in Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO, SEBI (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.

Regarding the request to transfer the application, the authority 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 the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India's order dated February 2, 2016. The authority further cited the Hon'ble CIC's decision in M Shanmugam v CPIO, Pearls Agrotech Corporation Ltd. & Or. (dated March 14, 2024) which accepted the contention that the Justice Lodha Committee is not a public authority under section 2(h) of the RTI Act.

Final Outcome

The Appellate Authority found no deficiency in the respondent's action and dismissed the appeal, upholding SEBI's response that the requested property-specific information is not available with them and cannot be provided. The appellant remains directed to approach the Justice Lodha Committee for matters related to PACL refunds and property inclusion.

Topics: RTI Appeal, PACL Refund Process, SEBI Transparency