Authority: Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005, Securities and Exchange Board of India

Order Date: November 02, 2026

Case Overview

The appellant, Himanshu Soni, filed an RTI application dated September 15, 2026, seeking certified copies of Action Taken Reports (ATRs) for 10 specific investor complaints. These included 4 complaints registered on SEBI's SCORES platform (SEBIE/RJ26/JAIP/032701/1, SEBIE/RJ26/JAIP/028832/1, SEBIE/RJ26/JAIP/028829/1, SEBIE/RJ26/JAIP/028827/1) and 6 complaints on the SMART ODR platform (BSE-SB-2026-07-253099, BSE-SB-2026-07-268528, BSE-SB-2026-07-478562, BSE-SB-2026-07-369666, BSE-SB-2026-08-691360, BSE-SB-2026-08-651312). The CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai responded on October 01, 2026, stating that for SCORES complaints, all actions, observations, clarifications sought, and responses received are recorded electronically in the system's action history, accessible to the complainant after logging in with credentials, and no separate file notings or internal examination notes are maintained outside the system. For SMART ODR complaints, the CPIO stated the information was not available with SEBI. The appellant filed an appeal on October 06, 2026 (Reg. No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00379) on the ground that he was refused access to the requested information.

The Appellate Authority considered the response and cited two key precedents: The Hon'ble Central Information Commission's decision in Lena Irene Mascarenhas vs. CPIO, SEBI (Decision dated July 5, 2024) which upheld a similar reply regarding SCORES complaint status, and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India's judgment in Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr. vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors (August 9, 2011) which established that the RTI Act only provides access to existing information and does not obligate public authorities to create or collate non-available information. The Authority also referenced the CIC decision in Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO, SEBI (July 8, 2013) which reinforced that CPIOs cannot invent information that does not exist.

Final Outcome

The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal, finding no deficiency in SEBI's response. For SCORES complaints, the Authority agreed that all relevant information is electronically accessible to the complainant within the system. For SMART ODR complaints, the Authority upheld that SEBI could not provide information that was not available in its records. The order was signed by Ruchi Chojer, Appellate Authority under the RTI Act at SEBI, Mumbai.

Topics: RTI Appeal, Investor Complaint Mechanism, Regulatory Transparency