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

Order Date: September 04, 2026

Case Overview

The appeal was filed by Sanjay Singh (Appeal No. 7031 of 2026) against the CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai regarding an RTI application dated July 15, 2026. The appellant sought two specific categories of information: 1) Certified copies of all statutory disclosures, material event alerts, and structural/financial damage assessment reports filed by Tata Communications Limited and/or its corporate affiliates with exchanges or SEBI concerning a major fire outbreak on June 5, 2026 at the Next-Gen Tower facility, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi; and 2) A copy of the formal internal incident report or business continuity log timeline submitted by the entity to state regulators detailing the cause of the lithium-ion battery failure and resultant data/hardware loss impact.

The respondent (CPIO, SEBI) responded on August 07, 2026. For query No. 1, they informed that all filings and disclosures made by a listed company with stock exchanges are available in the public domain and may be accessed through stock exchange websites. For query No. 2, they stated that the requested information was not available with SEBI.

The appellant filed the appeal on August 08, 2026 (Reg. No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00300) on the ground that he was refused access to the requested information.

The Appellate Authority examined the application, response, and appeal. For query No. 1, the authority cited precedent cases (Registrar of Companies & ors. Vs. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & anr. by Delhi High Court and Shri K Lall vs. Shri M K Bagri by Central Information Commission) which held that information available in the public domain cannot be considered information "held" by the public authority, and thus there is no obligation to provide it under the RTI Act. For query No. 2, the authority cited the Central Information Commission's decision in Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO, SEBI (July 8, 2013) which stated that if information is not in SEBI's possession, the CPIO cannot invent it for the appellant.

Final Outcome

The appeal was dismissed. The Appellate Authority found no deficiency in the respondent's response and determined there was no need to interfere with the CPIO's decision. The appellant will not receive the requested information through SEBI.

Topics: RTI Appeal, Corporate Disclosures, Regulatory Compliance