CIC: As per Rule 3 of the RTI Rules, 2012 an application under the RTI Act shall not contain more than 500 words whereas the applicant has sent a documents consisting 110 pages; Applicant is advised to be precise in seeking information in future

ORDER

1. The appellant, Dr. T S Nazreth, submitted RTI application dated April 4, 2014 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Mumbai seeking information under various heads with respect to email sent to ICICI on October 29, 2009, copies of replies from SEBI to his applications and information pertaining to BSE, NSDL & NSE etc.

2. Vide reply dated April 29, 2014, the CPIO denied information stating that information under point 1 (a) & (b) was not available with them and informed that the rest of the information was not specific/clear and did not come under the definition of information u/s 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the RTI Act, 2005 . Not satisfied with the decision of CPIO, the appellant preferred appeal dated May 30, 2014 before the first appellate authority (FAA) seeking information. Vide order dated June 26, 2014, the FAA further clarified the position and upheld the decision of CPIO.

3. Dissatisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commission.

4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant submitted that he had sought the copy of email dated 29.10.2010 sent by SEBI to ICICI and information related to BSE,NSDL & NSE but the respondents had not given the information to him. He further stated that he had also sought the respondents to confirm the replies given by them in RTI dated 1.3.2012, 4.10.2012, 25.1.2009 and 9.6.2010. The respondents submitted that email dated 29.10.2010 pertained to the inspection of ICICI and they did not have the email and had also checked with the intermediaries. With reference to information pertaining NSE, BSE & NSDL, the respondent stated that they do not maintain any records therefore only part of the information related to them had been replied to. The appellant reiterated that section 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the RTI Act applies in order to access information from private bodies. The respondents contended that they do not have any such information in their possession and therefore cannot be furnished to the appellant.

5. It is important to note the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CBSE Vs Aditya Bandopadhyay (Civil Appeal No. 6454 of 2011), which had observed as follows:

“35. At this juncture, it is necessary to clear some misconceptions about the RTI Act. The RTI Act provides access to all information that is available and existing. This is clear from a combined reading of section 3 and the definitions of ‘information’ and ‘right to information’ under clauses (f) and (j) of section 2 of the Act. If a public authority has any information in the form of data or analysed data, or abstracts, or statistics, an applicant may access such information, subject to the exemptions in section 8 of the Act. But where the information sought is not a part of the record of a public authority, and where such information is not required to be maintained under any law or the rules or regulations of the public authority, the Act does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to collect or collate such non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant...”

 6. In the present matter, the very nature of the information sought by the appellant does not envisage a situation where the respondent public authority must “access the information relating to a private body under any other law for the time being in force” as mentioned in section 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the RTI Act and then furnish the same to the appellant. The appellant did not substantiate any larger public interest in the matter.

7. The Commission directs the respondents to provide copy of replies in RTI dated March 1, 2012, October 4, 2012, January 22, 2009 and June 9, 2010 if available. As per Rule 3. “Application Fee An application under subsection (1) of Section 6 of the Act shall be accompanied by a fee of rupees ten and shall ordinarily not contain more than five hundred words, excluding annexures, containing address of the Central Public Information Officer and that of the applicant:” of the RTI Rules, 2012 attempt is to be made to keep the RTI application within 500 words whereas the applicant has sent a documents consisting 110 pages therefore he is advised to be precise in seeking information in future. The appeal is disposed of.

(Manjula Prasher)

Information Commissioner

Citation: Dr. T S Nazreth v. Securities & Exchange Board of India in Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/001960