Bombay HC says SEBI does not Need to Collect Information from Stock Exchanges for RTI reply
The Bombay High Court has ruled that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is not required under the Right to Information (RTI) Act to collect information from third parties such as the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) just to answer an RTI application.
A division bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram V. Shirsat delivered the judgment on Tuesday. The court allowed nine petitions filed by SEBI and BSE and cancelled orders issued by the Central Information Commission (CIC). The CIC had earlier directed SEBI to obtain information from BSE and provide it to RTI applicants.
Case Before the High Court
The main issue before the court was whether a public authority is required under the RTI Act to collect information from a private organisation and provide it to an RTI applicant.
The cases came after several applicants asked SEBI for information that was available with BSE. The CIC had held that SEBI was required to obtain the records from BSE and provide them to the applicants.
The Bombay High Court disagreed with this view. It said that a public authority is generally required to provide information that is already held by it when the RTI application is received, subject to the exemptions provided under the law.
SEBI Not Required to Collect Information From BSE
The court observed that the RTI Act does not require a regulator such as SEBI to obtain information from third parties simply because an applicant has requested it.
SEBI may have legal powers to ask entities such as BSE to provide information for regulatory purposes. However, this does not mean that SEBI must use those powers to collect information for every RTI applicant.
What the Supreme Court Has Said
The High Court also referred to several Supreme Court judgments dealing with the scope of the RTI Act.
The Supreme Court has clarified that the RTI Act provides access to information that already exists and is available with a public authority. It does not generally require an authority to collect, create or compile information that is not part of its records.
The High Court also noted that the definition of “information” under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act can include information relating to a private body if a public authority has a legal right to access that information. However, this does not automatically mean that the public authority has to obtain that information whenever an RTI applicant asks for it.
RTI Does Not Require Creation of New Information
The judgment also made it clear that public authorities are not required to create or generate information specifically for answering RTI applications.
They are generally not required to draw conclusions, make inferences, prepare opinions or compile new information that is not already available in their records.
The court also noted that the CIC had later passed some orders in line with the Supreme Court’s interpretation and had declined to direct public authorities to collect information from third parties.
CIC Orders Quashed
The Bombay High Court concluded that the CIC’s orders directing SEBI to obtain information from BSE were not consistent with the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The court therefore allowed all nine petitions filed by SEBI and BSE and quashed the CIC orders.
Delhi High Court Ruling on NSE
The issue is also connected with a recent Delhi High Court judgment involving the National Stock Exchange (NSE). The Delhi High Court had held that the exchange qualifies as a “public authority” under the RTI Act.
The ruling raised a wider question about whether a recognised stock exchange can come under the RTI framework because of the extensive statutory and regulatory control exercised over it by the government and SEBI.
However, the Supreme Court has stayed the Delhi High Court judgment, and the matter is currently pending before the apex court.
