Appeal No. 3914 of 2020 filed by Kanwal Nain Ahuja

BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY

(Under the Right to Information Act, 2005)

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

Appeal No.3914 of 2020

Kanwal Nain Ahuja : Appellant

Vs.

CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai : Respondent

ORDER

1.The appellant had filed an applicationdatedJuly 16, 2020 (received by SEBI on July 20,2020)under the Right  to  Information  Act, 2005 (“RTI  Act”).    The  respondent,bya letter  datedAugust 20,2020,responded  to  theapplicationfiled  by  theappellant. The appellant filed an appealdated September 12, 2020,against  the  said  response  datedAugust 20,2020. I  have  carefully  considered  the application,  the response  and the appeal  and  find  that  the  matter  can  be  decided  based  on  the material  available  on record.

2.Queries  in  the  application–The  appellant,  vide hisapplicationdated  July  16,  2020,  has  forwarded copies of certain emails and correspondences, between various individuals, regarding pay-outrequest. 

3.The  respondent,  in  response  to  the  application,  observed  that  no  information  was  sought  by  the appellant and hence, the same cannot be construed as seeking “information” as defined under section 2(f)  of  the  RTI  Act. Therespondent  alsoadvised  the appellant  to lodge  his  grievance  (if  any),on  the SCORES portal and also refer to the FAQs available on the SEBI website. Further, the respondent also provided  the  toll  free  helpline  numbers  launched  by  SEBI  to  facilitate  replies  to  various  queries  of  the general public on matters relating to securities market.

4.Grounds of appeal-The appellant has filed the appeal on the ground that incomplete reply was sent to the respondent. 

5.I    have    perused    the    application    and    I    note    that    the    appellant    has    enclosed    copies    of emails/correspondences between  entities.  It  is  not  clear  as  to  what  information  is  being  sought  by  the appellant. In view of the same, I agree with the observation of the respondent that no information was sought  in  the  application,  under  the  RTI Act.I  note  that  the  respondent  has adequately guided  the appellant by providing information with respect to lodging his grievance, if any, on the SCORES portal. Accordingly, I findno deficiency in the response.

6.In  view  of  the  above observations,  I  find  that  there  is  no  need  to  interfere  with  the  decision  of  the respondent. The Appeal is accordinglydismissed.

Place: Mumbai    
Date: October 09, 2020

ANAND BAIWAR
APPELLATE AUTHORITYUNDER THE RTI ACT
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA