SEBI RTI Appeal: Response Sheet Reconsideration Ordered for SEBI Grade A Exam 2025

BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY
(Under the Right to Information Act, 2005)
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

Appeal No.6986 of 2026 

Prabhat Singh: Appellant Vs CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai: Respondent

ORDER

1.The appellant had filed an application datedJune 24, 2026 (received by SEBI through RTI MIS portal) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (“RTI Act”). The respondent, by a letter dated July 15,2026responded to  the  application  filed  by  the  appellant.  The  appellant  filed  an  appeal  datedJuly  17,  2026(Reg.  No. SEBIH/A/E/26/00265). I have perused the application, the response of the respondent 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, inhisapplicationsought the following information:

“I appeared for SEBI Phase 2 Grade A Assistant Manager Examination 2025 in the Legal Stream. I could not qualify Phase 2. My roll number is 258100xxxand Registration Number is 71707xxxx. 
I need following documents: 
1. The Response sheet as I submitted of the objective legal paper. 
2. The subjective response sheet/answer sheet of the subjective legal paper.
3. The response sheet/answer sheet of the English paper. It may be noted that the above papers must contain the marks awarded to me for each questions. 

Question 2 -What is the likelihood of publication of notification for recruitment of SEBI AssistantGeneral Manager Grade A in 2026? If yes, then how many vacancies are expected in Legal category?”

3.Reply of the Respondent–Therespondent, in response to query no. 1, in the application, informed that the within the terms of MoU as per which only IBPS is in possession of copies of question paper and answer key, which is not shared with SEBI. Hence, the same is not available with SEBI. 
With  regard  to  query  no.  2, the  respondent  informed  thatthe  query  is  in  the  nature  of  seeking clarification/opinion.Accordingly, the same cannot be construed as “information” as defined u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. 

4.Ground  of  appeal–The  appellant  has  filed  the  appeal  on  the  ground  that he  was  refused  access  to information requested .

5.I have perused the application and the response provided thereto. With regard to the copy of his response sheet/answer key sought by the appellant vide query no. 1, on consideration, I find that respondent has not adequately addressed the query and that the query no.1 warrants reconsideration. 

6.With   regard   to   query   no.   2, I  find  that  the  appellant’s  query is   in   the   nature   of   seeking clarification/opinion/confirmation from the respondent. I find that the said query cannot be construed as seeking ‘information’ as defined under section 2(f) of the RTI Act. Consequently, the respondent did not have an obligation to provide such clarification or opinion under the RTI Act. In this context, reliance is placed  on  matter  of Azad  Singh  vs.  CPIO,  Oriental  Insurance  Company Limited(order  dated  March  23,  2021) wherein Hon’ble Central Information Commission(CIC) observed that “7.  The  Commission,  after  hearing  the submissions  of  both  the  parties  and after perusal  of  records,  observed  that  some  queries  of  the  appellant  are  in  the nature  of seeking explanation/opinion/advice/confirmation/clarification  from  the  CPIO  and  he  has  expected  that the  CPIO  firstly should analyze the documents and then provide information to the appellant. Butthe CPIO is not supposed to create information; or to interpret information; or to compile information as per the desire of the appellant under the ambit of the RTI Act. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, the reasons/opinions/advices can only be providedto the applicants if it is available on record of the  public  authority.  The  CPIO  cannot  create  information  in  the  manner  as  sought by  the  appellant.  The  CPIO  is  only  a communicator of information based on the records held in the office and hence, he cannot be expected to do research work to deduce anything from the material therein and then supply it to him.”Accordingly, I do not find any deficiency in the response of the respondent.

7.Considering  the  above  observations,  I  remit  query  no.  1  in  the  application  to  the  respondent for sending appropriate response to appellant in terms of RTI Act, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order.

8.The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 

Place: Mumbai
Date:August 13, 2026

RUCHI CHOJER
APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE RTI ACT 
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA