Application filed under the right to information act dismissed as it was demanding non-available information – The Securities and Exchange Board of India

Appeal No. 45821 BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY Under the Right to Information Act 2005) SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Appeal No. 45821 Geeta Khattar CPIO SEBI Mumbai The appellant had filed an application dated November 24 2021 under the Right to Information Act 2005of the RTI Act for providing information in respect of query number 12 related to SEBI. The respondent by a letter dated December 22 2021 responded to the application filed by the appellant. The appellant filed an appeal dated December 24 2021 against the said response dated December 22 2021. 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. Ground of appeal The appellant has filed the appeal on the ground that the information provided was incomplete misleading or false. I note that the application was transferred under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act for providing information in respect of query number 12. In view of the same I am only dealing with the said query and the response provided thereto in this appeal. 3. Query number 12 The appellant vide query number 12 of her application dated November 24 2021 inter alia sought the GOI online portal details through which she could send case write to JSFM ASFM WGIA and SEBI Board Members. The respondent in response to the aforesaid query informed that the information sought is not available with SEBI. However the respondent informed that the name and designation of the present Members of SEBI Board are available on the SEBI website. The respondent also provided the link for accessing the same. 5. On consideration I find that the respondent has categorically stated that the requested information is not available with SEBI and I have no reason to disbelieve the same. In this context I note that the Hon’ble Appeal No. 45821 CIC in the matter of Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO SEBIheld: “… if it SEBI) does not have any such information in its possession the CPIO cannot obviously invent one for the benefit of the Appellant. There is simply no information to be given.” In view of these observations I find that the information sought by the appellant was not available with SEBI and therefore the respondent cannot be obliged to provide such nonavailable information. 6. Notwithstanding the above I note that the respondent has guided the appellant to access the details of the members of the SEBI Board. Accordingly I find that the query has been adequately addressed and no further intervention warranted at this stage. In view of the above observations I find that there is no need to interfere with the decision of the respondent. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. Place: Mumbai Date: January 20 2022 ANAND BAIWAR APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE RTI ACT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA 

Summary: Application filed under the right to information act dismissed as it was demanding non-available information – The Securities and Exchange Board of India An application filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005 was transferred under section Section 6(3) of the RTI Act and was heard by ANAND BAIWAR APPELLATE AUTHORITY in the case of Geeta Khattar versus CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai in appeal no. 4583 of 2021 The appellant demanded the information in response to query no.12 on the ground that the information provided was incomplete, misleading, or false. Query no.12 included the  GOI online portal details. the respondent in response to it stated that the name and designation of the present Members of the SEBI Board are available on the SEBI website. The respondent also provided the link for accessing the same. But the information sought is not available with SEBI. After considering the response the officer has no reason to disbelieve the information given by the respondent and relied on the case of Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO, SEBI and therefore it Is believed that the information sought by the appellant was not available with SEBI and therefore, the respondent cannot be obliged to provide such non–available information. The officer finds that the respondent has guided the appellant to access the details of the members of the SEBI Board. and the query has been adequately addressed no further intervention is warranted at this stage and there is no need to interfere with the decision of the respondent. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed