BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY

(Under the Right to Information Act, 2005)

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
Appeal No. 2503 of 2016
S. K. Shrivastava

Appellant

Vs.
CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai

Respondent

ORDER
1.

The appellant had filed an application dated June 21, 2016, under the Right to Information
Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as RTI Act). The respondent vide letter dated July 26,
2016, responded to the appellant. The appellant has filed this appeal dated August 8, 2016
(received at SEBI on August 12, 2016), against the said response. 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.

In this appeal, the appellant while placing reliance on the decision of the Honble CIC in
CIC/SA/A/2014/000254 dated November 12, 2014, has inter alia made a request for a
personal hearing in the matter. In this regard, I note that Section 19(6) of the RTI Act
mandates the disposal of the first appeal filed under Section 19(1) of that Act within thirty
days of the receipt of the appeal or within such extended period not exceeding a total of forty-five days from
the date of filing thereof, as the case may be, for reasons to be recorded in writing. I, therefore, find that
there is no such obligation on the part of the First Appellate Authority to give disposal after
giving hearing. In this context, reliance is also placed on the decisions of the Honble CIC
in the matters of Mr. Milind Hemant Kotak, Mumbai vs. Canara Bank (Decision dated April 24,
2008) and Mr R.K Jain vs. UPSC (Decision dated March 10, 2014).

3.

From the appeal, I note that the appellant is aggrieved by the respondents response to his
application.

4.1

Query 1 of the appellants application In this appeal, the appellant has inter alia
submitted: Many SEBI Officials do not allow citizens to enter SEBI premises and sit in high security
zones after doing irregularities. Such types of restrictions are also not at Income Tax Officer, PMO, etc. (The
respondent) failed to provide guidelines & restriction Order for public
Page 1 of 2

4.2

In his response, I note that the respondent informed the appellant that visitor management
in SEBI was carried out as per the existing protocol and Security Standard Operating
Procedures (SSOP) and strategic requirement of the security of the SEBI Bhavan and
assets therein. Upon a consideration of the aforementioned, I find that the requisite
information in respect of the appellants request for information had been provided by the
respondent. I, therefore, find no deficiency in the respondents response to the appellants
application.

4.3

Without prejudice to the foregoing, I note that the respondent also informed the appellant
that details in respect of the same could not be provided as it may affect the security and
strategic interests of the organization and was therefore, exempted under Section 8(1)(a) of
the RTI Act. In this context, I note that disclosure of the requested information, which is
internal to SEBI, may affect the security strategy of the organization and may be detrimental
to its security interests. In view of the aforesaid, I find no deficiency in the respondent
invoking Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act in his response to the appellant.

5.1

Query 2 of the appellants application In this appeal, the appellant has inter alia
submitted: (The respondent) denied the information due process & protocol to meet SEBI
Chairman

5.2

In his response, the respondent informed the appellant that visitor(s) to SEBI is/are
permitted to meet the concerned Official or Chairman after following due process as per
the existing protocol and SSOP. Upon a consideration of the aforementioned, I find that
the requisite information in respect of the appellants request for information had been
provided by the respondent. I, therefore, find no deficiency in the respondents response to
the appellants application.

5.

I, therefore, find that there is no need to interfere with the decision of the respondent. The
appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Place: Mumbai
Date: September 12, 2016

S. RAMAN
APPELLATE AUTHORITY
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

Page 2 of 2