Page 1 of 2

BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY

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

Appeal No. 1994 of 2014

Hira Devi Choudhary : Appellant
Vs.
CPIO, SEBI, Mumbai : Respondent

ORDER

1. The appellant had filed an application dated August 19, 2014, under the Right to Information
Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "RTI Act"). The respondent vide letter dated August 26,
2014, responded to the appellant. The appellant has filed this undated appeal (received at SEBI
on September 5, 2014), 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. From the appeal, I note that the appellant is aggrieved by the respondent's response to the
following queries of her application having subject matter: "Obtaining Beneficial Holders List of
Essar Oil Limited ("EOL") From NSDL & CDSL", viz.

"In this connection, please obtain following information from NSDL and CDSL falling under SEBI's
regulatory domain.
i. Beneficial Shareholders List as at close of business on 14.08.14 of EOL as per Records of NSDL.
ii. Beneficial Shareholders List as at close of business on 14.08.14 of EOL as per Records of CDSL."

3. In this appeal, the appellant has inter alia submitted: "I am not satisfied in as much as documents &
inspection of the file, some vital information hidden/suppressed, etc. held in NSDL, which SEBI is expected to
obtain and furnish to investors, if necessary"

4. In his response, I note that the respondent informed the appellant that as the information
sought by her was not maintained by SEBI in the normal course of regulation of securities
market, the same was not available with SEBI. I do not find any reason to disbelieve the
response provided by the respondent. In this context, I note that the Honble Supreme Court
of India in the matter of Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr. vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay &
Ors. (Judgment dated August 9, 2011), had inter alia held that: The RTI Act provides access to all
information that is available and existing. But where the information sought is not a part of the record of a
public authority, and where such information is not required to be maintained under any law or the rules or
regulations of the public authority, the Act does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to collect or
Brought to you by http://StockViz.biz
Page 2 of 2

collate such non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant. Further, I note that the
Hon'ble CIC in the matter of Sh. Pattipati Rama Murthy vs. CPIO, SEBI (Decision dated July 8,
2013), had held that: 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 SEBI and therefore, the respondent cannot be obliged to provide such non-available
information.

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



Place: Mumbai S. RAMAN
Date: September 30, 2014 APPELLATE AUTHORITY
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA



Brought to you by http://StockViz.biz