Smt. Shashikala vs Securities And Exchange Board Of India ... on 5 October, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Smt. Shashikala vs Securities And Exchange Board Of India ... on 5 October, 2021

Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta

                              के   ीयसूचनाआयोग
                        Central Information Commission
                        बाबागंगनाथमाग ,मुिनरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067

ि तीयअपीलसं या/Second Appeal No.CIC/SEBIE/A/2020/101266

Mrs. Shashikala                                  ... अपीलकता /Appellant
                                    VERSUS
                                     बनाम
CPIO                                                   ...!ितवादी/Respondent
Securities & Exchange Board of
India, SEBI Bhawan, Plot No. C-4-
A, G-Block, Bandra Kurla
Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-
400051

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:-

RTI : 23-04-2019           FA     : 24-10-2019         SA       : 08-01-2020

CPIO : 18-12-2019          FAO : Not on Record         Hearing: 30-09-2021

                                 ORDER

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Securities & Exchange Board of India, Mumbai. The appellant seeking information on four points including, inter-alia:-

Page 1 of 4

2. The CPIO provided the reply vide letter dated 18-12-2019. The contents of the reply is as under:-

3. Aggrieved with the said reply, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 24-10-2019 requesting that the information should be provided to her. The first appellate authority order is not on record. She has filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission on the ground that information has not been provided to her and requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

Hearing:

4. Shri Mahadev (Representative of appellant) attended the hearing through audio-call. The respondent, Shri Santosh Kumar Sharma, CPIO/ CGM along with Ms. Pramila Sridhar attended the hearing through audio-call.

5. The respondent submitted their written submissions dated 10.08.2021 and the same has been taken on record.

6. The representative of the appellant submitted that complete and correct information has not been provided to the appellant by the respondent on her RTI application dated 23.04.2019.

7. Shri Santosh Kumar reiterated the contents of their reply dated 18.12.2019 and submitted that the said complaint has already been sent to the committee for necessary action. He further submitted that the respondent has adequately guided the appellant to refer to the FAQs pertaining to the refund process and relevant details such as Status Reports, Press Release, Public Notices etc., which are available on website https://www.sebi.gov.in/PACL.html and details of properties of PACL Limited on the website https://www.auctionpacl.com and www.ebipaclproperties.com . He clarified that PACL related matters are handled by a Special Committee under the Chairmanship of Hon'ble Justice R M Lodha appointed by Hon'ble Supreme Court for disposing off the land purchased by the Company (PACL) so that the sale proceeds can be paid to the investors, who have invested their funds in the company for purchase of the land. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated November 15, 2017 has appointed Shri R S Virk, Page 2 of 4 District Judge (Retd.) to hear the grievances of the applicants. Hence, information regarding refund/grievance related to PACL is not available with SEBI.

Decision:

8. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the appellant has sought information regarding her request letter dated 09.04.2019 w.r.t the refund on her claim including day-wise progress report and documents from it. The Commission observes that even though the information regarding refund/grievance related to PACL is not available with the respondent public authority, still the request letter of the appellant has been sent to the concerned Committee for necessary action. The Commission observes that the appellant has also been provided with relevant link on which FAQs pertaining to the refund process and relevant details such as Status Reports, Press Release, Public Notices etc can be referred by her.

9. In view of the above, the Commission is of the opinion that the respondent has adequately addressed the queries of the appellant as sought in the RTI Application. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.

10. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.

11. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

नीरजकु मारगु ा) Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरजकु ा सूचनाआयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक / Date : 30-09-2021 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस यािपत ित) S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा ), Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक), (011-26105682) Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:

1. CPIO Securities & Exchange Board of India, SEBI Bhawan, Plot No. C-4-A, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051

2. Mrs. Shashikala Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission