The First Appellate Authority (FAA) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) disposed of an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, concerning an alleged delay in furnishing information relating to Complaint No. IBBI/C/2025/01559. The appellant contended that the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) had failed to provide the requested information within the statutory period of 30 days prescribed under the RTI Act. The CPIO had informed the appellant that the complaint had been closed and had furnished the closure letter dated 16 October 2025. The FAA observed that the RTI application, received on 20 April 2026, ought to have been disposed of by 20 May 2026, but was actually answered on 21 May 2026, resulting in a one-day delay in violation of Section 7(1) of the RTI Act. While urging the CPIO to adhere strictly to statutory timelines in future, the FAA held that the information sought had been satisfactorily provided and, therefore, no further intervention was warranted. Accordingly, the appeal was disposed of.
BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA
7thFloor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001
Dated: 9th June, 2026
Order under section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) in respect of RTI Appeal Registration No. ISBBI/A/E/25/00018
IN THE MATTER OF
Amresh Shukla … Appellant
Vs.
Central Public Information Officer
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India
7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001 … Respondent
1. The Appellant has filed the present Appeal dated 21st May 2026, challenging that the Respondent has not provided the information within 30 days as per the RTI Act.
2. In the RTI Application, the Appellant had requested the following information,
“Please me know the final outcome of the Complaint No. IBBI/C/2025/01559. Please share copy of the order in the matter.”
The CPIO has replied that the complaint is closed and a closure letter dated 16.10.2025 has been furnished to the Appellant. However, the Appellant has filed the present Appeal stating that the information has not been received within the timeline enshrined under the RTI Act.
3. It is pertinent to mention here that the Appellant’s “right to information’ flows from section 3 of the RTI Act and the said right is subject to the provisions of the Act. Section 2(j) of the RTI Act defines the “right to information” in terms of information accessible under the Act which is held by or is under the control of a public authority. The inclusive list provides for the right to – (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records; (iii) taking certified samples of material; (iv) obtaining information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, video cassettes or in any other electronic mode or through printouts where such information is stored in a computer or in any other device. In terms of section 2(f) of the RTI Act ‘information’ means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force.
4. It is noted that as per section 7(1) of the RTI Act, the Respondent is required to respond within 30 days of the receipt of the request. As per records, the Application was received by CPIO on 20th April 2026. However, it was disposed of on 21st May 2026 which is 1 day beyond the due date i.e., 20th May 2026. Thus, the application has been disposed beyond thirty days of its receipt by the Respondent CPIO, which violates the timeline enshrined under Section 7 of the RTI Act. Being CPIO of Public Authority like IBBI, the Respondent should be sensitive to timelines and disposal of information request. I would, therefore, encourage and urge the Respondent to consider the requirements of law while dealing with information requests under the RTI Act and dispose of RTI applications within the prescribed time. Since the Application has been disposed of by the Respondent satisfactorily, it does not warrant our further interference
5. This Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
Sd/-
(Kulwant Singh)
First Appellate Authority
Copy to:
1. Appellant, Amresh Shukla
2. CPIO, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, 7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market, Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001.
