Summary: The First Appellate Authority of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), by order dated 23 September 2026, disposed of an appeal filed by Amarjeet Singh under section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The appeal arose from non-receipt of a reply to an RTI application dated 9 July 2026. The appellant had sought information concerning Research Associates and Consultants engaged by IBBI, including their number, names, levels, dates and periods of engagement, maximum permissible tenure, extensions granted by the Chairperson and applicable provisions relating to emoluments or salary. He also sought information relating to IBBI Notice dated 26 May 2026, including the number of applications received, applicants previously associated with IBBI, remuneration specified in the notice and documents concerning any increase in remuneration. The First Appellate Authority referred to sections 2(f), 2(j), 3 and 8 of the RTI Act while explaining the scope of information and the right to information. It noted that the CPIO disposed of the application on 31 August 2026, although the deadline had expired on 8 August 2026. The disposal beyond thirty days was held to violate the timeline under section 7 of the RTI Act. The CPIO was urged to remain sensitive to statutory timelines and dispose of RTI applications within the prescribed period. Since the application had ultimately been disposed of satisfactorily, no further interference was considered necessary and the appeal was disposed of.
BEFORE THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER AND FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY
INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA
7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001
Dated: 23rd September 2026
Order under section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) in respect of RTI
Appeal Registration No. ISBBI/A/E/26/00040
IN THE MATTER OF
Amarjeet Singh
Vs.
Central Public Information Officer
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India
7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001
1. The Appellant has filed the present Appeal dated 26th August 2026, aggrieved with the non-receipt of reply of the Respondent under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act).
2. In the RTI Application no. ISBBI/R/E/26/00131 dated 9th July 2026, the Appellant had sought the following information: –
“1. How many Research Associates/Consultants are presently engaged by the Board?
2. Give me the list of Research Associates/Consultants presently engaged by Board name wise and level wise.
3. Give me the list of Research Associates/Consultants along with the date of their engagement.
4. Give me the list of current Research Associates/Consultants along with the date of their earlier engagements with the Board. Provide the details of all earlier engagement with the Board by the present Research Associates/Consultants mentioning the date of joining on particular level by the respective Research Associate/Consultant and termination date.
5. Give me current legal provision as to the maximum number of years for which a Research Associate/Consultant can be engaged by the Board.
6. Provide me information as to whether any extension of tenure of engagement has been granted by the Chairperson, IBBI for any research Associate/Consultant.
7. Give me the name of such Research Associate/Consultant for whom such extension has been granted.
8. Provide information as to the legal provision with respect to the emoluments/salary admissible for Research Associates/Consultants at each level. With respect to the IBBI Notice dated 26.05.2026, reference File No: HR-13013/1/2024-IBBI, please provide following information
a) the number of applications received pursuant to this notice.
b) the list of applicants for this advertisement who were already associated with the Board in any capacity either as Research Associate or Consultant or employee.
c) the monthly remuneration as mentioned in Schedule 2 of this notice is different from the remuneration mentioned in the Schedule 2 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Engagement of Research Associates and Consultants) Regulations, 2017. Please provide information as to which is correct.
d) copy of any resolution by the Governing Board for increment of remuneration of Research Associate and Consultants.
e) copy of notified Regulations through which the Schedule 2 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Engagement of Research Associates and Consultants) Regulations, 2017 was amended to increase the remuneration to the limit as mentioned in the instant notice.”
3. I have carefully examined the applications, the responses of the Respondent and the Appeals and find that the matter can be decided based on the material available on record. 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.”
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 term of information accessible under the Act which is held by or is under the control of a public authority. Thus, if the public authority holds any information in the form of data, statistics, abstracts, etc. an applicant can have access to the same under the RTI Act subject to exemptions under section 8.
4. In this regard, I note that the Appellant had filed the RTI application on 9th July 2026, which was disposed of by the Respondent CPIO on 31st August 2026. The deadline to dispose of the impugned RTI Application expired on 8th August 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. The Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
Sd/-
(Shiv Anant Shanker)
First Appellate Authority
Copy to:
1. Appellant, Amarjeet Singh
2. CPIO, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, 7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market, Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001.
