RTI Appeal Dismissed as IBBI Not Required to Create New Information

The First Appellate Authority (FAA) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) dismissed RTI Appeals No. ISBBI/A/E/25/00114 & 00115 filed by Dhananjay Krishnanath Gaikwad on August 30, 2025. The appellant sought extensive information regarding grievances raised against an Insolvency Professional, Sh. Gaurav Adukia, and the ICSI Institute of Insolvency Professionals (ICSIIIP), including orders under Section 218 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), actions on non-release of director salaries, resolution plans, committee meetings, and alleged procedural irregularities.

The FAA noted that the Right to Information (RTI) Act allows access only to information “held by or under the control of a public authority” under Section 2(f) and 2(j). The FAA observed that all relevant file notings and communications related to the appellant’s grievances had already been provided in earlier responses (ISBBI/R/E/25/00176) and FAA order dated July 22, 2025. Requests for opinions, analysis, or information not recorded by IBBI fell outside the Act’s scope and would disproportionately divert resources under Section 7(9). Allegations regarding meeting procedures, resolution plans, and claims of fraud were either addressed through prior communications or were not held by the Board.

Accordingly, the FAA concluded that the CPIO’s responses were adequate and no further information was required to be created or furnished. The appeal was dismissed, reaffirming that RTI rights are limited to information maintained or controlled by the public authority, and do not extend to opinions, unrecorded analyses, or investigatory actions not formally documented.

BEFORE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA

7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar Market,
Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001
Dated: 7^th October 2025

Order under section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) in respect of RTI Appeal Registration No. ISBBI/A/E/25/00114 & ISBBI/A/E/25/00115

IN THE MATTER OF

Dhananjay Krishnanath Gaikwad    

… 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 Appeals dated 30^th August 2025, challenging the communication of the Respondent, filed under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act). Since the Appeals involved similar subject-matter and necessitated detailed analysis of various provisions of the RTI Act, they are being disposed of by a common order within 45 days from the date of their receipt.

2. The Appellant had requested the following information: –

“1. Copy of the order under Sec. 218 of IBC passed on receipt of the communication by Dhananjay Gaekwad on dt 6th January 2025 against Sh. Gaurav Adukia (Insolvency Professional) and ICSIIIP.

2. Copy of the entire papers of proceedings on record with IBBI regarding additional information being sought by IBBI under Reg. 6 of IBBI (Grievance and Complaint Procedure) Regulations, 2017, on receiving the grievance raised by Dhananjay Gaekwad on dt 6th January 2025against Sh. Gaurav Adukia (Insolvency Professional) and ICSIIIP.

3. Action taken by IBBI for release of paid director salary amount Rs92,50,000/- which was not released after NCLAT order for which IBBI officer Mayank Mehta dispose PMOPG Grievance only with remark dt 18 July 2025 that IBBI take cognizance of grievance regarding non-release of salary of working directors of the cd in compliance of the directions of honourable NCLAT and has initiated further action in terms of the provisions of IBBI but no further action or reply from IBBI.

4. IBBI finding on ICSIIIP Order on which Dhananjay Gaikwad filed application dt 6 Jan 2025 which was dispose of on dt 10 JUNE 2025 by IBBI Not processed our Complaint U/S 218 OF IBBI AGAINST ICSIIIP AND RP.

5. IBBI finding on ICSIIIP Order and RP Statement to ICSIIIP that RESOLUTION PLAN not shared with suspended Directors who is attending 8 COC Meeting for approval of resolution plan? not shared resolution plan with 8 COC meeting agenda.

6. IBBI Finding on 8COC Meeting minutes approving resolution plan in which COC member instruct suspended Directors to leave 8 COC meeting for discussion of resolution and taken short break in 8 COC Meeting to discuss resolution plan which was not on record?

7. IBBI Finding on RP intention is to do fraud shaking hands with ICICI Bank person for not sharing resolution plan? COC instruct suspended Directors to leave meeting for discussion of resolution plan? and resolution plan discussion taken place by taking break in meeting in private off record? RP act when COC instruct suspended Directors to leave meeting when RP chair the meeting.

8. IBBI Finding on act of RP who is chairperson of 8 COC Meeting which was not as per IBC Law that meeting was taken short break which make 8 COC meeting illegal and not as per rule of IBC to pass resolution passed in the said meeting which is not as per IBC Law?

9. IBBI Finding on OTS Request which known to RP which trashes process of value maximization of CD asset and done fraud?

10. IBBI Finding on payment transition between 2 resolution application which clear that all process of liquidation and CIRP is managed to do Fraud?

11. IBBI Findings on above and action taken U/S 218 of IBC on RP and ICSIIIP?”

The CPIO has, inter alia, stated that the relevant file notings pertaining to the information sought have already been provided to the Appellant in the reply furnished under reference ISBBI/R/E/25/00176. Aggrieved by the CPIO reply, the Appellant has filed the present appeal while reiterating the queries in the RTI application.

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, an applicant can have access to the same under the RTI Act subject to exemptions under section 8.

4. I note that the Appellant has sought copy of the proceedings which records the examination of the grievance raised by Appellant against Sh. Gaurav Adukia (Insolvency Professional) and ICSI Institute of

Insolvency Professionals (ICSI IIP). Accordingly, the impugned Appeal is decided as under: –

5. In view of the aforesaid observations, the CPIO reply does not warrant any interference.

6. The Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

Sd/-
(Kulwant Singh)
First Appellate Authority