Summary: The First Appellate Authority of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) disposed of an RTI appeal challenging the non-disposal of an RTI application seeking multiple Action Taken Reports (ATRs) relating to issues such as financially distressed Central Public Sector Undertakings, recovery of funds under Section 24 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, recoveries in insolvency proceedings, implementation of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and SICA, suppression in annual reports, and date-wise actions concerning “clawing” of funds. The Authority examined the provisions of Sections 2(f), 2(j), 3, 7, and 8 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and observed that the appellant’s RTI application dated 11 May 2026 had not been disposed of within the statutory 30-day period, which expired on 10 June 2026. Holding that the Central Public Information Officer had failed to comply with the prescribed timeline, the Authority directed the CPIO to dispose of the RTI application expeditiously and disposed of the appeal.
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: 30th 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/26/00024
IN THE MATTER OF
Sundaresan
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 10th June 2026, challenging the communication of the Respondent, filed under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act).
2. In his RTI application dated 11.05.2026, the Appellant had sought Action Taken Reports (ATRs) concerning interactions with the IBBI on several key areas and such other ATRs, including.
i. The annual identification of Central Public Sector Undertakings (CPSUs) experiencing a 50% or 100% wipeout of net worth, or those with potential for such wipeouts.
ii. Follow-up actions on “clawing” (recovery of funds) under Section 24 of SICA 1985.
iii. Follow-up on clawing during the period leading up to the IBBI mandating Form CIRP 8 in 2021.
iv. Efforts to increase recoveries under insolvencies, including recoveries from personal and corporate guarantors and through increased identification of clawing.
v. Addressing suppressions in annual reports.
vi. The implementation of various laws, including the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and SICA 1985.
vii. Date-wise ATR on clawing for the period starting from the date the IBBI mandated Form CIRP 8.
viii. All ATRs provided must include a list of dates, the specific actions taken on those dates, responses received, and subsequent actions or reminders sent.
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 “light 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 “light 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 11th May 2026, which has not been disposed of by the CPIO till date. The deadline to dispose of the impugned RTI Application expired on 10th June 2026. Thus, the CPIO has failed to dispose of the impugned application within the timeline of thirty days as 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. Accordingly, the CPIO is directed to dispose of the impugned RTI application expeditiously.
5. The Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
Sd/-
(Kulwant Singh)
First Appellate Authority
Copy to:
1. Appellant, Sundaresan
2. CPIO, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, 7th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar
Market, Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001.
