New Delhi: In a recent ruling, the First Appellate Authority of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) disposed of an appeal related to an information request concerning the grievance mechanism for candidates of the Limited Insolvency Examination. Appellant Darshil Kalpesh Mashru had sought details on how candidates could address complaints. The IBBI’s Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) responded by directing the appellant to the FAQs and an official email address available on the board’s website. While the appellate authority, Executive Director Kulwant Singh, found the information provided by the CPIO to be satisfactory and accessible online, a key point raised in the appeal was the delay in the CPIO’s response. The RTI application, filed on February 22, 2025, should have received a response by March 24, 2025, but the CPIO replied only on April 3, 2025. The authority acknowledged that this timeline violation contravenes Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Emphasizing the need for public authorities like the IBBI to adhere strictly to statutory timelines, the order encouraged and urged the CPIO to be more sensitive and compliant with legal requirements when handling future RTI requests. Despite the admitted delay, the appeal was dismissed as the requested information was deemed to have been adequately provided, albeit late, and was publicly available.
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: 25th April 2025
Order under section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) in respect of RTI Appeal Registration No. ISBBI/A/E/25/00067
IN THE MATTER OF
Darshil Kalpesh Mashru
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 Appeals dated 24th March 2025, challenging the communication of the Respondent, filed under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act). Since the Appeals required detailed analysis of different provisions of the RTI Act, same are disposed within 45 days of receipt of the impugned Appeals.
2. The Appellant had sought information on the grievance redressal mechanism for candidates appearing in the Limited Insolvency Examination of the IBBI. The Respondent CPIO has replied that the IBBI has hosted FAQs and an official email-id on its website, which can be accessed for any assistance, information requests or grievance redressal. Moreover, the candidates can send their queries to the official email-id for any issues pertaining to the examination. Aggrieved with the same, the Appellant has filed the present Appeal stating that the Respondent CPIO has replied beyond the statutory timeline enshrined under the RTI Act.
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. While the “right to information” flows from section 3 of the RTI Act, it is subject to other 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. In this regard, I note that the Appellant had filed the RTI application on 22nd February 2025, which was disposed of by the Respondent CPIO on 03rd April 2025. The deadline to dispose of the impugned RTI Application expired on 24th March 2025. 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. Moreover, the FAQs pertaining to the Limited Insolvency Examination is hosted on the website’s link https://ibbi.gov.in/en/faqs. Since the Application has been disposed of by the CPIO Respondent satisfactorily, it does not warrant our further interference.
5. The Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
Sd/-
(Kulwant Singh)
First Appellate Authority
Copy to:
1. Appellant, Darshil Kalpesh Mashru
2. CPIO, The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, 7thFloor, Mayur Bhawan, Shankar
Market, Connaught Circus, New Delhi -110001.
