Bombay High Court: No Obligation to Collect Third Party Info Under RTI Act

• The Bombay High Court has ruled that public authorities are not obligated under the RTI Act to obtain information from third parties.
• The Court quashed certain orders passed by the Central Information Commission, which had directed SEBI to collect information from BSE for RTI applicants.
• This decision may impact the compliance strategies of Indian regulatory bodies like SEBI and highlight the need for clarity in the interpretation of the RTI Act.

The provisions (of the RTI Act) do not indicate that a public authority, like SEBI in the present case, which is a regulatory body empowered to call upon third parties to provide information in terms of its own governing statute, is under an obligation to obtain information from third parties to satisfy persons applying for such information.

The Bombay High Court has made a significant ruling in the case of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) v. Yogesh Mehta & Ors., which has implications for public authorities' obligations under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act). On Tuesday, a Division Bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram V Shirsat quashed certain orders passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC), which had directed SEBI to collect information from the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) for RTI applicants. The Court held that public authorities are not obligated under the RTI Act to obtain information from third parties, even if it means actively collecting data from private entities like BSE. This ruling has been granted in favor of SEBI and BSE, which had challenged the CIC's directives.

The RTI Act, 2005, is a key legislation that empowers citizens to access information held by public authorities. However, the interpretation of this law has been a subject of debate among various stakeholders. In this case, the CIC had taken a broad view of the definition of 'information' under the RTI Act, holding that SEBI was bound not only to provide data already available in its records but also to actively collect information from private third parties like BSE. However, the Bombay High Court has now set aside these orders, clarifying that public authorities are not obligated to obtain information from third parties merely to satisfy citizen queries. This ruling is significant as it highlights the need for regulatory bodies to review their procedures for responding to RTI requests and consider whether they can rely on existing governing statutes to obtain information from third parties.

The implications of this ruling are far-reaching, particularly for Indian regulatory bodies like SEBI. This decision may impact the compliance strategies of these bodies, which should review their procedures for responding to RTI requests and consider whether they can rely on existing governing statutes to obtain information from third parties. The Bombay High Court's ruling has also highlighted the need for clarity in the interpretation of the RTI Act, particularly with regards to the definition of 'information' and the obligations of public authorities under this law. This decision is likely to have significant implications for the functioning of regulatory bodies in India and may lead to a re-evaluation of their procedures for responding to RTI requests.

This ruling may impact the compliance strategies of Indian regulatory bodies, such as SEBI, which should review their procedures for responding to RTI requests and consider whether they can rely on existing governing statutes to obtain information from third parties.

Source: Original reporting via The Hindu