“Appellate Authority is of the opinion that no interference of this forum is warranted…”: SEBI, Part 2.
The respondent, in response to query number 1, informed that the recovery proceedings in the matter has been initiated by the Recovery and Refund Department of Eastern Regional Office, by issuing recovery certificate on 9th of April, 2021. The appellant, in his appeal, submitted that only partial information with respect to query number 1 has been provided.
On perusal of the query and the response provided thereto, it was noted that the respondent has addressed the first part of the query, by providing the information available with him. Further, it was also noted that the appellant has not made any specific submission regarding the same. Accordingly, no deficiency was found in the response.
Mr Baiwar also noted that the appellant, vide second part of query number 1, sought information regarding the time to be taken for the recovery proceedings to be settled. He found that the same is in the nature of eliciting a clarification or opinion regarding a future event, which cannot be construed as an information available on record. In this regard, it was noted that the Hon’ble CIC, in the matter of Shri Shantaram Walavalkar vs. CPIO, SEBI (Decision dated January 17, 2013), held: “… we would also like to observe that, under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the citizen has the responsibility to specify the exact information he wants; he is not supposed to seek any opinion or comments or clarifications or interpretations from the CPIO…”.
In view of the same, it was found that the respondent did not have an obligation to provide such clarification or opinion under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Accordingly, he is of the opinion that no interference of this forum is warranted at this stage.
The respondent, in response to query number 3, informed that SEBI, in compliance with the order dated 31st of October, 2018, had forwarded the aforesaid order to the Director General & Inspector General of Police, West Bengal, for information.
The respondent also informed that the query with regard to whether there is a provision for sending a reminder, is in the nature of enquiry/inquisition and thus cannot be construed as seeking “information” as defined under Section 2(f) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.