Public authority can’t be forced to get info from third parties for RTI applicants: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday ruled that a public authority is under no legal obligation under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) to collect or obtain information from a private body merely to furnish it to an RTI applicant [Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Yogesh Mehta & Ors.]..A Division Bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram V Shirsat made the observation while quashing certain orders passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC). The CIC had directed the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to collect certain information from the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), so that the same may be given to RTI applicants. SEBI and BSE challenged such directives before the High Court. Granting them relief, the Court held,"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 CIC had interpreted the definition of "information" under the RTI Act to hold 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 to satisfy citizen queries.The core issue before the High Court, therefore, was whether the power of a regulator (like SEBI) to request data could be cited to compel it to collect third-party information for RTI applicants.SEBI had argued that forcing a regulator to act as an information-gathering agent for RTI applicants exceeds the statutory mandate of the RTI Act. The High Court found force in this submission. It clarified that a public authority is only required to furnish the information it actually holds when the RTI request is submitted.The High Court also relied on Supreme Court rulings, which clarified that the RTI Act does not cast an obligation upon public authorities to collect or collate information not already available with it. The High Court concluded that CIC had overstepped in this case. "We find that the said reasoning of the CIC is in the teeth of the position of law clarified by the Supreme Court and therefore, it cannot be sustained and the impugned orders deserve to be quashed and set aside."Consequently, the Court set aside the CIC orders under challenge..Senior advocate JJ Bhatt, with advocates Misha Patel, Omprakash Jha, Shivani Kumbhojkar and Mugdha Narkar, briefed by The Law Point, appeared for SEBI. Senior advocate Pesi Modi and advocates Kalpana Desai, Kingshuk Banerjee, Arnav Mohanty, Ritvik Kulkarni, Arnab Ray and Surya Ravikumar, briefed by Khaitan and Co., appeared for BSE..[Read judgment]