Description
RTI appeal regarding disclosure of information about BSE technical glitch on July 12, 2024, including reports and TAC proceedings.
Summary
This document pertains to Appeal No. 6603 of 2025 filed by Siddhartha K Garg before SEBI’s Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The appellant sought information regarding a technical glitch that occurred at BSE on July 12, 2024, including immediate notifications, preliminary reports, Root Cause Analysis (RCA), and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) findings. SEBI’s CPIO refused disclosure citing that the information is held in fiduciary capacity and exempt under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act.
Key Points
- Appeal filed on October 31, 2025 (Reg. No. SEBIH/A/E/25/00282)
- Original RTI application dated September 23, 2025
- CPIO response dated October 13, 2025 denied access to information
- Information requested relates to BSE technical glitch on July 12, 2024
- SEBI cited fiduciary capacity exemption under RTI Act Section 8(1)(e)
- Appellant contested fiduciary capacity claim citing Reserve Bank of India vs. Jayantilal N. Mistry (2016) 3 SCC 525
- Reference made to SEBI Master Circular dated July 05, 2021 (SEBI/HO/MRD1/DTCS/CIR/P/2021/590)
Regulatory Changes
No regulatory changes. This is an RTI appeal order regarding information disclosure.
Compliance Requirements
Not applicable - this is an appellate order on an RTI matter, not a compliance directive.
Important Dates
- July 12, 2024: BSE technical glitch occurred
- September 23, 2025: RTI application filed by appellant
- October 13, 2025: CPIO response denying information
- October 31, 2025: Appeal filed before Appellate Authority
- November 28, 2025: Document date
Impact Assessment
This appeal has minimal direct market impact as it concerns procedural matters under the RTI Act. The case involves disclosure of information about exchange technical glitches and whether such information is held in fiduciary capacity. The outcome may set precedent for transparency regarding exchange technical failures and SEBI’s obligations under RTI Act. The appellant’s reliance on Supreme Court precedent (RBI vs. Jayantilal N. Mistry) and reference to another SEBI matter (Arun Damodar Sawant vs. SEBI) suggests ongoing debate about what constitutes fiduciary information in regulatory context.
Impact Justification
RTI appeal case with limited market impact, primarily administrative matter regarding information disclosure under RTI Act