Pending Disciplinary Action Shields Records u/s 8(1)(h) of RTI: IBBI FAA denies Disclosure, allows Only File Notings [Read Order]

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India’s (IBBI) First Appellate Authority (FAA), has disposed of an RTI appeal filed by Sanjeev Mahajan under Section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

The appeal challenged the response of theCentral Public Information Officer (CPIO) regarding the disclosure of records in disciplinary proceedings against Resolution Professional (RP) Navneet Gupta, appointed in the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) of Nimitaya Hotels and Resorts Limited.

Sanjeev Mahajan, representing the suspended management of the corporate debtor, sought extensive information including certified copies of the complaint file, internal notings, communications between IBBI and the RP, correspondence with the sole Committee of Creditors (CoC) member Indian Bank, replies filed by the RP, preliminary examination reports, show cause notices, written submissions, hearing details before the Disciplinary Committee, and the current status of proceedings.

The CPIO had replied that disciplinary proceedings were pending and therefore detailed disclosure could not be made. Dissatisfied, Mahajan filed the appeal, also requesting a personal hearing via videoconference.

The FAA examined the application, the CPIO’s response, and the appeal. It repeated that under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, “information” means records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, and data material held in any form.

However, the right to information under Section 3 is conditional on exemptions under Section 8. Specifically, Section 8(1)(h) exempts the disclosure of information that would impede the investigation or prosecution of offenders.

Applying this provision, the FAA held that most of the information sought was exempt from disclosure since disciplinary proceedings against the RP were ongoing. Disclosure at this stage, it reasoned, could prejudice or impede the inquiry and any subsequent prosecution. Accordingly, requests for copies of communications, replies, show cause notices, submissions, and hearing details were denied.

At the same time, the FAA directed partial disclosure by attaching file notings about the complaint. This limited release balanced transparency with the need to protect the integrity of ongoing proceedings. The appeal was disposed of within the statutory 45‑day period under Section 19 of the RTI Act.

The underlying complaint alleged serious violations by the RP, including misappropriation of CIRP funds, falsification of minutes, violation of voting timelines, collusion with resolution applicants, failure to convene CoC meetings, and failure to update creditor lists.

Indian Bank, the sole CoC member, had repeatedly denied ratifying expenses and sought audits of CIRP costs, alleging misappropriation of ₹15–20 crore. Emails on record showed the bank dissenting from approvals recorded by the RP and demanding supporting invoices.

While these allegations form the context, the FAA, headed by Executive Director Kulwant Singh, clarified that the RTI appeal was confined to the disclosure of records, not adjudication of misconduct. The disciplinary proceedings against the RP remain pending before IBBI’s Disciplinary Committee.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates