Supreme Court Stays Delhi HC Order Calling NSEI a 'Public Authority' Under RTI

The Supreme Court on Friday stayed a Delhi High Court judgment that had declared the National Stock Exchange of India (NSEI) as a 'public authority' under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The stay means that, for now, the stock exchange is not obliged to disclose information under the transparency law.

A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice on the NSEI's petition and sought responses from the Central Information Commission and other parties. The matter is scheduled for further hearing after four weeks.

The NSEI had challenged the July 1 verdict of the Delhi High Court's Division Bench, which upheld a Single Judge's April 2010 ruling. That ruling had held that the NSEI falls under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, which defines a 'public authority' as any body owned, controlled or substantially financed by the appropriate government. The Division Bench had agreed, observing that the NSEI is controlled by the government.

Under the RTI Act, citizens can seek information only from a 'public authority'. The NSEI, however, has maintained that it is not a public authority and should not be subject to RTI requests. The stock exchange had earlier challenged an order of the Central Information Commissioner before the Single Judge, arguing that it is a private market institution.

The Supreme Court's intervention comes as a relief to the NSEI, which had been asked to respond to RTI queries following the High Court's order. Legal experts note that the final outcome will have significant implications for the transparency of stock exchanges and other financial market infrastructure institutions in India.

The case raises broader questions about the extent to which private entities that perform public functions or receive significant government support should be accountable under the RTI Act. While the NSEI plays a crucial role in the Indian financial system, the question of whether it is 'controlled' by the government is at the heart of the dispute.

Observers will closely watch the Supreme Court's final decision, as it could set a precedent for other exchanges and regulatory bodies. For now, the stay provides interim relief to the NSEI, which had argued that subjecting it to RTI would hamper its operations and compromise confidential commercial information.

The Supreme Court's order does not delve into the merits of the case but merely stays the High Court's judgment while allowing the NSEI's plea to be heard. The next hearing is expected to clarify the legal position, with the Central Information Commission and other stakeholders set to file their responses.