केन्द्रीय सचू ना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गगं नाथ माग,ग मनु नरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई दिल्ली, New Delhi – 110067 नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/RCOLB/A/2024/652020 Shri Vinay Pujari … अपीलकता/ग Appellant VERSUS/बनाम PIO, …प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent Registrar of Companies cum Official Liquidator, Bihar Date of Hearing : 04.08.2025 Date of Decision : 04.08.2025 Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 16.10.2024 PIO replied on : 22.10.2024 First Appeal filed on : 24.10.2024 First Appellate Order on : 21.11.2024

2^ndAppeal/complaint received on : Nil Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.10.2024 seeking information on following points:-

1.”A list of all companies registered under the jurisdiction of the Registrar of Companies (ROC), Patna in the last three years (from October 2021 to September 2024).

2. For each of these companies, please provide the following additional information:

Name of the company Date of registration Corporate Identification Number (CIN)

Registered office address Type of company (e.g., Private Limited, Public Limited, LLP, etc.)

3. Details of directors for each of the above-mentioned companies, including:

Name of the director(s)

Director Identification Number (DIN) Date of appointment as director Address and contact details of the directors.”

The CPIO, ROC cum OL, Bihar vide letter dated 22.10.2024 replied as under:-

Reply: Information sought is not available in the form as desired, however the same is available in public domain on the following link:

https://mca.gov.in/content/mca/global/en/data-and-

reports/company-lip-info/incorporated- closed-month.html.”

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 24.10.2024. The FAA vide order dated 21.11.2024 stated as under:-

“The RTI 1st Appeal received on 24.10.2024 has been examined by the undersigned and it has been found that the CPIO of this office has already served the reply to the Appellant vide online mode dated 22.10. 2024. The undersigned concurs with the view of CPIO that information sought is not available in the form as desired.

It is stated that the sought information/Data is not readily available at the end of this office.

In view of the above the appeal is disposed off.”

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Written submission dated 16.07.2025 has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record for perusal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Not present Respondent: Mr. Kundan Kumar, AROC- participated in the hearing through video-conferencing.

The Respondent stated that the information sought by the Appellant in a desired form is not available in their records. He further stated that complete details of registered companies are available in the public domain and same can be easily accessed on the link which was provided to the Appellant in the reply dated 22.10.2024.

Decision:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made during hearing, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent. Commission notes that ‘information’ as defined in the section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material as is already available in the records of the public authority. Furthermore, the RTI Act, 2005 does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to create or collate information and then furnish it to an Applicant in a desired format. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया

Chief Information Commissioner (मख्ु य सचू ना आयक्तु )

Authenticated true copy अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत ( )

S. K. Chitkara (एस के नचटकारा)

. .

Dy. Registrar (उप - पंजीयक)

011-26186535