Supreme Court stays Delhi High Court order declaring NSEI ‘public authority’ under RTI Act

You don’t have any Active Subscription.

Your active subscription(s)

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

Products you've access to

Additional Subscription Benefits

Need help with your subscription?

The High Court’s division bench had observed that if the body is owned, controlled or substantially financed by the appropriate government, it would qualify as a ‘public authority’

Updated - July 31, 2026 05:25 pm IST - New Delhi

A Bench of justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, agreed to hear a petition filed by the NSEI and sought responses from the Central Information Commission and others. File. | Photo Credit: The Hindu

The Supreme Court on Friday (July 31, 2026) stayed a Delhi High Court order which held that the National Stock Exchange of India (NSEI) is a ‘public authority’ under the Right to Information Act.

A Bench of justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, agreed to hear a petition filed by the NSEI and sought responses from the Central Information Commission and others.

The Bench posted the matter for hearing after four weeks.

The NSEI challenged the July 1 verdict of a division bench of the Delhi High Court.

The High Court’s division bench had dismissed the NSEI’s appeal against its single judge’s April 2010 decision, which ruled that NSEI qualified as a ‘public authority’ under section 2(h) of the RTI Act.

Citizens can enforce their right to ask for information only from a ‘public authority’ under the RTI Act.

The High Court’s division bench had observed that if the body is owned, controlled or substantially financed by the appropriate government, it would qualify as a ‘public authority’.

“The single judge holds, in the impugned judgment, that the NSEI is controlled by the appropriate government, and we agree,” the division bench had said.

The stock exchange had challenged an order of the Central Information Commissioner before the single judge and asserted that it was not a ‘public authority’ under the RTI Act.

Published - July 31, 2026 04:51 pm IST

Terms & conditions | Institutional Subscriber

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.