Kashvi Pathak has a complaint against her private bank. She files an RTI to the bank and gets a flat refusal: we are not a public authority. She is right to be confused, and there is a legal way forward.
You cannot file an RTI directly to a purely private body like a private bank, school, hospital or company, because it is not a “public authority” under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act 2005. But you can file the RTI to that body's PUBLIC REGULATOR and ask for the private body's records that the regulator legally holds. That route is built into the Act itself.
Short on time? Jump to the regulator-mapping table below, pick your sector, and file a Section 6 RTI with the regulator, not the private body.
Section 2(f) of the RTI Act defines “information” to include “information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force.” In plain words: if a government regulator can legally pull a private body's records, you can ask the regulator for those records under RTI.
Private banks file inspection data with the Reserve Bank of India. Listed companies and mutual funds file disclosures with SEBI. Insurers report to IRDAI. Private schools hold affiliation records with CBSE or the State Education Department. These regulators “hold” or “can access” that private data under their own laws, so it falls inside RTI.
The catch, set out in the same provision, is scope. Only information the regulator “normally and routinely” holds or accesses counts. You cannot force a regulator to use special investigative powers just to answer your RTI.
| Private body | Its public regulator | Records you can usually ask for |
|---|---|---|
| Private bank | Reserve Bank of India, RBI | Inspection reports, defaulter and NPA data, action taken on complaints |
| Listed company or mutual fund | SEBI | Disclosures, filings, investigation and enforcement orders |
| Insurance company | IRDAI | Returns filed by the insurer, grievance data, regulatory action |
| Non-banking finance company, NBFC | Reserve Bank of India, RBI | Registration status, inspection and supervisory records |
| Telecom operator | TRAI or DoT | Tariff filings, quality of service reports, compliance records |
| Private school | State Education Department or CBSE | Affiliation, recognition and inspection records held by the board |
| Private hospital or clinic | State Health Department or clinical establishment registrar | Registration, licensing and inspection records under State law |
For private schools and hospitals the exact holdings vary by State, so phrase your request around the registration, affiliation and inspection records the authority actually keeps. See the guide to which regulator handles your sector.
The Supreme Court settled the core question in Reserve Bank of India v. Jayantilal N. Mistry, decided on 16 December 2015, reported as (2016) 3 SCC 525.
RBI had refused to disclose bank inspection reports and defaulter lists, claiming a fiduciary relationship with the banks it supervises and protection under Section 8(1)(e). The Court rejected this. It held that RBI is a statutory regulator, not in a fiduciary relationship with the banks it oversees, so Section 8(1)(e) is no blanket bar. The Court stressed that public-interest disclosure must prevail over a regulator's claim of confidentiality.
This principle reaches beyond banking. A regulator cannot routinely hide a regulated body's records behind “fiduciary” or “commercial confidence” labels when public interest favours disclosure. The Court reaffirmed the ruling in April 2021 when it dismissed RBI's recall application, so the principle stands as good law. For the standing rule of disclosure, the The RTI Playbook is a useful companion.
The regulator route is powerful but not unlimited. Keep these limits in mind.
A purely private body that gets no substantial government finance is simply outside RTI. The regulator is your doorway, not the private body itself.
No. A purely private body is not a “public authority” under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, unless it is substantially financed by government. You instead file the RTI with the body's public regulator, such as RBI for a private bank, and ask for the private body's records the regulator holds under Section 2(f).
Section 2(f) of the RTI Act 2005. It defines “information” to include information relating to any private body which a public authority can access under any other law in force. So records that a regulator like SEBI or IRDAI can legally pull from a private body fall within RTI, subject to the usual exemptions.
It may try, but the Supreme Court limited that defence in Reserve Bank of India v. Jayantilal N. Mistry, (2016) 3 SCC 525. A regulator is not in a fiduciary relationship with the bodies it supervises, so Section 8(1)(e) is no automatic shield. Public-interest disclosure can override claims of confidentiality, though some records may still be redacted.
That can be a valid answer. RTI reaches only what the regulator normally and routinely holds or accesses, not data it would have to specially investigate. If you believe the record exists in its files, name it precisely and, if refused, file a first appeal and then a second appeal to the Information Commission.