Central Information Commission
Naresh Kadyan vs Central Sheep Breeding Farm,Hissar on 12 December, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/CSBFH/C/2022/664997
Naresh Kadyan ....िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Central Sheep Breeding Farm,
Post Box No. 10, Hisar - 125001 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 03.12.2024
Date of Decision : 11.12.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 28.09.2022
CPIO replied on : 18.10.2022
First appeal filed on : NIL
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : NIL
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an (online) RTI application dated 28.09.2022 seeking the following information:
"Under 74 and 76 of Indian Evidence Act, read with RTI Act: Supply -
The Central Sheep Breeding Farm, Hisar was established in 1968-70, in collaboration with the Government of Australia under Colombo Plan on Page 1 of 6 approximately 6477 acres of land, leased by the Government of Haryana for a period of 20 years (from 1st August, 1968 to 31st July 1988) at the lease rent of Rs. 1.00 per acre per annum to upgrade the Nations Sheep Flocks and Improve the quality of wool. In May, 1997 about 4028 acres of land (pasture/grazing land) was taken back by Government of Haryana. At present total land available with the Farm is 2456 acres.
Objectives of the Farm:
A total number of 500 Corriedale, 50 Merino, 310 Dorset Sheep imported from Australia and 9875 Rambouillet Sheep were imported from America to establish the Sheep Breeding Farm with the following objectives:
1. Production of large number of cross bred rams for distribution to the sheep raising areas of India.
2. Setting up extension and training programme to ensure the best use of the ram produced.
3. Development of suitable managemental system and requisite facilities for breeding and rearing under Indian conditions, using purely Indian resources.
Under RTI, Scouts and Guides for Animals and Birds along with OIPA: Indian People for Animals, directed all public servants, to supply all relevant informations, point wise compliance of above said objectives, along with similar status reports of the:
1. Impacts of CSBF, with clarification of sheep and goods, action taken to prevent, treating sheep as goods, restoring their 5 freedoms, along with total area of land allotted with the copies of land allotment and present status of land use.
2. All copies of letters received and made with files notings and FIR with present status of FIR with all dogs, related to Naresh Kadyan, certified copies as attached.
3. Complete details about sex discrimination among male and female.
4. Rabbit and Poultry farming, against the mandate of CSBF, complete details and communications be supplied.Page 2 of 6
5. Copies of all MoU with strict compliance and present status with impacts.
6. Legal Mechanism along with prototype of special vehicle for sheep transportation.
7. Complete details about slaughtering and tanning with flaying and source of skinning.
8. Use and present status of dog squad.
9. Use of dead animals and their disposal.
RTI attached for reply."
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the complainant on 18.10.2022 stating as under:
"आपके नोट सं या 28-3/2021/242-243 दनांक 30.09.2022 के संदभ म मांगी गई बां छत जानकार का ववरण न न !कार है :-
1. इस फाम पर भेड़ के साथ पशुधन क+ तरह ह ,यवहार -कया जाता है और कभी भी इसे वा/तु मा0 नह समझा गया ।
फाम के पास 2456 एकड़ 5 कनाल 7 मरले जमीं उपल6ध है िजसम से 1437 एकड 4 कनाल 16 मरले जमीन वा पस मांग ल गई है और इस बारे म कायवाह जार है ।
2. कु9े ले जाने से स बि:धत ;मशल (File) सं या 28-2/2003//था0 सलं<न है ।
3. इस फाम के जानवर= (भेड व ् बक?रय=) म -कसी भी !कार का नर व मादा म ;लंग भेद नह ं रखा जाता ।
4. मं0ालय के नदA शानस ु ार मो?रंगा प?रयोजना के तहत फाम पर खरगोश व ् मुगB पालन का काय -कया जा रहा है ।
Page 3 of 65. लाला लाजपत राय वCव वDयालय, हसार के साथ MOU ह/ताEर हुआ है और स बि:धत !/ताव वभाग को भेजा गया है जो अभी लंGबत है ।
6. इस फाम पर इस !कार का कोई /पेशल वाहन उपल6ध नह ं है ।
7. इस फाम पर -कसी भी !कार के जानवर का वध (Slaughter) नह -कया जाता।
8. इस फाम पर वतमान म कोई Sheep dog का द/ता उपल6ध नह ं है ।
9. मत ृ जानवर= को वैIा नक तर के से एक गहरे गJढे म दबा कर नपटन -कया जाता है ।"
Being dissatisfied, the complainant filed a First Appeal dated NIL. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Absent.
Respondent: Dr. H.R. Khanna, FAA-cum-Joint Commissioner and Shri Bharat Kumar, Section Officer, attended the hearing in person.
The Complainant did not participate in the hearing despite service of hearing notice.
The Respondent submitted that a suitable reply qua the instant RIT Application was given to the Complainant vide letter dated 18.10.2022. He added that upon receipt of the hearing notice from the Commission, an updated and pointwise reply was also furnished vide letter dated 26.11.2024.
A written submission has been received from Dr. Runtu Gogoi, CPIO-cum- Deputy Commissioner, vide letter dated 26.11.2024, a copy of which has been sent to the Complainant and the same has been taken on record. The relevant extract of the same is as under:Page 4 of 6
"1. Earlier Farm has total 2456 acre 5 kanal 7 marla area is which 1437 acre 4 canal 16 marla of land has been taken back by the Government of Haryana and process of lease deed agreement of rest of about 1019 acre land is unde progress. (Annexure -1 attached).
Sheep and Goats are treated as valuable animals/livestock a this farm rather as a goods.
Adequate action taken to restoring their 5 freedoms like biosecurity, health and security etc.
2. As per telephonic discussion with the Director, CSBF, Hisar with your goodself it is to inform you that this office has sent a letter No.28-3/2021//था./353 dated 20.11.2024 to the SHO, Sadar Thana Hisar to enquire the present status to the FIR No.135 dated 21.03.2003. In response Sadar Than has informed that the said FIR has been disposed off.
Copies of FIR including file noting and present status of the case are attached as Annexure-2.
3. There is no sex discrimination among the animals at CSBF Hisar.
4. As per instruction of the Ministry/Department the rabbit and poultry farming started under Moringa Project for a limited period time. At present there is no rabbit and poultry farming is being done at this farm.
5. The respective MOU was proposed between LUVAS, Hisar and this farm and the same was forwarded to the Department for existence but the same was not executed. There is no MOU exist at this farm.
6. There is no special vehicle facility available for Sheep Transportation at this farm.
7. There is no slaughter house exists at this farm and the farm is not involved in slaughtering the animals but merely skinning was used to be done during Postmortem of dead animals.
8. There is no dog squad available at this farm.
9. There is no use of dead animals at this farm and is disposed off in deep Pit"
Decision The Commission observed that the present complaint was filed under Section 18 of the RTI Act, 2005 where the Commission was only required to ascertain if the information has been denied with a mala fide intent or due to an unreasonable cause or under any other clause of Section 18 of RTI Act. In this regard, the Commission relies on one judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Chief Information Commissioner & Anr. Vs. State of Manipur & Anr." bearing Page 5 of 6 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.10787-10788 OF 2011 decided on 12.12.2011 has held as under:-
"Therefore, the procedure contemplated under Section 18 and Section 19 of the said Act is substantially different. The nature of the power under Section 18 is supervisory in character whereas the procedure under Section 19 is an appellate procedure and a person who is aggrieved by refusal in receiving the information which he has sought for can only seek redress in the manner provided in the statute, namely, by following the procedure under Section 19. This Court is, therefore, of the opinion that Section 7 read with Section 19 provides a complete statutory mechanism to a person who is aggrieved by refusal to receive information. Such person has to get the information by following the aforesaid statutory provisions. The contention of the appellant that information can be accessed through Section 18 is contrary to the express provision of Section 19 of the Act. It is well known when a procedure is laid down statutorily and there is no challenge to the said statutory procedure the Court should not, in the name of interpretation, lay down a procedure which is contrary to the express statutory provision. It is a time honoured principle as early as from the decision in Taylor v. Taylor [(1876) 1 Ch. D. 426] that where statute provides for something to be done in a particular manner it can be done in that manner alone and all other modes of performance are necessarily forbidden."
The above ratio is applicable to this case as well. Since records of the case do not indicate any such deliberate denial or concealment of information on the part of the PIO, the Commission concluded that there was no cause of action which would necessitate action under the provisions of Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act, 2005 in the instant complaint.
The Complaint is dismissed accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)