Central Information Commission
Naresh Kadyan vs Veterinary Council Of India on 23 February, 2026
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईिद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No:
CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/648081
CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/617841
CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/616080
CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/616124
CIC/VCOIN/A/2024/612177
Naresh Kadyan .... Complainant/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
.... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Veterinary Council of India, 'A'
Wing, 2nd Floor, August Kranti
Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
N New Delhi - 110066.
Date of Hearing : 17.02.2026
Date of Decision : 23.02.2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : SANJEEV KUMAR JINDAL
The above-mentioned complaints and appeal are clubbed together as the
complainant/appellant and respondent is common and subject-matter is
similar in nature and hence are being disposed of through a common order.
Relevant facts emerging from complaints/ second appeal:
Case No. Date of RTI CPIO Reply First appeal FAA order Compliant/Secon
d
Appeal Dated
648081 13.08.2024 10.09.2024 13.08.2024 11.10.2024 04.11.2024
617841 22.12.2023 19.01.2024 22.01.2024 05.03.2024 30.04.2024
Page 1 of 14
616080 03.01.2024 16.01.2024 03.02.2024 05.03.2024 19.04.2024
616124 31.01.2024 28.02.2024 02.03.2024 05.03.2024 18.04.2024
and
06.03.2024
612177 30.12.2023 23.01.2024 31.01.2024 05.03.2024 20.03.2024
1. Complaint CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/648081
Information sought:
The Complainant filed RTI application dated 13.08.2024 seeking information regarding:
"Supply complete details about curriculum by VCI, guidelines, policies, circulars, advisories, issued with present status, related to following: Veterinary Council of India Standard of Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics, for Veterinary Practitioners Regulations, 1992"
The CPIO, VCI furnished a reply to the Appellant on 10.09.2024 stating as under:
".....Veterinary Council of India - Minimum Standards of Veterinary Education -BVSc&AH Degree Course Regulations, 2016 containing course curriculum is uploaded on the website of the Council [www.vci.dahd.gov.in]. In case of applicant requies hard copy of the said regulations [175 pages], the payment of Rs. 350/- (Rs. 2/- per page) under RTI Act, 2005 is to be made to this Council through Demand Draft in favour of "Veterinary Council of India payable at New Delhi."
Dissatisfied reply received from the CPIO, VCI Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 13.08.2024. FAA vide order dated 11.10.2024 stated as under:
"...that the veterinary council of India has been established under the provision of Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984 and there is no provision in the IVC Act, 1984 related to freedom of animals, right to life of animals, census, slaughtering of animals and welfare of animals. Hence, matter is not related with this council and no information is available with the council."Page 2 of 14
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Written submissions dated 05.02.2026 filed by the respondent CPIO/FAA, Veterinary Council of India along with annexures is taken on record which states that the sought information doesn't relate to them and a timely reply was given on dated 10.09.2024 to the Complainant. It is further stated that the CPIO, vide letter No. 1-04/2024-VCI/680 dated 10.09.2024, informed the complainant that the issue relating to slaughtering of animals without census does not fall within the purview of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984, as the subject matter pertains to a State subject. Further, the First Appellate Authority, in response to the Appeal dated 13.08.2024, passed an Order dated 11.10.2024. The respondent CPIO further replied upon section 66 of Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984.
2. Complaint CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/617841 Information sought:
The Complainant filed RTI application dated 22.12.2023 seeking information regarding:
"The core infrastructure elements in a Smart City would include Adequate water supply, assured electricity supply, Sanitation, including solid waste management, Efficient urban mobility and public transport, Affordable housing, especially for the poor, Robust IT connectivity and Digitalization, Good Governance, especially e- Governance and citizen participation, Sustainable environment, Safety and security of citizens, particularly women, children and the elderly, and Health and education. Whereas, Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court of India, upheld judicial advisory related to five freedoms for animals, without treated animals at par with persons, as per article 14 of Indian Constitution, OIPA: Indian People for Animals, along with Scouts and Guides for Animals and Bird, asked under RTI, to supply information, related to animals, 100 Smart Cities, restoring their 5 freedoms, since beginning till date with present status, head wise recurring and non-recurring budget provisions for animal shelter and ambulance services for animals in distress, Similar position in all 62 cantonments.Page 3 of 14
1. Land identified and allotment for animals, smooth movement for grazing as charahgah.
2. Proposal received, processed and decides, Land identified and allotment for animal shelter, to keep them lifetime for treatment, care and shelter, whereas Animal Shelter, means place where stray or street or abandoned animals are kept for adoption or rehabilitation, general treatment while they are ill or injured instead lifetime.
3. Proposal received, processed and decides, for animal ambulance, and on spot treatment for animals.
4. Complete list of specie of homeless animals, including dogs and action taken under 100 Smart Cities and 62 cantonments.
5. Complete list of reported cases of dog bites and road accidents, death of victims, either human beings or animals.
6. Any proposal in pipelines, guidelines and circulars issued, policy decides and implemented, related to animals.
7. Complete list of complaints lodged, court cases and their present status.
8. Complete list of Animal Welfare Committee, means committee constituted under rules for resolution of the community dog feeding and State Implementation and Monitoring Committee. Explain Module, means document in writing for dog population management and rabies eradication published and updated by the Board from time to time, which shall serve as the Standard Operating Procedure for Animal Birth Control program for street dogs. Explain Community Animals, means any animal born in a Community for which no ownership has been claimed by any individual or an Organisation, excluding wild animals as defined under the wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (53 of 1972). Explain classification of animals: Animals classified for the purpose of rules are as under: (1) Pet animals - dogs owned and kept indoor by individuals (2) Street dogs or community owned Indian dogs or abandoned pedigreed dogs which are homeless, living on the street."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 19.01.2024 stating as under:
"The Veterinary Council of India has been established under the provisions of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984. The information sought [proposal for land identified and allotment for Page 4 of 14 animals, animal shelters, smooth movement for grazing, animal ambulance, complete list of species of homeless animals including dogs and action taken under 100 smart cities, list of reported cases of dog bites and road accidents, death of victims either human beings or animals, guidelines circulars, policies related to animals, list of complaints lodged, court cases and their present status, list of animal welfare committee etc] are not related to this Council as the same are not come under the purview of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984. A copy is also enclosed [containing 26 pages] of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984 is enclosed for your kind information under the provisions of RTI Act, 1984."
Dissatisfied reply received from the CPIO, VCI Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 22.01.2024.
FAA vide order dated 05.03.2024 stated that the information sought by the appellant on the aforesaid matter does not fall under the purview of the veterinary council and CPIO, VCI vide letter No. 1-64/2023-VCI/3839 dt. 19.01.2024 has already given information in this regard.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Written submissions dated 05.02.2026 filed by the respondent CPIO/FAA, Veterinary Council of India along with annexures is taken on record which states that the sought information doesn't relate to them and a timely reply was given on dated 19.01.2024 and FAA also uphold the same vide order dated 05.03.2024.
3. Complaint CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/616080 Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 03.01.2024 seeking information regarding:
"1. Supply complete details, list of authorities and powers, as above oath holder can issue a certificate for healthy animals, fit to slaughter, and their flesh is suitable - hygienic for human consumptions as diet.Page 5 of 14
2. Supply complete details, list of authorities and powers, as above oath holder can issue a certificate as required under Rule No. 96 being pre transport permit, without any vehicle, approved by a competent authority.
3. Action taken by AWBI, SAWB, or DSPCAs, on the grounds as stated above, restoring their five freedoms, including right to life.
4. Action taken against violators of oath, being fundamental duties and responsibility of custodian of animals as per section 3 of PCA Act, 1960.
5. Complete list of cases moved, under consideration and decided, under 133 and 144 CrPC, since beginning till date."
Reply from the CPIO, VIC dated 16.01.2024 states as under:-
"Refer to your RTI Online Application No. VCOIN/R/T/24/0001 dated 03/1/2024 received from the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India vide Reference No. DOAHD/R/E/23/00403 on the subject cited above and to provide the following point wise information under RTI Act, 2005:-
Point No.1 &2: Relevant provision of Section 30 of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984 is enclosed.
3,4 &5: Not related to VCI"
Being dissatisfied complainant filed a First Appeal dated 03.02.2024.
FAA vide order dated 05.03.2024 stated as under:-
"After going through the Appeal, it has been observed that the Appellant has sought information related to slaughtering of animals, hygiene of animal foods, list of authorities related to slaughtering of animals, issue of animal health certificate, transport of animals, action taken by the VCI related to above matters, prevention of cruelty to animals Act, 1960.
The Veterinary Council of India has been established under the provisions of Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984 and the information sought by the Appellant is not under the purview of IVC Act, 1984. The CPIO, VCI vide letter No.1- 64/2023-VCI/3858 dated 16.1.2024 has already given Page 6 of 14 information in this regard. Accordingly, the Appeal is disposed of."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Written submissions dated 05.02.2026 filed by the respondent CPIO/FAA, Veterinary Council of India along with annexures is taken on record which states that the sought information doesn't relate to them and a timely reply was given on dated 16.01.2024. It is further stated that on 05.03.2024 FAA upholded the CPIO reply.
4. Complaint CIC/VCOIN/C/2024/616124 Information sought:
The Complainant filed RTI application dated 31.01.2024 seeking information regarding:
"Supply complete details and copies of relevant record, animals treated, handled and admitted, in the above facility, during Animal Welfare Fortnight 2024.
Supply complete details, and copies of relevant record, animals treated, handled and admitted, in the following facility, during Animal Welfare Fortnight, since last 11 years, Head wise expenditure as well, including medicines: A). Animal Hospital - 928.327 square meter: B). OT for big animals: 666.87 square meter C). Dog shed: 72.00 square meter D). Cat shed: 12.02 square meter E). Birds shed: 30.00 square meter F). Wild animals: 40.00 square meter G). Large animals: 150.00 square meter Supply report on present status of above said facility, cum Infirmary, may not declared by the Government invited audit para.
Supply Sujit Kumar Datta, annual property return, since last 11 years, being public documents, upload in public domain as well. Supply head wise details of payments. related non-practice allowances, from public funds, since last 11 years of Sujit Datta."
CPIO,VCI vide letter dated 28.02.2024 replied as under:
Page 7 of 14"Refer to your online RTI application Registration No. VCOIN/R/E/24/00008 dated 31/01/2024 on the subject cited above and to inform that the Veterinary Council of India has been established under the provisions of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984. The information sought (details and copies of relevant record, animal treated, handled and admitted during Animal Welfare fortnight 2024, since last 11 years head wise expenditure as well, including medicines, present status of facilities cum infirmary, may not declared by the Government invited audit para, annual property return & payment of NPA etc. since 11 years of Dr. Sujit Dutta) are not related to this Council as the same are not come under the purview of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984."
CPIO,VCI vide letter dated 06.03.2024 disposed of the RTI by stating that:
"RTI request is disposed of"
Dissatisfied with the reply received from the CPIO, VCI complainant filed the First Appeal dated 02.03.2024.
FAA, VCI vide order dated 05.03.2024 stated that the information sought by the appellant on the aforesaid matter does not fall under the purview of the council and CPIO, VCI vide letter No. 1-64/2023-VCI/3839 dt.28.02.2024 has already given information in this regard.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Written submissions dated 05.02.2026 filed by the respondent CPIO/FAA, Veterinary Council of India along with annexures is taken on record which states that the sought information doesn't relate to them. It is further stated that Council does not treat any animal for run any hospital / dispensary not provide any financial assistance in this regard. It is further stated that Dr. Sujit Data is not an employee of this Council and it is also stated that the information sought does not come under the provision of Indian veterinary Council act, 1984 and information in this regard as already been provided on 28.02.2024.
Page 8 of 145. Appeal CIC/VCOIN/A/2024/612177 Information sought:
The Appellant filed RTI application dated 30.12.2023 seeking information regarding:
"Veterinary Council of India Standard of Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Code of Ethics, for Veterinary Practitioners Regulations, 1992.
1. Supply complete details, list of authorities and powers, as above oath holder can issue a certificate for healthy animals, fit to slaughter, and their flesh is suitable - hygienic for human consumptions as diet.
2. Supply complete details, list of authorities and powers, as above oath holder can issue a certificate as required under Rule No. 96 being pretransport permit, without any vehicle, approved by a competent authority.
3. Action taken by VCI, State VC, AWBI, SAWB, or DSPCAs, on the grounds as stated above, restoring their five freedoms, including right to life.
4. Action taken against violators of oath, being fundamental duties and responsibility of custodian of animals as per section 3 of PCA Act, 1960.
5. Complete list of cases moved, under consideration and decided, under 133 and 144 CrPC, since beginning till date."
CPIO, VCI vide letter dated 23.01.2024 disposed of the RTI. Reply dated 23.01.2024 states as under:
"Refer to your RTI Online Application No. VCOIN/R/E/23/00118 dated 30/12/2023 dated 03/1/2024 on the subject cited above and to inform that the undersigned (CPIO] vide its letter No. 1- 64/2023-VCI/3858 dated 16/1/2024 has already provided information to your good self under the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 in reference to your RTI Application Reference No DOAHD/R/E/23/00403 submitted to the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India. A copy of the same is again enclosed for your kind information and record."
Dissatisfied reply received from the CPIO, appellant filed the First Appeal dated 31.01.2024.
Page 9 of 14FAA,VCI vide order dated 05.03.2024 stated that the information sought by the appellant on the aforesaid matter does not fall under the purview of this council and CPIO, VCI vide letter No. 1-64/2023-VCI/3839 dt. 19.01.2024 has already given information in this regard.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Appellant approached the Commission with the instant second appeal.
Written submissions dated 05.02.2026 filed by the respondent CPIO/FAA, Veterinary Council of India along with annexures is taken on record which states that the sought information doesn't relate to them. It is further stated that reply was duly furnished on 23.01.2024.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not Present Respondent: Mr. Balbir Singh, CPIO/VCI, Mr. T.P Singh, FAA/VCI
6. Proof of having served a copy of complaints and second appeal on Respondent, while filing the same in CIC, is not available on record.
7. The Appellant is not present despite serving of notice of hearing.
8. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the Veterinary Council of India is a statutory body constituted under the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984 for regulating veterinary education and professional standards. It neither administers animal shelters nor implements Smart City projects, nor does it exercise jurisdiction over slaughterhouses, animal census, animal birth control implementation, municipal governance, or criminal proceedings. They further submitted that the complainant/ appellant is in the habit of filing multiple RTI applications even on those issues, which does not pertain to the Veterinary Council of India. Even then the respondents have given timely reply on all the RTI applications.Page 10 of 14
Decision:
9. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the parties present and perusal of the records and written submissions observes that so far the as Complaints under Section 18 are concerned, it is settled law that the jurisdiction of the Commission under Section 18 is supervisory in nature and confined to examining whether there has been any refusal to accept an application, unreasonable delay, malafide denial, or obstruction in furnishing information by the CPIO. In the present complaints, timely replies were furnished and no malafide or deliberate obstruction is discernible from the record on the part of respondent CPIO. Hence, no case is made out for initiation of penal proceedings under Section 20 of the RTI Act. For this the Commission would like to place reliance on the case of Bhoopal Singh Vs. Kendriya Vidyalaya, 2023 in which it was held as under:
"....The only order which can be passed by the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, under Section 18 is an order of penalty provided under Section
20. However, before such order is passed the Commissioner must be satisfied that the conduct of the Information Officer was not bona fide."
Further the complainant/appellant has preferred instant 4 complaints under section 18 of the RTI Act and seeking relief of providing information as well as penalty. In view of the foregoing, this Commission now refers to Section 18 of the RTI Act while examining the complaints and in this regard the Commission refers to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Chief Information Commissioner and Another v. State of Manipur and Anr. In Civil Appeal Nos. 10787-10788 of 2011 dated 12-12-2011. The relevant extract of the said decision is set down below:-
"...28. The question which falls for decision in this case is the jurisdiction, if any, of the Information Commissioner under Section 18 in directing disclosure of information. In the impugned judgment of the Division Bench, the High Court held that the Chief Information Commissioner acted beyond his jurisdiction by passing the impugned decision dated 30th May, 2007 and 14th August, 2007. The Division Bench also held that under Section 18 of the Act the State Information Commissioner is not empowered to pass a Page 11 of 14 direction to the State Information Officer for furnishing the information sought for by the complainant."
The Commission therefore is unable to adjudicate the adequacy of information to be disclosed under section 18 of the RTI Act.
With respect to Appeal No. 612177, the Commission finds that the CPIO has already provided the reply as per the available information. The Commission observes that under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005, "information" means material in any form which is held by or under the control of a public authority. The scope of the RTI Act does not extend to compelling a public authority to create information, interpret laws, provide explanations, or respond to grievances beyond the records held by it.
The Commission observes that the respondent CPIO has not denied any identifiable record that is held by it. Rather, it has categorically stated that the information sought is not available with it as the same does not pertain to its statutory functions. In view of the above, the Commission finds no infirmity in the replies furnished by the respondent CPIO and the orders passed by the First Appellate Authority.
The Commission further observes from the perusal of records that 567 Second Appeals/ Complaint cases of the Complainant/appellant against the same and different Public Authorities had already been heard and disposed of by different benches of the Commission. It is evident from the perusal of records that apart from the 18 complaints/appeal cases listed today, 79 Second Appeals/ Complaint cases of the present complainant are pending before this bench against the same and different Public Authorities.
It appears that the Complainant/appellant has grossly misconceived the idea of exercising his Right to Information as being absolute and unconditional. The approach of the Complainant/appellant is against the spirit of the RTI Act and clogging the valuable time and resources of the Public Authorities. The respondent has pleaded for remedy against repeated and humongous number of RTI applications and Appeals by the same person. Moreover, the Commission would like to place its reliance to the OM No. 1/18/2011-IR of DoP&T dated 16.09.2011 and the judgment pronounced by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of CBSE and Anr. Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 6454/2011 wherein it was held as under :
Page 12 of 14"The nation does not want a scenario where 75% of the staff of public authorities spends 75% of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of public authorities prioritising 'information furnishing' at the cost of their normal and regular duties.
The act of the Complainant/Appellant in filing a series of RTI applications and inundating the CPIOs with numerous RTI queries is not in keeping with the spirit of the RTI Act and is hereby admonished.
Further, the Complainant was not present during the hearing before the Commission, neither he has filed any written submissions nor any re- joinder to the written submissions of the respondents, which indicates that he is not interested in pursuing the matter further.
In view of the above-said observations, and in view of the fact that that the response of the respondent CPIO's in all the above cases is found to be appropriate, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in the instant matters.
With the above observations, the instant Complaints and Appeal are disposed of.
SD/-
SANJEEV KUMAR JINDAL (संजीवकुमारिजंदल) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) date: 23.02.2026 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणतस ािपत ित) (Col. Prabhat Kumar) Dy Registrar 011- 26107051 Page 13 of 14 Addresses of the Parties:
1. CPIO Veternary Council of India A-Wing, Second Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066.
2. Shri NareshKadyan Page 14 of 14 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)