Central Information Commission
Baby Viyana Berwal vs Central Institute For Research On Goats ... on 7 April, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
निकायत संख्या / Complaint No. CIC/CIROG/C/2024/617784
Ms. Baby Viyana Berwal निकायतकताग /Complainant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Central Institute for Research on Goats
Date of Hearing : 03.04.2025
Date of Decision : 03.04.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 13.02.2023
PIO replied on : 01.03.2023
First Appeal filed on : 03.03.2023
First Appellate Order on : 15.03.2023
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 30.04.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 13.02.2023 seeking information on following points:-
1. "Energy be defined as Horse Power, why not to Elephant Power, Camel Power, Yak Power, Buffalo or Ox Power, Goat and Sheep power, whereas Project Elephant never defined Elephant Power, likewise Central Institute for Research on Goats, Central Sheep and Wool Research Institute, National Research Center on Camels, National Research Centre on Yak, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Central Institute for Research on Cattle, National Dairy Research Institute, National Research Centre on Equines along with Animal Welfare Board of India, Rashtriya Kamdhenu Aayog, National Board for Wildlife, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, National Biodiversity Authority, National Authority for Animal Welfare, hence supply me the Research papers, recommendations, decisions on Public Grievances portal, related to Elephant Power, Camel Power, Yak Power, Buffalo or Ox Power
2. Regulations under section 10 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 & Advisory on Educational purpose under section 9 (k) of PCA Act, 1960.
Page 1
3. Introduction of prototype of Vehicle to transport animals & birds as per Bureau of Indian Standards, keeping in view Central Motor Vehicle Act
4. Installation of animal scanner at every toll plaza, preventing cruelty against animals, performing our fundamental duties as defined under article 51 A (g) of Indian Constitution read with section 3 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960
5. License required to operate Horse Power but no authority or license required to handle Elephant Power, Camel Power, Yak Power, Buffalo or Ox Power, Goat and Sheep power, regulate them by law
6. Elephant Power, Camel Power, Yak Power, Buffalo or Ox Power, goat and sheep power, replaced by Horse Power as Motor Engine, left them jobless, Is it possible to replace each other, restoring their five freedoms
7. Provide me Mandate, objectives with functions along with point wise compliance of: National Research Center on Camels, National Research Centre on Yak, Goat and Sheep, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Central Institute for Research on Cattle, National Dairy Research Institute, National Research Centre on Equines along with Animal Welfare Board of India, Rashtriya Kamdhenu Aayog, National Board for Wildlife, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, National Biodiversity Authority, National Authority for Animal Welfare etc, as stated above.
8. Complete details related to Elephant foetus with Mother Elephant blasted with in Kerala, whereas dynamite was introduced by Nobel then justification of Nobel Peace Prize, please define."
The CPIO, Central Institute for Research on Goats (ICAR), Mathura vide letter dated 01.03.2023 replied as under:-
Point No. 1: "ICAR-Central Institute for Research on Goats, Makhdoom is not conducting research on draft power of male goat.
Point No. 2: Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act 1960 is well defining act published and need to follow by all institution related to animal keeping with compliance. CIRG being research institution the guideline framed for experimentation on animal be followed. CIRG has Institution animal ethics committee (IAEC) under CPCSEA, Gol for judiciously permitting the animal experimentation.
Point No. 3: Under the transport of Animal rules 1970 and rule revised 2009, the transportation of animal including sheep and goat has been described sufficiently to follow. Point No. 4: The statement given at point 2. Point No. 5&6: ICAR-CIRG, Makhdoom is not working on draft power of goat /buck for its uses in any way.
Page 2 Point No. 7: ICAR-CIRG, Makhdoom, vision, mission, mandate and objective area as follows.
Vision: To develop the Goat as a source of livelihood and nutritional security for the prosperity of India. Mission: Improvement in productivity of goat through research, extension and HRD support.
Mandate: To undertake research training and extension education program for improving milk, meat and fiber production of goats and to develop processing technologies of goat products.
Objectives:
To undertake basic and applied research in all disciplines relating to goat production and products technology.
To develop, update and standardize area specific package of practices on breeding, feeding. management and prophylactic and curative health cover of goats. To impart National and International Trainings in specialized fields of goat research and development. To transfer technologies for improving milk, meat and fibre production and value addition of goat products. To provide referral and consultancy services on goat production and product technologies.
Point No. 8: ICAR-CIRG, Makhdoom is only working on Goats."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 03.03.2023. The FAA vide order dated 15.03.2023 stated as under:-
"I have gone through your RTI Appeal on the matter. On bare perusal of the appeal & records, CPIO, ICAR-CIRG have already provided required information which was sought by you through your RTI Application.
With reference of the above, it is to inform you that the ICAR- CIRG, Makhdoom is only working on Goats research, the information related to goats is available on www.cirg.res.in and for rest of the informations the website of ICAR at www.icar.org.in may be referred.
Also, keeping the spirit of the Right to Information Act in high hands, if you so desire, you can get various available information related to goats from Farmer Single Window and Scientists during office hours on any working day by giving prior information to the office at your expense.
Thus, your appeal dated 03.03.2023 hereby stands disposed off."
Page 3 Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Complainant: Not present Respondent: Dr. A.K. Dixit, CPIO- Central Institute for Research on Goats- participated in the hearing through video-conferencing.
The Respondent stated that the relevant information from their official record has been duly provided to the RTI Applicant as per the provisions of the RTI Act.
Decision:
Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that appropriate reply has been provided to the Complainant by the CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act. Therefore, no malafide can be ascribed over the conduct of the CPIO and thus, no penal action is warranted in the matter.
Commission further observes that the Complainant has chosen to approach the Commission with a Complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act wherein the Commission is required to examine whether there was any deliberate denial of information by the public authority. It is worthwhile to place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Chief Information Commissioner and Another v. State of Manipur and Anr. in Civil Appeal Nos. 10787-10788 of 2011 dated 12.12.2011, relevant extract whereof is as under:
"...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 direction to the State Information Officer for furnishing the information sought for by the complainant."
"30. It has been contended before us by the Respondent that under Section 18 of the Act the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission has no power to provide access to the information which has been requested for by any person but Page 4 which has been denied to him. 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."
31. We uphold the said contention and do not find any error in the impugned judgment of the High court whereby it has been held that the Commissioner while entertaining a complaint under Section 18 of the said Act has no jurisdiction to pass an order providing for access to the information."
"37. We are of the view that Sections 18 and 19 of the Act serve two different purposes and lay down two different procedures and they provide two different remedies. One cannot be a Substitute for the other...."
Thus, the limited point to be adjudicated in complaint u/s 18 of RTI Act is whether the information was denied intentionally.
In the light of the above observations, the Commission is of the view that there is no malafide denial of information on the part of the concerned CPIO and hence no action is warranted under section 18 and 20 of the Act. No further action lies.
Complaint is disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाभित सत्याभित प्रभत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)