Central Information Commission
Mala Mattha vs I I M Udaipur on 19 May, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. (As per Annexure)
Mala Mattha ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
Indian Institute of Management,
Udaipur, Rajasthan ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal(s):
Sl. Second Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of
No. Appeal RTI CPIO's First FAA's Second
No. Application Reply Appeal Order Appeal
1. 633940 05.06.2024 01.07.2024 04.07.2024 01.08.2024 Nil
2. 630336 29.04.2024 28.05.2024 05.06.2024 01.07.2024 Nil
3. 622259 26.03.2024 24.04.2024 25.04.2024 24.05.2024 Nil
4. 620487 09.03.2024 07.04.2024 08.04.2024 06.05.2024 Nil
5. 620486 16.03.2024 12.04.2024 13.04.2024 10.05.2024 Nil
6. 619934 07.03.2024 04.04.2024 08.04.2024 05.05.2024 Nil
7. 619931 15.03.2024 12.04.2024 13.04.2024 10.05.2024 Nil
8. 619928 14.03.2024 12.04.2024 13.04.2024 10.05.2024 Nil
9. 616607 29.01.2024 27.02.2024 05.03.2024 03.04.2024 Nil
Note: The instant set of appeal(s) have been clubbed for decision as these relate to
similar RTI Application(s) and same subject matter.
Date of Hearing: 15.05.2025
Date of Decision: 19.05.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
Page 1 of 15
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/633940
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.06.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1) "As per the URL you provided, https://www.ilmu.ac.in/canine, we have perused the agreement. You have indicated the use of humane handling of canines in general policies. Kindly describe the procedures taken to put the canines in enclosures in the first place (as previously mentioned by you) when they put in confinement in the first instance.
2) When the canines were in the enclosure who had copies of the keys to the lock?
3) According to your response on RTI number IIMUD/A/E/24/00017, dated 4/6/2024, Answer number 7, all dogs are now released from the confined shelter.
Please share the exact date of the release of the canines and provide the updated SOPs and contracts being followed for canine care and well-being."
1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 01.07.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"1: To Lure the canines, they were given food inside the shelters and the shelters are always open.
2: The Shelters were never locked, hence no keys were required.
3: 27th May, 2024. Please refer to the Canine section on IIMU website for the SOP."
1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 04.07.2024. The FAA vide order dated 01.08.2024 stated that:
"1: Dogs were given food to bring them to shelter. UAF member lured them.
2: The shelters were never locked.
3: 27th May, 2024, the canines were released from shelters. As of now no new SOP is formed. The One on the website is the latest version."Page 2 of 15
1.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/630336
2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.04.2024 seeking information as under:
"Please share the guest entry/exit records of IIMU kept at the main gate for the month of April 2024."
2.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 28.05.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"We maintain no such records."
2.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 05.06.2024. The FAA vide order dated 01.07.2024 stated that:
"You may come to the campus and view the records under the supervision of the security supervisor."
2.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/622259
3. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 26.03.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1) "Diet of Dogs-Raw or cooked? Kindly provide monthly meal plan and photographs of diet you are giving to dogs with date and time.
2) Quantity of food of each meal according to age and weight of Dog? Please share all 20 dogs photos with meal (Date and Time mentioned on Photo)
3) After deworming liver tonic is must what liver tonic you are giving to dogs and please share photos and videos (Old dated with time).Page 3 of 15
4) As you opened your shelter in October 2023 its almost 6 months. Please share medical checkups diary of each dog. With all 6 month medical records of 20 dogs you adopted. With qualified Veterinary Doctor seal and sing on it.
5) Please share old dated pictures of dogs temperature check in medical checkups from anal area of dogs..." etc. 3.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 24.04.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"1: Please find the diet chart.
2: Please find pictures of dogs having food.
3: Please contact UAF 4: Please find copies of medical books 5: Please contact UAF...."
3.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 24.05.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
3.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/620487
4. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.03.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1) "If you adopted these dogs than you should have any veterinary doctor or compounder associated with you. Please proved his details. (Registration Number, Degree Certificate, Clinic address, Contact number) Page 4 of 15
2) In night in Case of any Dog medical emergency what facilities you have in your premises. Do any person appointed in night if yes than please provide name, photo, appointment letter, pay slip from the day of operations of shelter.)
3) IIM situated far from Udaipur city, So do you have any ambulance with you for medical emergency and if not do you have any agreement for ambulance with any other organization who is having medical facilities with them. Kindly provide copy of that agreement.
4) As you made confined shelter what is your plan to make dogs comfortable in summers and rains. Do they have Fan, Cooler facility with shed. Provide photos of all these facilities inside shelter?
5) All employees of IIM having transferable job what if you got your transfers than who will look after these dogs. Do you take them with you or not. If not who will be responsible person after you who can look after them..." etc. 4.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 07.04.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"Reply 1: Since the Institute has outsourced the wellbeing of the Canine's within to an external agency - "Udaipur Animal Feed", you are requested to contact them for all details of the veterinary personnel.
Reply 2: The Institute has provided the canines with safe shelters. All canines within the shelters are safe from external threats and attacks from other wild animals. In case of any emergency the institute will make provisions of transporting the animal to the government veterinary hospital-emergency wing.
Reply 3:1IM is an educational institution. An Ambulance with nursing staff is present 24*7 on campus for any medical emergency for humans in campus.
Reply 4: The Institute has made Shades using Tin Shed for all shelters. Apart from these shed's the institute has also planted young local trees to provide Page 5 of 15 natural shade. One Plunge Pool in each shelter is being made for the canines to bath and play into.
Reply 5: The canines are the institutes responsibility, hence the transfer of an employee will not affect the process of caring for the canines. Moreover, UAF, an external agency that is working towards the welfare of animals in Udaipur city has been contracted by the institute to ensure proper care of the canines..."
4.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 06.05.2024 stated that:
"1: The Institute has outsourced the wellbeing of the canines to Udaipur Animal Feed, Kindly contact UAF for further details.
2: The Institute has outsourced the wellbeing of the canines to Udaipur Animal Feed, Kindly contact UAF for further details.
3: IIM has an 24hrs ambulance for humans within the campus. For further query, please contact UAF.
4: The Institute has provisioned the shelters with a plunge pool, a covered are apart from the shed and has also recently put grass in the shelter to create a green patch for the canines.
5: The institute has sought services from UAF to look into the wellbeing of the canines...." etc. 4.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/620486
5. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 16.03.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1) "Please share Medical Records of All dogs as mentioned in your canine shelter SOP In Medical Care of Canine Point.Page 6 of 15
2) As per you SOP point Taking out Canine for Stroll Point number 4 Safe return.
Please share entries of dog in and out from day of operations of shelter. With person in charge details (name, appointment letter, pay slip from the day of operation of shelter.)
3) As per your SOP canine shelter gates will be locked and keys will be available with canine care team/security/helpdesk. But this is not adoption and this comes under confinement which is animal cruelty. Elaborate this.
4) Udaipur animal feed is engaging with you for running the canine shelter. Please provide there registration documents which is mandate for running a dog shelter as per AWBI guidelines as you are a central government body and if you hire a service provider than you must have all details of their."
5.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.04.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"1: Please find.
2: Please contact Udaipur Animal Feed.
3: The Shelters are not locked.
4: Please contact Udaipur Animal Feed for the same."
5.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 10.05.2024 stated that:
"1-2: All records are internal and cannot be shared.
3: The Institute has adopted the canines and has provided them with shelters. The canines are not under Lock & Key.
4: All records are internal and cannot be shared."
5.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Page 7 of 15Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/619934
6. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.03.2024 seeking information as under:
"Required: Name, Mobile Number, Mail Id, Postal Address of IIM Udaipur Board of Governors."
6.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 04.04.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"Please refer the IIM-Udaipur website https://www.iimu.ac.in/ "
6.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 08.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 05.05.2024 stated that:
"These are internal details and hence cannot be shared."
6.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/619931
7. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.03.2024 seeking information as under:
"Is this allowed to an educational institute IIM Udaipur that they can adopt the dogs and put them in confined shelter. If yes, please provide manual or SOP on this. As IIM Udaipur is running an illegal shelter in the name of adoption. After receiving of state board orders to release the dogs they are not ready for that. kindly justify this."
7.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.04.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"The Letter for investigating whether the canines are kept captive in IIMU was addressed to the District Collector's Office."
7.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 10.05.2024 stated that:
Page 8 of 15"The Institute has adopted the canines and has provided them with shelters."
7.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/619928
8. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.03.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1) "You run a shelter in IIM and claimed that you adopted dog's. How an institute adopted dogs? Kindly share process and documentation which you followed as per AWBI guidelines for adoption.
2) Please share food brand which food you provide to your dogs.
3) Please share payment receipts of payment made towards to Udaipur animal feed from day of operations.
4) As per your SOP you have 3 shelters. Kindly Share all (3+3) care taker details that stay there 24 *7 with their pay slips from date of operation of shelter.
5) Please provide all (3 + 3) care taker appointment letter, Photo, Police verification details and National ID card with their timing schedule (CCTV footage with OLD date and time) 8.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.04.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"Reply 1. The Institute was not aware that a formal approval must be taken from any local authority to adopt a Street Canine. The process to request adoption of the canines within IIMU from the local authorities will be initiated shortly.
Reply 2. Please contact Udaipur Animal Feed for the same.
Reply 3. The record is internal document of the Institute and hence cannot be shared.
Reply 4. Please contact Udaipur Animal Feed for the same Page 9 of 15 Reply 5. Please contact Udaipur Animal Feed for the same."
8.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.04.2024. The FAA vide order dated 10.05.2024 stated that:
" 1-5: All records are internal and cannot be shared."
8.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/616607
9. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.01.2024 seeking information on the following points:
1) "In accordance with SAWB letter no. F.B. 8() /2023-23/2616 and AWBI letter no. 9-06/2023-2024/PCA, dated 28/12/2023 and dated 5/1/2024 Orders releasing dogs have been issued. Addressing this, what steps have you taken?
2) According to the Dainik Bhaskar News Paper on January 11, 2024, you claimed that you had adopted the dogs, and you acknowledged this in a letter to AWBI.
However, in your canine shelter's SOP, dated October 1, 2023, you contained nothing of adoption. Would you please explain this?
3) If, in accordance with your letter, you adopted these dogs on the first day the institute was functioning, kindly submit all dog adoption documentation.
4) Please provide the name, phone number, and schedule of the full-time caregiver who stays with Dogs with CCTV footage. Is this person employed by IIM Udaipur? Kindly share his/her appointment letter with pay slip.
5) Why are the dogs in confinement if you adopted them all? Please elaborate."
etc. 9.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 27.02.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
Page 10 of 151: The Institute has responded to the letters vide email dated 29th Dec 23 to "Chairman_Sawb". and copied to the District Collectors office.
2: The SOP Version 1 was released before the process of adoption, however the SOP is revised vide Version 2 after the adoption.
3: The canines were not adopted by the institute during the initial years of operation. However out of compassion and care for all living within the campus the administration ensured that the canines are fed and given water everyday at a specific location.
4: Name: Dimple Bhavsar (******7449).
No, Ms. Dimple's agency (Udaipur Animal Feed) has been given a contract to look after the canines within the campus.
5: The canines are in dedicated shelters. It may be noted that the IIM Udaipur campus houses 800 students, and close to 50 families. These families have small children aged between 1 yr to 12 years average. Since these children often travel between houses and also go out for play in the open areas. It has been reported on multiple occasions that the canines have attempted attacks and also bitten a few children, students and staff members. Considering the safety of all members of the resident society within the campus and the safety of the canines living within the campus it was decided that all canines be shifted into large open shelters, where they can freely move around and also are safe. This not only ensured the safety of the residents and children but also ensured that the canines are now within a closed space and are safe from external threats such as leopard movement..."
9.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 05.03.2024. The FAA vide order dated 03.04.2024 stated that:
"Reply 1: The Letters only mentioned the general policies of keeping canine in shelters, they did not give any clear or direct instructions to release the canine from the shelters.
Reply 2: Please find attached.Page 11 of 15
Reply 3: We have not mentioned anywhere that we adopted these canine from the first day of starting operations.
Reply 4: Since the service has been outsourced to Udaipur Animal Feed and we have already given the details of the Founder in the last RTI, you may contact the Founder of the Udaipur Animal Feed to collect any further details you require.
Reply 5: The Institute decided to adopt these canines after the inspection teams visit. The canines are in open shelters, which can be accessed by anyone who is willing to take them out for a walk tied to a leash. However, due to many senior citizens and young children also walking, playing and roaming in the area, these canines must be brought back into the significantly big shelters after their walk, where they can be left free, without being tied down to a single pillar or post..." etc. 9.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
Hearing Proceedings & Decision
10. The Appellant remained absent during the hearing and the notice of hearing sent to her came back undelivered from the postal department, while on behalf of the Respondent, Arvind Sharma, CPIO; Yashwardhan, DPIO; Bhavinee, Legal Officer along with Sameer Kumar Sinha, Admin. Officer attended the hearing through video conference.
11. The Respondent reiterated the replies on record and submitted that there is no additional argument to put forth in these matters. Upon a query from the Commission regarding there being an anomaly in the response tendered by the CPIO & FAA in Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/63036, the Respondent expressed regret and confirmed the availability of entry/exit record of the main gate.
12. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of records, observes that the contents mentioned in the grounds of the instant second appeal(s) are cyclostyled except in Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/616607. These cyclostyled grounds in the other second appeal(s) Page 12 of 15 merely state as under and reproduce provisions of Section 4(1)(a); 4(1)(b), 2(j) of the RTI Act:
"IIM Udaipur denied to give information but Denial can only be justified on the basis of Sections 8 and 9 of the Act. The only exception to this is if giving any information would violate the provisions of the Constitution, in which case, the request for information can be denied."
Pertinently so, the queries raised by the Appellant through these RTI Applications do not strictly conform to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act as these are either rhetorical in nature or seek to interrogate the CPIO by asking for all pervasive clarifications and expressing surmises at many places. Yet, the CPIO has provided adequate clarifications and answers, which are found to be in keeping with the spirit of the RTI Act. The only exception is found in Second Appeal No. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/63036, wherein the CPIO & FAA have provided inconsistent responses about the availability of information and the same was clarified by the CPIO during the hearing. Similarly, exception is also found sparingly in cases where the CPIO has asked the Appellant to contact Udaipur Animal Feed (UAF) with respect to some RTI queries under reference.
Notwithstanding the above observation, the Commission cannot lose sight of the fact that the material on record bears stamps depicting the Appellant as an authorized signatory of a certain animal protection society, but the address provided for correspondence appears to be dormant as on date, and the Appellant has not even reached out with any request to amend/update their address. Therefore, it will not be out of place to assume that considering the absence of any specific grounds of second appeal(s), rather considering the mechanical contents of these second appeal(s); non-conformity of the queries to Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, access to information is not the concern of the Appellant and the cases have been filed as a matter of empty formality it seems. Therefore, no adverse action is warranted against the Respondent in these cases per se.
13. However, for the sake of propriety, taking a liberal view with respect to some of the RTI Applications under reference, wherever the CPIO has advised the Appellant to collect Page 13 of 15 the information from Udaipur Animal Feed (UAF), the CPIO is directed to provide a revised reply limited to such points by either providing the information, if available with their office or by procuring the same from UAF as per the provisions of Section 2(f) of the RTI which includes in the definition of "information"- 'information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a Public Authority under any other law for the time being in force.' The said revised reply of the CPIO shall be provided free of cost to the Appellant within 15 days of the receipt of this order under due intimation to the Commission.
14. The Appeal(s) are disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 19.05.2025 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ.पी. पोख रयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Indian Institute of Management CPIO, RTI Cell, Balicha, Udaipur, Rajasthan-313001
2. Mala Mattha Page 14 of 15 ANNEXURE Sr. No. File No.
1. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/633940
2. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/630336
3. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/622259
4. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/620487
5. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/620486
6. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/619934
7. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/619931
8. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/619928
9. CIC/IIMUD/A/2024/616607 Page 15 of 15 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)