After a three-year-long RTI battle, the Central Information Commission (CIC) found “resolute and willful resistance” to disclosure of information by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) in the stray dog management case and imposed a law $25,000 penalty.
And it was also granted $The applicant was compensated $10,000 and ordered to proactively disclose records, including NGO payments and sterilization and vaccination data.
The order referred to the Supreme Court’s May 19, 2026 ruling on the stray dog issue, which stressed the need to closely monitor the implementation of animal birth control (ABC) measures through objectively verifiable data.
Also read: ‘On paper only’: Delhi not ready to implement Supreme Court ruling on stray dogs
CIC said prior public disclosure of information requested by the applicant would facilitate regular monitoring of ABC measures and enhance transparency and accountability.
The case arose out of a December 2022 RTI application filed by Akshay Kumar Malhotra seeking information about animal welfare organizations operated by MCD, sterilization and vaccination of stray dogs, dog shelters, complaints received by authorities and expenses incurred on these activities.
The information sought relates to the implementation of the animal birth control programme, payments to NGOs, functioning of animal shelters, monitoring mechanisms and expenditure of public funds, much of which should have been proactively disclosed under Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act, the committee said.
Also Read I MCD seeks space for dog shelters across Delhi after SC reiterates directions
During the show proceedings, Immigration Canada noted that the respondents “clearly evaded providing complete and relevant information to each of the inquiries and instead requested the appellant/complainant to contact the NGOs that carried out the work. These NGOs would clearly tell him that they were not a public authority and would refuse any request from him.”
The Commission also observed that despite its earlier directions, the respondent failed to place the information in the public domain and held that “the media office stands in persistent violation of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court for advance public disclosure as provided under Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act.”
“The respondent’s resolute and deliberate resistance to disclose the information to the appellant/complainant as well as to place it privately in the public domain is proven beyond reasonable doubt,” the committee said.
The CIC directed the MCD Commissioner to ensure proactive disclosure of information relating to animal birth control programmes, sterilization and vaccination data, payments made to NGOs, contracts, monitoring committee details, shelter and kennel information, complaints received and reports of actions taken.
The Committee also took note of the applicant’s allegations that the disclosure of his personal data to third parties had led to intimidation and harassment as he sought information relating to the management of stray dogs in his area.
It noted that proactive disclosure of this information would reduce the potential for “intimidation and harassment of individual information seekers.”
Read also I SC refuses to relax stray dog directive, orders strict implementation
Granting compensation $In Case 10,000, the Commission said the applicant was denied timely access to information relating to “public health, public safety and the expenditure of public funds” affecting his district and was forced to pursue the first appeal, second appeal and show proceedings for more than three years.
“The respondent’s conduct led to unnecessary litigation and avoidable hardship for the appellant,” the panel said.
