Tanish Reddy

Alumni IIT Hyderabad (Batch: 2022-2026)

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

The university has the full legal right to collect video evidence because the Supreme Court of India strictly mandates that campus administrations clear public institutional spaces of stray dogs for student safety. Because the administration is legally accountable to the court, they are entirely within their rights to document individuals violating safety zones by feeding outside designated spots.

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

@Abhishe24736228 @PunitaS44575106 @IITHyderabad The mail clearly stated that feeding in common areas is prohibited due to student safety and hygiene concerns. It did not prohibit feeding at designated feeding points. Better know it first

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

@mh_rao2000 @PunitaS44575106 @IITHyderabad You have the reason why and proof to support the reason you state?

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

Now let us discuss the video you circulated.

From my understanding, the initial incident involved a warden visiting a hostel after receiving a complaint about a student feeding dogs in a prohibited hostel area. The footage involving students speaking with the HCU chairperson also appears to relate to a separate student protest concerning hostel issues, including dogs entering rooms, residential pods, and washrooms.

If footage from different contexts is being used to construct a particular impression, the public deserves a clear explanation of the sequence of events.

Why should viewers be expected to draw conclusions from selected footage without being given the complete context? If the complete video supports your interpretation, why not provide it and allow people to judge for themselves? If there is additional footage involving faculty members, it should be presented with its context rather than selectively interpreted.

**An edited video can influence public perception. It cannot, by itself, establish every allegation attached to it. Surely an advocate understands that distinction.**

Your claim about 76 dog deaths is even more serious. You have placed a specific number before the public and used it to question the integrity of an entire institution.

Where is the underlying evidence? Are these documented deaths? Have the causes been established? Do you have evidence linking them to deliberate cruelty, institutional negligence, disease, accidents, or other causes?

These are different questions requiring different evidence. If you cannot establish the circumstances, how can you expect the public to accept the implication that the institution is responsible?

**A serious allegation does not become a proven fact merely because it is accompanied by an emotionally powerful caption.**

I would also ask you to examine the institute's reported animal-welfare efforts, including vaccination initiatives and veterinary treatment arranged with NGO assistance. Here are two posts for you and the public to examine:

These links do not, by themselves, settle every question about animal welfare. Equally, however, allegations of wrongdoing do not erase evidence of welfare initiatives. If you intend to assess the institution fairly, you must consider both.

I have pet dogs at home. I understand what it means to care for animals. But I also understand that responsible care involves medical attention, hygiene, appropriate handling, and respect for other people's boundaries.

What I reject is the assumption that students who question certain animal-feeding practices must be animal haters, or that authorities enforcing residential rules must automatically be acting cruelly.

**You cannot demand fairness for animals while denying fairness to the people you publicly accuse.**

And why are major recruiters being tagged in a dispute whose facts remain contested? What purpose does that serve before the evidence has been independently examined? If your objective is to establish the truth, present the evidence and seek a fair investigation. If your objective is to encourage reputational pressure, then the public deserves to know why that is being prioritised over establishing the facts first.

You are entitled to criticise IIT Hyderabad. You are entitled to advocate for community dogs. You are entitled to demand an investigation into credible allegations.

But none of those rights makes you immune from questions about your own research, judgment, or presentation of evidence.

**The title of advocate does not make your allegations self-proving. It makes the need for accuracy and fairness even more important.**

So, before you question the integrity of IIT Hyderabad's administration, its faculty, or its students, I ask you to demonstrate the same commitment to evidence that you demand from them.

[IIT Hyderabad @IITHyderabad]

IIT Hyderabad strongly condemns the circulation of fabricated and misleading videos deliberately presented out of context. The allegations made against the Institute and its faculty member are false and baseless.

IIT Hyderabad has always stood for humanity, compassion, and animal welfare, and strongly opposes cruelty towards animals.

Such misrepresentation and dissemination of misinformation are unacceptable. The Institute is taking appropriate action against the circulation of this misleading content.

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

Ms. Punita (@PunitaS44575106), I have some very uncomfortable questions for you, particularly because you are an ADVOCATE by profession. I would expect someone in your position to understand the difference between an allegation, an assumption, and an established fact. Your recent post raises serious questions about whether you have applied that distinction before publicly targeting IIT Hyderabad and its administration.

**First, answer these questions before preaching to others about accountability and justice.**

1. Have you ever visited IIT Hyderabad and personally observed the situation you are commenting on?
2. Have you spoken to the students who actually reside on campus and experience these problems every day?
3. Have you personally questioned the authorities you are accusing, or did you decide who was guilty before hearing their side?
4. Have you examined the complete, unedited footage, or are you relying on selected clips presented to you?
5. What documentary evidence supports your claim that approximately 76 dogs died on campus? Do you have verified records of those deaths and evidence establishing their causes?
6. Have you established that students were penalised merely for feeding dogs, or have you investigated whether the penalties concerned violations of designated feeding arrangements and hostel regulations?

These are not insignificant questions. They go to the very foundation of the allegations you have chosen to broadcast publicly.

**As an advocate, how can you demand accountability from others while apparently expecting your own claims to escape the same scrutiny?**

I am a recent IIT Hyderabad graduate from the 2022–2026 batch. I have lived on campus. I have personally experienced the problems that your post appears to overlook. You are presenting a narrative to thousands of people about an institution and its students. What gives you the confidence to make such sweeping public accusations if you have not first established the complete facts?

Let me explain what your post conveniently leaves out.

Designated feeding points and shelters have been established on campus, approximately 500 metres from the hostels, according to my understanding of the arrangements. The stated purpose of these arrangements is to allow community dogs to be fed at designated locations rather than inside residential areas.

Yet your post presents the matter as though students are simply being punished for showing compassion. What about instances in which dogs are allegedly brought into hostel rooms, residential pods, and washrooms? What about the hygiene concerns, the shared living environment, and students who are uncomfortable having animals enter their private rooms?

**Do hostel rules cease to matter when someone claims to be acting in the name of animal welfare? Do students lose their right to privacy, hygiene, and personal safety because an animal is involved?**

I have personally experienced difficulties involving dogs approaching people carrying food. I have also seen dogs that appeared to require medical attention. On one occasion, while I was away at the library, I was informed that a dog had entered my hostel room. My friends shared videos of the incident with me, and I was told that the dog was undergoing treatment for an infection.

I am not a veterinarian and will not pretend to diagnose an animal from a video. But I have every right to question why an animal was brought into my room without my consent and to raise concerns about the arrangements being followed.

Have you considered the perspective of students who experience such situations? Have you asked them what happened? Or are their experiences inconvenient to the narrative you wish to present?

**Your responsibility to listen does not end with the people who agree with you. It begins precisely when there is another side to the story.**

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

@kusuma96111 @naralokesh @ncbn Due to the message word limit she couldnt send her contact number, Her contact number is
6302761378

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

@kusuma96111 @naralokesh The above mentioned Physical Education Director Paul is from Acharya Nagarjuna University, she is a air riffle shooter she is facing a very big trouble with him and he is not allowing her to play. I request @naralokesh garu and @ncbn garu to please help them.

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

@kusuma96111 @naralokesh The above mentioned Physical Education Director Paul is from Acharya Nagarjuna University, she is a air riffle shooter she is facing a very big trouble with him and he is not allowing her to play. I request @naralokesh garu and @ncbn garu to please help them.

[Pawan Kalyan @PawanKalyan]

The Truest sense of upholding Democracy is to ensure Fairness & Transparency in the Entire Election Process starting from Preparation of Voter List to the Declaration of Result.

Despite Election Commission’s clear instructions, several Volunteers across AP are being part of the door-to-door survey process along with YCP Booth Level Officers. This is violation of the Constitution & blatant abuse of power by the YCP in Andhra Pradesh.

JANASENA demands Election Commission of INDIA to investigate this and take strict action & immediate enforcement of the necessary rules in AP.
@SpokespersonECI @rajivkumarec @CEOAndhra

[Hail Prabhas @HailPrabhas007]

Most Mentioned Hashtags For Any Upcoming Indian Films On Facebook:-

1. #Adipurush: 120K+
2. #Salaar: 109K+
3. #Jawan: 84K+

Upcoming Noted Indian Films with Most Number of BMS Interests On #BookMyShow :-

1. #Salaar: 98K+
2. #Adipurush: 73K+
3. #HHVM : 50K+

#Prabhas 🥁🥵🔥

[Pawan Kalyan Youth Force @TeamPKYF]

@PawanKalyan 🙏

[Tanish Reddy @Sunse58982594]

@VishalKOfficial It has been a long time seeing you sir