“Meenakshi Khurana & Anr. Vs. UOI & Ors. – Writ C No. 27021 of 2024” confining dog feeders to feed dogs at designated feeding points as provided under law

23rd December, 2024 - 11:02 am Categories: Legal Case 0 Comments

Introduction

The unsystematic feeding culture within residential society has led stray dogs to obstruct the entire pathway and attack residents attempting to use the pathway at any time of the day thereby causing serious risk to life. This situation has rendered the society unsafe for its occupants, a majority of which are toddlers, young children and senior citizens. The Allahabad High Court’s ruling in the case of Meenakshi Khurana & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (WRIT – C No. – 27021 of 2024) highlights the way forward in management of stray dogs in residential societies by ensuring that the dogs are fed at the designated feeding points. Filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the case reflects the plea of Residents of Jaypee Greens, Gr. Noida for judicial intervention to ensure the safety of residents while maintaining the welfare of stray animals within the residential society.

Background

The issue arose from a stray dog attack on February 20, 2023, when one of the petitioners, was suddenly charged at by a stray dog in the premises of Earth Court Cluster, Jaypee Greens, Greater Noida.  The sudden attack by the dog had caused the victim a panic attack and she froze at the very moment, who was fortunately at that moment rescued by people nearby who came running and saved her from the dog attack. This particular incident was not isolated, as the society had been struggling with frequent problems caused by stray dogs, including attacks and blocked pathways.  These issues were primarily attributed to unsystematic feeding practices by the stray dog feeders who fed the stray dogs at pathways and in front of residences.

Such a situation rendered the society unsafe for its occupants, a majority of which are toddlers, young children and senior citizens which was also in utter disregard of position of law pertaining to management/welfare of stray dogs, which are described below:

• On April 18, 2023, the Central Govt. notified the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960, to address the issue of stray dog menace in the country. Under the extant Rules, the respective Local Bodies/Municipalities/Municipal Corporations/Panchayats are under an obligation to organise Animal Birth Control Programs for sterilisation and immunisation of stray dogs.
• Rule 8 (2) of Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, covers the manner in which the local Authority is responsible for deworming, immunization and sterilization of street animals.
• Rule 20 of the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, provides for the guidelines that It shall be the responsibility of the Resident Welfare Association or Apartment Owner Association or Local Body’s representative of that area to make necessary arrangements for feeding of community animals residing in the premises. Furthermore, the it has been provided in Rule 20 that feedings points shall be far from children play areas, entry and exit points, staircase or in an area which is likely to be least frequented by children or senior citizen. It further provides that where there is any conflict between the Resident Welfare Association or Apartment Owner Association and the animal caregivers or other residents, an Animal Welfare Committee shall be formed comprising of members such as Chief Veterinary Officer, Jurisdictional Police, Representative of RWA or Apartment Owners Association or Local Body of that area, etc to name a few.
• The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maya D. Chablani Vs. Radha Mittal and Ors (CS(OS) 277/2020) issued guidelines highlighting the role of RWAs and Municipal Corporations, and held as follows: “AWBI shall ensure that every Resident Welfare Association or Municipal Corporation (in case RWA is not available), shall have an Animal Welfare Committee; / which shall be responsible for ensuring compliance of the provisions of the PCA Act and ensure harmony and ease of communication between caregivers, feeders or animal lovers and other residents”.

In the instant case, the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA), after repeated follow ups by the Petitioner, inspected the premises of Jaypee Greens and had already identified four feeding points in accordance with the Rules. An Animal Welfare Committee (AWC) was formed, comprising representatives from the Association of Apartment Owners (AOA), FMD, & Security Department of Jaypee Greens, the Veterinary Officer, the Representative of GNIDA and the District Station House Officer, Pari Chowk.  Pertaining to a meeting held by the Animal Welfare Committee, it confirmed the already finalised four feeding points by the Health Officer, GNIDA previously, within the premises of Jaypee Greens and a formal approval by GNIDA’s was sought by the Petitioner for its construction at the said designated points within Jaypee Greens Society, Gr. Noida.

However, despite repeated reminders from Petitioner No. 2, GNIDA failed to confirm the construction of feeding points, leaving the petitioners with no alternative but to approach the Allahabad High Court for relief in the nature of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking directions to GNIDA to forthwith issue confirmation for construction of the already finalized feeding stations in the Jaypee Greens Society, Greater Noida.

Observations by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

On 27.11.2024, when the matter was taken up for hearing by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, it observed that it has examined the four feeding points identified by the Animal Welfare Committee and on a prima facie view, it appears that these four points may not be adequate for the purpose of feeding dogs in the vast area of Jaypee Greens, however, keeping in mind the urgency of the matter, the FMD of Jaypee Greens, Gr. Noida was directed to create the identified Four Feeding Points immediately within a maximum period of 7 days.

Recognizing the need for additional feeding points due to the large area of Jaypee Greens, the Court further appointed an Advocate Commissioner who was directed to visit the Jaypee Greens site along with members of the committee and suggest the Court more points that may be created for feeding of dogs.

The Advocate Commissioner in its Report dated 18.12.2024 observed:

• That all four designated feedings points were erected in accordance with the order dated 27.11.2024 passed by Hon’ble High Court.
• It was also recorded in the Report pertaining to current feeding practices and the points at which the dog lovers/feeders currently fed the community dogs (i.e., random/undesignated feedings points) were unsuitable and contrary to legal and practical considerations and observed that such feeding may create inconvenience for residents and do not align with the purpose of designated feedings points under Rule 20 of Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023.
• The Advocate Commissioner, with respect to Additional Feeding Points, recommended the erection of two additional Feeding Points 5 and 6, issuance of guidelines directing all feeders to use only the designated feeding points for feeding community dogs and a suitable mechanism may be established to deter non-compliance with these guidelines.

In purview of the above, the Advocate Commissioner recommended the following:

• Erection of additional Feeding Points 5 and 6.
• Guidelines may be issued directing all feeders to use only the designated feeding points for feeding community dogs.
• A suitable mechanism may be established to deter non-compliance with these guidelines.
• It was requested that the Hon’ble Court may consider monitoring the implementation of these measures to ensure compliance and welfare of community dogs.

Taking in consideration the recommendation by the Advocate Commissioner, the Hon’ble High Court in its order dated 18.12.2024 directed the FMD, Jaypee Greens, Gr. Noida, to construct two additional feeding points indicated by the Advocate Commissioner. The Hon’ble High Court further directed that feeding activities be confined to the designated four feeding points and that feeding times be fixed in consultation with dog feeders, the AOA, and the Animal Welfare Board. The Hon’ble Court has however kept the right to file objections to the Advocate Commissioner’s Report open.

Conclusion

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court’s decision in Meenakshi Khurana & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. sets a significant precedent for management and welfare of stray dogs in residential societies. By addressing both the safety of residents and the welfare of animals, the Court has provided a balanced and practical solution i.e., erecting designated feeding points for feeding of dogs and fostering coordination between the parties involved, and further ensuring compliance with animal welfare laws and promoting harmony within the society.

Author: : Rajat and Vishnu Gambhir, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.