Difficult To Decide Disputed Question Of Facts: Bombay HC Directs MCGM To Constitute Animal Welfare Committee To Resolve Stray Dog Feeding Issue In Society
The Bombay High Court has directed the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) to constitute the Animal Welfare Committee to resolve the issue regarding feeding of stray dogs within the society’s premises.
The Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by RNA Royal Park Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. against MCGM relating to the dispute between the society and some of its members regarding feeding of stray dogs.
A Division Bench comprising Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Kamal Khata said, “As it is, it would be difficult for us to decide the disputed question of facts which arise in this Petition. In the exercise of our extraordinary but summary jurisdiction, it would not be possible for us to go into the rival claims involving the breach of the feeding point protocols, the breach of timings, aggression by some of the animals, etc. These are matters that are best considered by the Animal Welfare Committee as provided under Rule 20(2) of the rules quoted above.”
Advocate Rahul Sarda represented the petitioner while Advocate S. Tondwalkar represented the respondents.
In this case, the petitioner-society contended that the respondent was indiscriminately feeding stray dogs beyond the appointed timings and locations, causing society to face a serious problem. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the dogs have become aggressive, and there are instances of them biting or attacking senior citizens and even small children who are helpless to defend themselves.
The counsel for the respondent disputed this position and pointed out that a mechanism was put in place by the order of the High Court. It was submitted that even the petitioner seeks implementation of this order, to which the respondent has no objection whatsoever. The counsel for the petitioner referred to the Animal Birth Control Rules 2023 and Rule 20 of these Rules is concerned with the Feeding of community animals.
The High Court in view of the above submissions observed, “The Animal Welfare Committee so formed by the BMC, will have to look into the Petitioner’s complaints and the 5th Respondent's response to such complaints and make a final decision. Sub-Rule 3 of Rule 20 provides for an appeal against such a decision to the State Government.”
The Court, therefore, directed the MCGM to constitute an Animal Welfare Committee to resolve the disputes between the petitioner society and the respondent, and, for that matter, any other residents on the issue of animal feeding, etc.
“This Animal Welfare Committee should be constituted within 15 days from today without giving any excuses. The Animal Welfare Committee, so constituted, must dispose of the Petitioner’s complaint within 15 days of its constitution. The Animal Welfare Committee may also look into any complaints that the 5th Respondent may have”, it further ordered.
The Court also said that the Animal Welfare Committee must hear the petitioner and the respondent or any other residents interested in feeding or caring for the animals in the society premises or in and around the society premises and that the said Committee must consider visiting a society’s premises to ascertain the position first-hand.
“The Committee must communicate its reasoned decision to the parties within a week after arriving at such decision so that if any of the parties are aggrieved it will be open to explore the appeal option. … We request Ms Tondwalkar, learned counsel for BMC, to immediately forward an authenticated copy of this order to the BMC so that there is no time loss in constituting the Animal Welfare Committee as contemplated by Rule 20 (2). These matters should be resolved without delay, given the Petitioner’s grievance that there have been some dog-biting incidents involving senior citizens and even small children”, it added.
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the petition and issued necessary directions.
Cause Title- RNA Royal Park Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2023:BHC-OS:11593-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Rahul Sarda, Avdhoot Prabhu, and Dhrumil C Shah.
Respondents: Advocates S. Tondwalkar, Gauraj Shah, and Samaa Shah.
