BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.03.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN W.P.(MD)No.3542 of 2025 Kavitha ... Petitioner vs.

1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

2.The Regional Joint Director, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department, Pudukkottai - 5.

3.The Commissioner, Pudukkottai Municipal Corporation, Pudukkottai.

4.The Superintendent of Police, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.

5.The Inspector of Police, Ganeshnagar Police Station, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the Respondents 2 and 3, his subordinates, agents, in any manner interfering with the petitioner’s right for feeding of stray dogs in Pudukkottai in the light of the circular issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India, dated 26.02.2015, under Section II(3) relating to feedings of stray dogs and ensure the petitioner’s right to feed to the stray dogs by considering the petitioner’s representation, dated 08.01.2025.

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Balasubramanian For R1 and R2 :Mr.G.Suriyananth Additional Government Pleader For R3 :Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram For R4 and R5 :Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate *****

O R D E R

The petitioner seeks for a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the Respondents 2 and 3 or their men in any manner interfering with the petitioner’s right for feeding of stray dogs in Pudukkottai in the light of the circular issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India, dated

26.02.2015, relating to feeding of stray dogs.

2.The petitioner claims that she is running a trust indulging in social service. One amongst it being feeding stray dogs and other animals in Pudukottai. She states that she is following the circulars of the Animal Welfare Board of India at the time of feeding. She further states that whenever a stray dog is injured, she immediately attends to the dog by giving it appropriate treatment.

3.She states that on 24.07.2023, while she was feeding stray dogs, certain persons attacked her violently resulting in a complaint being registered in Cr.No.233 of 2023 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Ganeshnagar Police Station, Pudukottai District. She claims that under Article 51A of Constitution of India, it is her duty to take care of stray animals and that she is merely fulfilling this duty. This is being objected by the respondents as well as by private parties. She states that she gave a representation to the respondents on 08.01.2025 and as there was no effective response to the same, she has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

4.When the matter came up for admission, Mr.G.Suryananth, learned Additional Government Pleader took notice for the respondents No.1 and 2, Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram took notice for the third respondent and Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate, took notice for the respondents No.4 and 5.

5.I pointed out to, the petitioner as well as to Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram, that the Union of India has come out with the “Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023” and that these Rules are statutory in nature. They have been issued in the exercise of Section 38(1)(ea) and 38(2) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and therefore, the reference to the guidelines given by the Animal Welfare Board might not be relevant as on today.

6.Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram, taking notice of the statutory rules brought forth by the Central Government, stated that he will bring it to the notice of the third respondent and come up with locations, where the petitioner can feed stray animals.

7.When the matter is taken up today, Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram has produced the communication sent by the Commissioner, Pudukottai Corporation to him. The said instructions are extracted hereunder:

“jpUkjp.v.ftpjh vd;gtu;> ghu;it 1-y; fhZk; tptug;gb>

njU eha;fSf;F mtu; cztspg;gij jLg;gjhf $wp khz;gik nrd;id cau;ePjpkd;w kJiu fpisapy; tof;F njhlu;e;Js;shu;. mjdpy; 3-k; gpujpthjpahf GJfN;fhl;il khefuhl;rp Mizahsu