Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 21905
[ 3183 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA, AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEN4BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT:
-
Between
1 Association for Animal Shelter and Rescue Aid AASRA, NGO represented by '
its President, Gowri Vandana, D/o. Baburao Vandana, aged about 42 years, Occ- Story Writer, R/o. Flat No. 301, Laxmi Nivas, near Golden Temple, Puppalaguda, [t/anikonda.
2 Syed Salim, S/o. Syed Rafi, aged about 40 years, Occ:- Animal Activist and member of People for Animals (PFA) and PETA lndia, R/o. H. No. G-402, Venkateshwara Nagar, Dammaiguda, l/ledchal tt/alkajgiri District, Telangana.
Petitioners AND
1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Special Secretary, tVlunicipal , Administration and Urban, Development Department, Telangana.
2 The Director of ttlunicipalAdministration and Urban Development Department,, 4th and Sth floor, AC Guards, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad Telangana- 500038.
3 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHIMC),Rep by its Commissioner, Tank bund, Hyderabad.
Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of l\ilandamus to declare the inaction of Respondent No.3 pursuant to Representations of the Petitioners dated 12-11-2025 and 1B-11-2025 as illegal, void and against the principles of naturaljustice and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to a) lmmediately suspend all ongoing capture and removal operations of community dogs from educational institutions, hospitals, sports stadiums, railway stations and bus depots until compliance with Directions 25(A), [THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY] (E) of the Supreme Coutl's order dated 07-11-2025 in Suo [/oto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5 of 2025 is achieved release and return dogs until suitable 'ehabilitation facilities where animals rec>ive all proper care as directed ry Supreme Court are ready.
b) Conduct and publish a comprehensive list iderrtifying all educational institutiorrs, hospitals, sports stadium, railway st;ttions and bus depots within Ht derabad as mandated by the Apex Court Jrder c) To crea [e and secure boundaries (fencing/wa ls/gates) at all listed premise:, d) To appornt and notify Nodal Officers for each of the se instituttons;
e) To crea e and notify designated shelters in fu I compliance with the Preventi,>n of Cruelty to Animals Act clearly ,listinguishing between
To ensu'e that sterilized dogs are not sent to Anrmal Birlh Control Units and unst:rilized dogs are not sent to these shelters -
g) To main ain and share real time records of all dcgs captured, sterilized, vaccinati:d and housed with tracking and photogral>hs-
h) To creat: a public helpline to share this information and online database for citizcns and welfare organizations to report violations and trace captured animals-
i)
To accord visitation rights to all concerned citizens especially those care takers w ro have been the primary caretakers of these dogs. Timings may be set and prominently published at all shelters and Animal Birth Care units-
j)
To take disciplinary action against the erring GHMC officials and contractors responsible for violation of Rules and lrrhumane practices.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition und()r Section 151 CPC praying that in the c'ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the writ petition, the High Cc,urt may be pleased to direct the Respondr:nt No.3 to immediately suspend all ongoirrg capture and removal operations of conrmunity dogs from educational institutrons, hospitals, sports stadiums, railway stations and bus depots until compliance with Directions 25(A) - (E) of the Supreme Court's order dated 07-11-2025 in Suo [\loto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5 of 2025 is achieved, release and return dogs untl suitable rehabilitation facilities where aninals receive all proper care as directed by Supreme Court are ready, pending disp osal of WP 35995 of 2025, on the file of tl- e High Cour1.
IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition undt:r Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the writ petition, the High Cc urt may be pleased to direct the Responrient No.3 to accord visitation rights to all concerned citizens especially those care takers who have been the primary caretakers of these dogs. Timings may be s:t and prominently published at all shelters and Animal Birth Control units, pendrrg disposal of WP 35995 of 2025. on the f ile of the High Court.
Nos.1 & 2 and tt/r. G lt/adhusudhan Reddy, standing Counsel for the Respondent No.3, the Court made the following.
Important Points
Subject
Animal Welfare - Municipal Administration
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Administrative Law - Principles of Natural Justice - Importance of assessing and following guidelines set by higher courts to prevent inhumane treatment of animals in municipal capture and removal operations. (Paras 7-9)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners sought relief against the GHMC’s ongoing operations for capturing stray dogs without adequate rehabilitation facilities in Hyderabad, asserting violations of the Supreme Court’s orders.
Findings of Court:
The court directed authorities to halt the capture of sterilized dogs until compliance with court orders, while enabling capture based on specific dog attack incidents.
Issues: The case raised concerns about the ongoing cruel practices for capturing dogs and adherence to Supreme Court’s directions on animal welfare.
Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored the necessity of following established guidelines on dog management to ensure humane treatment and public safety, emphasizing respect for judicial directives.
Result: The temporary stay was granted against the capture of sterilized dogs pending compliance with legal mandates.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K. G. Krishna Murthy, P. Sree Ramya
For the Respondents: GP for Municipal Administration, G. Madhusudhan Reddy
ORDER
Mr. X. G. Krlshna Murthy, learned senior counsel, appearing for Ms. P. Sree Ramya, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the respondent authorities are adopting cruel methods to capture dogs and in violation of the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court. Moreover, the respondent authorities are capturing sterilized dogs and sending them to unknown centres and there is no sufficient rehabilitation centres in Hyderabad.
Mr. G. Madhusudhan Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent - GHMC, requested time. However, the learned standing counsel submitted that directions of the Supreme Court are being scrupulously followed. There are frequent complaints lodged in several locations in Hyderabad regarding
Till then, the respondent authorities are directed not to capture sterilized dogs. However, this order shall not come in the way of the respondent authorities in capturing the street dogs as and when specific instances of dog attacks are reported.
