Back
Cracks the Whip: 12 States and 2 UTs Get Final Warning on Animal Welfare Compliance
In a no-nonsense directive amid a long-running , a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi has put 12 states and two Union Territories on notice. They must file overdue within four weeks—or brace for " ." The order underscores the court's frustration with persistent delays in addressing pleas for functional
Animal rights activist filed in against the and others, pushing for enforcement of provisions under the . The PIL highlights the need for operational welfare boards in every state to combat animal cruelty effectively.
From Petition to Procedural Standoff: The PIL's Rocky Road
Launched over five years ago, the petition seeks directions for states to establish and activate Animal Welfare Boards, as mandated by law. Despite multiple hearings and extensions, responses from key states remain pending. The judgment lists the defaulters: Assam, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur, Meghalaya, Punjab, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu, and Ladakh .
Petitioner's counsel, led by Senior Advocate , has pressed for urgency, arguing that non-functional boards leave animals vulnerable to neglect and abuse. Respondents, including a battery of Advocates-on-Record for the Union and states, have cited administrative hurdles, but the court found these excuses insufficient after "sufficient opportunity given."
States' Silence Meets Judicial Impatience
While detailed arguments weren't aired in this hearing, prior proceedings reveal petitioners emphasizing statutory obligations and real-world animal welfare crises. States and UTs have dragged their feet, prompting the bench to invoke the Chief Secretaries directly. The , represented by multiple AORs, was tasked with more than just listening—it must now deliver.
No major precedents were cited in this procedural order, but the court's approach echoes its firm stance in PILs demanding governmental accountability, distinguishing between genuine delays and willful non-compliance.
Echoes of Frustration: Straight from the Bench
Key Observations from the order capture the court's tone:
"Despite sufficient opportunity given, 12 States and 2 Union Territories i.e., Assam, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur, Meghalaya, Punjab, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Dadar and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu and Ladakh have not yet filed their counter affidavits."
"Their Chief Secretaries are directed to ensure that counter affidavits, with advance copy, be filed within four weeks, failing whichshall be imposed."
"Thewill also file status report including with respect to the final decision taken, if any, on the draft rules."
These quotes, as reported in legal updates, signal a tipping point in the litigation.
Costs Loom Large: What's Next for Animal Welfare?
The bench ordered the matter listed on , giving defaulters a tight deadline. Practically, this ramps up pressure on state administrations—Chief Secretaries now bear personal responsibility. For the Union, it's a call to clarify progress on draft rules for these boards.
This ruling reinforces the 's role as a watchdog in PILs, potentially spurring quicker compliance nationwide. If ignored, could set a precedent for penalizing bureaucratic inertia in welfare matters, benefiting animal protection efforts across India.
