IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2010 / 8TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1057 of 2010(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE CHAIRPERSON, PALAKKAD MUNICIPALITY, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD SRI.C.A.ANOOP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. K.V.K.MOORTHY, RESIDING AT 'SREEVALSAM', A.M.C.ABOOBACKER ROAD, PALAKKAD-678 014. 4. P.BALAN NAIR, RESIDING AT POOLOTHE VEEDU, KOMBANKUZHY, PALAKKAD-678 001. BY GP K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................... W.P.(C).1057/2010 ....................... Dated this the 28th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. Ext.P1 is an order passed by the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions in complaint No.1038 & 1043/2009 which essentially directs the petitioner to take steps for the effective implementation of Animal birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001. Petitioner submits that the Municipality does not have resources to comply with the directions in the order and for that reason, seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent, the State, to make necessary budgetary allotments to the Municipality for effective implementation of the Rules referred to above. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent to disburse necessary amounts for the purchase of ambulance, construction of Municipal pounds, employment of Veterinary doctors and dog catchers etc. 2. Admittedly these statutory duties are to be discharged by the Municipality and necessarily, the Municipality requires W.P.(C).1057/10 2 resources to meet the expenses that will have to be incurred by it. However, it is not possible for this Court to issue a direction to the State to provide budgetary allotments or disburse the amounts as sought for by the petitioner. Any such direction will be beyond the power of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. If as stated, Municipality needs financial resources to be made available by the State, Municipality will have to necessarily take up the matter to the 2nd respondent and it is for the 2nd respondent to do the needful in the matter. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the Municipality to take up the matter to the 2nd respondent for disbursement of funds. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs