IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2010 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 28436 of 2009(S) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- DAYA, (ANIMAL WELFARE ORGANISATION), REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, P.B. RAMESHKUMAR, MUDAVOOR P.O., VAZHAPALLY,MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM, 686 669. BY ADV. SRI.P.J.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, STATE SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (RC) DEPARTMENT, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,POLICE HQS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. THE DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDAY DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R7 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K. MEERA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.28436/2009 S APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION NO.ER 737/01 DTD. 1/03/2001 OF PETITIONER ORGANISATION AND ITS TRANSLATION. P2 SERIES:COPIES THE NEWS PAPER REPORTS AND ITS TRANSLATION WITH PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE OVER LOADING AND CREUL METHOD OF TRANSPORTATION OF CATTLE IN KERALA. P3: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.1617/06-G1/D DTD. 23/22/06 ISSUED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUVATTUPUZHA TO THE PETITIONER AND ITS TRANSLATION. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.PETITION/3416/07 M.S. DTD. 1/09/07 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUVATTUPUZHA TO THE PETITIONER AND ITS TRANSLATION. P5: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 1/07/08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss C.R. P.R.RAMAN, Ag. C.J. & C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 28436 OF 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair,J. The writ petition is filed as a Public Interest Litigation for directions to the various State authorities to prevent cruelty to animals while under transport. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner’s allegation is that animals brought to Kerala for slaughtering from outside States like Tamilnadu and Karnataka are transported under conditions which are in violation of the various provisions of the Transport of Animals Rules, 1978 prescribed by Central Government under Section 38(2)(h) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. Petitioner has not made regular traders or anyone transporting animals from outside to Kerala as parties in the writ petition. However, it is common knowledge that large number of animals are brought to Kerala mainly for slaughtering and for sale of meat in the local markets in Kerala. These animals are transported in large numbers only in trucks under W.P.(C) No. 28436/09 2 conditions which amounts to intrinsic cruelty to animals. The petitioner has produced various photographs of animals under transport in trucks which clearly prove that more than the permitted number of animals are transported, leading to cruelty to them. 3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the Central Rules of Transport of Animals referred above and Rule 197 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, for transport of animals are as far as possible followed by the State authorities and enforced. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Animal Husbandry Department does not have even officers attached to all the check posts even to check the conditions under which the animals are transported. 4. From the photographs produced and published materials we are satisfied that the Rules are violated for the transport of animals probably because if Rule 197 of the Motor Vehicles Rules and Rule 56 of the Transport of Animal Rules with regard to space to be provided to each animal in the vehicle are followed then certainly only a very limited number of animals can be transported in huge trucks leading to heavy cost of transportation per animal which may W.P.(C) No. 28436/09 3 be unbearable for animal traders as well as for buyers. However, we see no reason why the Rule should not be implemented because the purpose of the Rule is to ensure compliance of statutory provisions, which is prevention of cruelty to animals. Therefore, certain directions are called for to prevent cruelty to animals under transport at least in future. 5. The directions sought by the petitioner is that there should be a Veterinary Doctor or a representative of the Animal Husbandry Department posted in every border check post. The main direction sought by the petitioner is that the Government should be directed to frame rules for the transport of animals without causing any cruelty to them. The learned Government Pleader has referred to G.O.(Ms) 50/85 dated 14.2.1985 where the Government has adopted the above Central Rules for transport of animals to Kerala. Since the comprehensive Rules framed by the Central Government are adopted by the State Government, there is no need for us to issue any direction to the Government to frame separate rules. However, we feel that the rules framed under the Central Act by the Central Government and adopted by the State for transport of animals are W.P.(C) No. 28436/09 4 not for animals transported for slaughtering but are mainly for animals to be reared and protected. Of course, so far as the Transport Rules are concerned, there is no distinction between the purpose of transport of the animals because irrespective of the purpose of transport whether it be for rearing or for slaughtering, no cruelty should be shown to them during transport which is what the Rules seek to achieve. The transport of animals in violation of the Rules therefore will certainly lead to pain and suffering to the animals which has to be necessarily prevented. However, we feel that a realistic approach has to be taken keeping in mind the steady transport of thousands of animals from outside Kerala to the Sate for slaughtering and for sale of meat. The meat market in Kerala certainly helps the farmers in other states to get a fair price for their abandoned animals. Certainly Rule 56 (c) of the Transport of Animals Rules prohibits transport of more than six cattle in a goods vehicle. In fact, the space to be provided for transport of cattle in a truck under Rule 50 of the Transport of Animal Rules and Rule 197 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules is 2 Sq. meters and 2.43 x .92 Sq. metres respectively, which really make it impossible for the traders W.P.(C) No. 28436/09 5 and transporters to run the business viably. What is required is only the minimum comfortable space for every cattle under transport so that it does not have any suffering in the course of transport. The Rules provide for provision for food as well as water in the vehicle in which the animal is transported. Further medical fitness certificate is also required for the transport of animals. It is not known whether all these are practically possible for transport of animals from Tamil Nadu as well as from Karnataka which can be completed within a period of maximum 8 to 10 hours. If transport is during night probably the need for food and water may not be as much as what is required at the time of transport during day time. In fact, in our view in order to make the transport viable for the traders, at least two tier or three tier vehicles should be used for transport so that large number of animals can be transported in a single vehicle providing sufficient floor space for each one to occupy. These are matters not taken into account when the Rules were framed because such routine interstate mass transport of animals for slaughtering would not have been contemplated by the Central Government while framing rules. In fact, the transport of animals in such number is a W.P.(C) No. 28436/09 6 unique feature only in the south that too for transport to Kerala probably because of the large demand of meat in Kerala. The argument made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that State should provide Veterinary Doctor or officials of the Animal Husbandry Department to ensure compliance of the rules in the transport of animals at the border check post, in our view, is not required because for the enforcement of the basic rules no expertise is required. Further, Rule 197 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules which also deals with transport of animals in goods carriages provides for its monitoring by the motor vehicles department. We therefore feel that wherever the officials of the Animal Husbandry Department are not engaged, the officials of the Motor Vehicles Department have to be authorised to ensure compliance of Rule 197 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules and the provisions of the transport of animals rules by the traders or transporters of animals. 6. The learned Government Pleader submitted that various agencies like societies for prevention of cruelty to animals and other authorised agencies are posted to inspect the animals under transport and to inform the concerned authorities for taking action for W.P.(C) No. 28436/09 7 violation of the rules. We therefore dispose of the writ petition by directing the Transport Commissioner and the Director of Animal Husbandry together to consider the provisions of the Rules referred above and issue guidelines in a practical and realistic manner to prevent cruelty to animals while under transport and the guidelines should be prepared and issued by them within one month form the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the same shall be strictly enforced to see that no cruelty is caused to animals under transport. If the guidelines prescribed require incorporation in the rules, the Government should take steps to make or amend Rules. So far as the health of the animals are concerned, it is for the licensing authority to test and certify that the animals slaughtered and meat sold are of the quality fit for human consumption. P.R.RAMAN, Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE vps W.P.(C) No. 28436/09 8