Bombay High Court: The present dispute was between petitioner, RNA Royal Park Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., and some of its members regarding the feeding of stray dogs within the society’s premises. The Division Bench of M.S. Sonak and Kamal Khata, JJ., directed Respondent 1, Municipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai, to constitute an Animal Welfare Committee within 15 days from the date of this order, to resolve the dispute on the issue of animal feeding, etc.
Petitioner contended that Respondent 5, one of its residents was indiscriminately feeding stray dogs beyond the appointed timings and locations, causing society to face a serious problem. Counsel for petitioner submitted that the dogs have become aggressive, and there were instances of them biting or attacking senior citizens and even small children who were helpless to defend themselves.
The Court took note of Rule 20 of the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 (‘2023 Rules’) and observed that Rule 20(1) referred to the responsibility of the Resident Welfare Association or Apartment Owner Association or Local Body’s representative of that area to make necessary arrangements for feeding community animals residing in the premises or that area involving the person residing in that area or premises as the case may be, who feed those animals and provides care to street animals as a compassionate gesture.
The Court also observed that Rule 20(2) provided that an Animal Welfare Committee should be formed where there was a conflict between the Resident Welfare Association or Apartment Owner Association and the animal caregivers or other residents. The Court stated that Rule 20(2) imposed certain duties on the Resident Welfare Association, Apartment Owner Association or Local Body’s representative.
The Court stated that in the present case, there was obviously, a dispute between petitioner and Respondent 5, therefore, the Court opined that it was necessary that an Animal Welfare Committee comprising the members referred to in clauses (i) to (vii) of Rule 20(2) was formed expeditiously.
The Court stated that the Animal Welfare Committee formed would have to look into petitioner’s complaints and Respondent 5’s response to such complaints and make a final decision and Rule 20(3) of the 2023 Rules provided that an appeal lies against such decision to the State Government.
The Court stated that it would be difficult for it to decide the disputed question of facts which arise in the present case and in the exercise of its extraordinary but summary jurisdiction, it would not be possible for it to go into the rival claims involving the breach of the feeding point protocols, the breach of timings, aggression by some of the animals, etc. The Court opined that these matters were best considered by the Animal Welfare Committee as provided under Rule 20(2) of the 2023 Rules.
Thus, the Court directed Respondent 1 to constitute an Animal Welfare Committee within 15 days from the date of this order, to resolve the disputes between petitioner and Respondent 5, and, for that matter, any other residents on the issue of animal feeding, etc. The Court stated that the Animal Welfare Committee must dispose of petitioner’s complaint within 15 days of its constitution. The Court further stated that the Animal Welfare Committee must hear petitioner and Respondent 5, or any other residents interested in feeding or caring for the animals in the society premises or in and around the society premises.
[RNA Royal Park Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Municipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2487, decided on 02-08-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Rahul Sarda, with Rahul, Avdhoot Prabhu, and Dhrumil C Shah, i/b Lex Services.
For the Respondents: Gauraj Shah, i/b Samaa Shah; S Tondwalkar.