This report is very important to understand the complexities students with disabilities encounter on different university campuses. Our Legal Correspondent New Delhi, Sept. 18: The Supreme Court today sought the Kerala government's response to a petition seeking to stop "unbridled" killing of stray dogs in the state.
Kerala authorities had directed civic bodies on July 9 to eliminate "ferocious" and "dangerous" dogs following reports of a spate in dog bites in the state. However, the Animal Welfare Board of India, a statutory authority, petitioned the apex court saying the order violated the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and that sterilisation of street dogs was a better option. "The terms 'ferocious' and 'dangerous' are not defined in law, and vesting every municipal employee with the discretion to choose 'ferocious' or 'dangerous' dogs at will, will necessarily result in intemperate, unbridled killing," the board's petition says. Counsel Anjali Sharma, appearing for the petitioner, argued that inhumane methods of catching and killing dogs had been widespread in Kerala for years but had not led to any perceptible reduction in the state's dog population or man-dog conflict. This, she said, shows that killing dogs - apart from being illegal and inhumane - does not achieve the Kerala government's stated objective of lowering the street dog population. This objective can only be achieved, the board argues, by following the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001, framed under the 1960 act. These rules advocate sterilising street dogs to lower their population and giving them anti-rabies vaccines to reduce the danger from dog bites. The board has challenged a Kerala High Court judgment, dated March 3, 2006, which held that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act gave local authorities the discretion to seize and destroy any and all street dogs. That judgment held that the provision in the 2001 rules - framed by the central government - that prohibits the killing of stray dogs was ultra vires (beyond one's authority). It was this judgment that the Kerala government had cited while issuing its July directive to civic authorities after chief minister Oommen Chandy had held an all-party meeting on the issue. "I am of the opinion that human life is more important," Chandy was quoted as saying last Wednesday, defending the move. But the board petition says that following the 2001 rules can "not only curb (the) street dog population if implemented in the manner prescribed, they can also effectively control the nuisance perceived as caused by dogs, and reduce incidences of dog bites and human rabies, while also ensuring that street dogs are treated in a humane manner." It cites Articles 51A(g) of the Constitution, which advocates "compassion for living creatures". The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and P.C. Pant has given the Kerala government four weeks to reply. SC scan on Kerala dog culling Our Legal Correspondent New Delhi, Sept. 18: The Supreme Court today sought the Kerala government's response to a petition seeking to stop "unbridled" killing of stray dogs in the state. Kerala authorities had directed civic bodies on July 9 to eliminate "ferocious" and "dangerous" dogs following reports of a spate in dog bites in the state. However, the Animal Welfare Board of India, a statutory authority, petitioned the apex court saying the order violated the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and that sterilisation of street dogs was a better option. "The terms 'ferocious' and 'dangerous' are not defined in law, and vesting every municipal employee with the discretion to choose 'ferocious' or 'dangerous' dogs at will, will necessarily result in intemperate, unbridled killing," the board's petition says. Counsel Anjali Sharma, appearing for the petitioner, argued that inhumane methods of catching and killing dogs had been widespread in Kerala for years but had not led to any perceptible reduction in the state's dog population or man-dog conflict. This, she said, shows that killing dogs - apart from being illegal and inhumane - does not achieve the Kerala government's stated objective of lowering the street dog population. This objective can only be achieved, the board argues, by following the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001, framed under the 1960 act. These rules advocate sterilising street dogs to lower their population and giving them anti-rabies vaccines to reduce the danger from dog bites. The board has challenged a Kerala High Court judgment, dated March 3, 2006, which held that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act gave local authorities the discretion to seize and destroy any and all street dogs. That judgment held that the provision in the 2001 rules - framed by the central government - that prohibits the killing of stray dogs was ultra vires (beyond one's authority). It was this judgment that the Kerala government had cited while issuing its July directive to civic authorities after chief minister Oommen Chandy had held an all-party meeting on the issue. "I am of the opinion that human life is more important," Chandy was quoted as saying last Wednesday, defending the move. But the board petition says that following the 2001 rules can "not only curb (the) street dog population if implemented in the manner prescribed, they can also effectively control the nuisance perceived as caused by dogs, and reduce incidences of dog bites and human rabies, while also ensuring that street dogs are treated in a humane manner." It cites Articles 51A(g) of the Constitution, which advocates "compassion for living creatures". The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and P.C. Pant has given the Kerala government four weeks to reply. -- Avinash Shahi Doctoral student at Centre for Law and Governance JNU Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
