High Court Kerala High Court

A.L.Raghunath vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 12 November, 2010

Kerala High Court
A.L.Raghunath vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 12 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25486 of 2009(E)


1. A.L.RAGHUNATH, EXECUTIVE MEMBER,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE TAHSILDAR, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD.

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, COYALMANNAM,

4. THE ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD OF INDIA,

5. THE SOCIETY OF PREVENTION OF CRUELTY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.)

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.JAJU BABU

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN

 Dated :12/11/2010

 O R D E R

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan

&

P.Bhavadasana, JJ.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

W.P.(C).No.25486 of 2009-E

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dated this the 12th day of November, 2010.

Judgment

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.

1.This writ petition comes to the Bench on a

reference by a learned single Judge.

2.The petitioner sought directions to the first

respondent to grant permission for conducting

cattle raise named “Kannu Poottu Malsaram” in

Chithali, Coyalmannam Panchayat, Alathur,

Palakkad District. The writ petition related to

the programme on 24.8.2010. The issue is referred

for consideration of the Bench as the learned

single Judge saw conflict between Exts.P3 and P5

judgments.

3.After hearing the learned counsel for the parties

WPC25486/09 -: 2 :-

quite in extenso, on different aspects of the

matter, we had issued an interim order on

20.8.2010 directing that the conduct of the

programme shall be only subject to all

restrictions as are imposed as per Ext.P1 order

dt.31.12.2008 as regards the Kottayi Grama

Panchayat and also the guidelines among the

directions contained in Ext.P5 as may apply to

“Kannu Poottu Malsaram” which involves only

animals and not carts. In spite of our specific

order in that interim order that they may do so

in the event of any violation, neither the Animal

Welfare Board nor the Society of Prevention of

Cruelty to Animals(SPCA) has placed any report of

any violation of the guidelines. We, therefore,

take it that there was no violation in the matter

of conducting the programme. The Commissioner

deputed by this Court in terms of the interim

order, has also filed a report recording that

there was no violation of any of the provisions

of Prevention of Cruelties to Animals Act, 1960

or any of the other directions during the

programme. That report is recorded.

WPC25486/09 -: 3 :-

4.In so far as the issues of law are concerned, we

need to notice that if cattle are put to a

competition as part of any entertainment;

different teams taking some prize based on

success; that would not, by itself, amount to

exhibition in terms of Chapter V of the

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. The

term ‘exhibit’, going by Section 21 of that Act,

means ‘exhibit at any entertainment, to which the

public are admitted through sale of tickets’ and

‘training’ means ‘training for the purpose of any

such exhibition’. Therefore, the concepts of

‘exhibition’ and ‘training’ for the purpose of

that chapter have an immediate and express nexus

to the derivation of funds through sale of

tickets for admission to view the entertainment.

5.We record the submission on behalf of the

petitioner that no amount whatsoever is being

collected from the public through sale of tickets

for admission to enjoy the entertainment that

would be generated by the “Kannu Poottu

WPC25486/09 -: 4 :-

Malsaram”. If that be so, there can be no

objection referable to any requirement to

register the animals for any performance in terms

of the Performing Animals(Registration) Rules,

2000 which rules are issued in exercise of power

under Section 38 of the Act. However, the State

and the Animal Welfare Board as the regulatory

authorities have to ensure that no cruelty

whatsoever is meted out to the animals which

would get involved in that programme.

6.We also notice that in Ext.P1, the RDO had

granted permission in so far as Alathur Taluk is

concerned subject to certain conditions as are

evident from Ext.P1. In that view of the matter,

we are sure that if the “Kannu Poottu Malsaram”

is held in terms of the provisions of Ext.P1 and

such further directions as may be issued by the

District Collector and the RDO, ends of justice

would be satisfied. We, therefore, direct that

the following conditions shall be observed in

connection with any “Kannu Poottu Malsaram” which

will involve animals, with no carts being

WPC25486/09 -: 5 :-

utilized:

1. No stick, whether of metal or
wood or cane will be used during the
race, but only whip chord made of
cotton or synthetic fibre of moderate
size and length, with handle, will be
permitted, if necessary.

2. The cattle/oxen are not given
alcohol before participation in the
race. If any oxen/cattle is found fed
with alcohol, it should not be allowed
to participate in the race.

3. The participants are not allowed to
consume alcohol.

4.Any action of twisting or biting of
tales of animals by riders are not
allowed.

5.None of the provisions of Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals Act should be
violated.

It is further ordered that if the Animal Welfare

Board of India or the SPCA has any specific

WPC25486/09 -: 6 :-

reason to point out for requirement of additional

conditions, they will be at liberty to place such

requirement before the appropriate RDO who will

ensure that such conditions, if in conformity

with the subsisting laws and requirements, would

also be included as directions for the programmes

in the years to come. The writ petition ordered

accordingly.

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,
Judge.

P.Bhavadasan,
Judge.

Sha/0712