JUDGMENT
Dalveer Bhandari, J.
(1) The need for replacement of the existing slaughter house facilities in Delhi has been recognised for over a decade and serious consideration was first given to this as early as ;in 1967. ‘ The question of construction of a modern slaughter house in Delhi has been examined by slaughter house experts from the world over the Fao Mission was of the considered view that the present facilities at the slaughter house are inadequate and unhygienic. The report has given following reasons to support its case. I)The most pressing need for new facilities relates to the totally inadequate and inappropriate location of the present slaughter house. Situation in the heart of the city is unacceptable because; -it is an unsocial activity that should be removed from residential areas; -gross movement of livestock into the centre of Delhi causes considerable traffic congestion. -serious public health risk arises from the large quantity of affluent for which urban sewers in old Delhi are not adequate. ii) The existing facility is physically inappropriate for the production of hygienic meat. Since the municipality has an obligation to the population in Delhi to make available public facilities for the preparation of hygienic meat, this obligation can be met only by replacement of the existing facilities. iii) The present site of some 3 hectares is far too small to accommodate the activities required in a livestock marketing and slaughter house complex serving Delhi. (The new livestock market and meat processing plant fully occupies a site approaching an area of 40 hectares.) iv) The traditional slaughter system is not conducive for maintaining high standards of hygiene and adequate veterinary control. This indicates the need for the introduction of production line technology to be introduced particularly at the potential scale of operation envisaged. v) Pre-slaughter facilities arc inadequate leading to: -poor ante-mortem inspection; -economic losses due to weight loss; -lowering of meat quality because of pre-slaughter stress and -difficulty in controlling and organising the functionaries and the slaughtering operations. vi) There is considerable wastage of potentially valuable by-products owing to – -inadequacy of the physical facilities for collection and handling of minor by-products. -impossibility of centralised assembly of minor by-products with the present dressing system and -absence of facilities for the processing of by-products on site and lack of space to establish such facilities within or near the existing slaughterhouse. vii) There is need to consider the new abattoir as part of a long range ” national plan to structure the meat processing industry in India to provide markets for low valued animals and to stimulate extraction and up-grading of livestock in general. viii) The existing facilities are totally unsuitable for the production of meat for export. There would be a considerable premium on exported meat, if it can be satisfactorily established that healthy animals have been slaughtered and carcasses dressed under approved and hygienic conditions. ix) The existing system of transporting meat in an uncontrolled fashion in open carts to the butchers and exporters premises is unsocial and leads to further risk of contamination of the meat.
(2) The Agricultural & Processed Food Products Export Development Authority was imp leaded as respondent in this writ petition. The Agricultural & Processed Food Product Export Development Authority is statuary body under the control of Ministry of Commerce Govt. of India. The object of this authority is to enhance and promote agro-products including meat products which is one of the scheduled projects under the Act. Cessation of meat and meat products exports would have serious repercussions on foreign exchange earnings and future share in the international meat export market. It is pertinent to point out that export of meat and meat products from Delhi region is around 50 crores per annum.
(3) Mr. Swaraj Kaushal, appearing for Apeda (imp leaded respondent) submitted that reducing number is likely to affect the export obligations and interest of the exporters. He further submitted that it is the statutory obligation of the Corporation to improve the prevailing conditions at the slaughter house And that the exporters cannot be penalised for the MCD’s lapse of not carrying out its statutory obligations. Mr. Sabharwal countered the arguments of Mr. Kaushal by saying that the slaughter house in question was not meant for the export of meat and no infrastructural facilities are available for slaughtering such a large number of animals and this is also not the responsibility and obligation of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to maintain the slaughterhouse for exporting the meat.
(4) Mr. Man Mohan, learned counsel appearing for Apeda (Agricultural & Processed Food Products Export Development Authority) also submitted that export of meat and livestock is regulated by the statutory body i.e. Apeda which came into existence vide The Agricultural & Processed Food Products Export Development Authority Act 1985 and this is in operation w.e.f. 13th February, 1986. In his application for intervention, he has submitted that the petition filed by the petitioner is a public interest litigation and per se there ought not to be any adverbial lis and the applicant would like to assist the Court with relevant facts, parameters and variables which .would go a long way in enabling the Court in passing appropriate directions in this case.
(5) APEDA’S object is to enhance and promote agro products including meat products which is one of the scheduled product under the Act Mr Man Mohan further pointed out that the export of meat and meat product from Delhi region has earned Rs 50 crores per annum. In the earlier petition, Cw 2267/90 M.C.D. submitted that unhygienic conditions were created partly because of overcrowding at this slaughter house due to additional requirement of meat for export. Thereafter, this Court passed an interim order on 19.12.91 directing that export wing should be closed w.e.f. 31.12.93. He further mentioned that even slaughter- ing of animals for domestic use should stop after 31.12.93 by which time the M.C.D. should put up alternative slaughterhouse at some other site. On the request of the applicant, Apeda, operation of these orders were stayed and ultimately the High Court in its judgment directed that the Idgah slaughter house shall be closed downw.e.f. 31.12.1993 and a modern slaughter house shall be constructed in any area away from the site before 31.12.1993. It is further submitted that the M.C.D. has acquired a big chunk of land of 40 acres for setting up a modern slaughter house. He has further submitted that stoppage of slaughter of animals at the Idgah may also affect the existing and future export potentialities. He also submitted that closing of the Idgah Slaughter House or its export wing would result in closure of ancillary industries leading to the unemployment of persons who are engaged in this business.
(6) Mr Man Mohan submitted that by increasing the fees for slaughtering, over one crore of rupees has been collected by M.C.D. but they have not spent any money on the improvement of the slaughter house. He also pointed out that duties and obligations as enumerated under various provisions are not being discharged by the M.C.D. He also suggested that livestock market must be immediately shifted. That would solve the problem to a large extent.
(7) We have carefully considered and examined the submissions of Mr. Kaushal and Mr. Man Mohan. The apprehension of learned counsel that reduction in number of animals to be slaughtered at the Idgah slaughter house would affect export of meat, is not well founded. There are large-number of slaughter houses all over the country and some of them have been recently set up with the latest modern technology. Those slaughter houses can take care of the export obligations. In case wholesome and fresh meat is supplied, then eventually our exports would increase.
(8) We have also heard Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for Buffaloes Welfare Association. He also argued that number of animals to be slaughtered should not bereduced. There is no merit in the submission of Mr. Rohtagi that the petitioner or the lawyers’ committee want to change the food habits of the residents of Delhi. The purpose of filing this petition is not to change the food habits of Delhi residents. This is also not the object of the suggestions of the lawyers’ committee report either. The petition has been filed primarily to seek direction from the court so that the prevalent hygienic and sanitation conditions at the Idgah slaughter house can be improved, and residents of Delhi can get wholesome and fresh meat.
(9) Mr. Mehta submitted that the prevailing conditions at the slaughter house are posing serious threat to the lives and health of millions of residents of Delhi, and adjoining areas, therefore, in order to improve the prevailing conditions even ‘if some inconvenience is caused for the time being, then also the residents must be prepared to face the inconvenience in the larger public interest. Mr. Mehta rightly submitted that deficiency, if any, can be replenished by getting the meat from other slaughter houses in vans having facilities of cold storage, the way milk is brought from various States to Delhi.
(10) Mr. S.N. Marwah, appearing for imp leaded respondent Mr. Soni, submitted that supply of wholesome and clean drinking water is part of the fundamental rights of the residents of Delhi, as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. This fundamental right of the residents of Delhi and of adjoining areas is flagrantly violated by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, by not providing wholesome and clean drinking water. When according to the petitioner,13000 litres of blood and other effluents from the said slaughter house, are permitted to be discharged in the Yamuna river, then how the M.C.D. is ensuring supply of wholesome and clean water to the residents of Delhi.
(11) Mr. Marwaha placed reliance on M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, to demonstrate that every citizen has aright to fresh air and to live in pollution free environment.
(12) Mr. Marwaha further submitted that continuation of the Idgah slaughter house is perpetuating tremendous problems for the residents of the locality and school children. Nauseating and foul smell is making it extremely difficult for the school children and residents to tolerate such air pollution any longer.
(13) We have carefully examined the petitioner’s averments in the petition.
(14) The petitioner has placed on record 15 coloured photographs. For convenience, the photographs have been numbered from I to 15. Photograph no.1 depicts rows of slaughtered animals and dirt. From this photograph, it is clear that the blood was freely flowing on the floor. The second photograph depicts slaughter animals lying in blood and urine flowing all around. The third photograph depicts slaughtered buffaloes with free flowing of blood. The fourth photograph depicts large number of carcasses lying in the heap of filth. The fifth photograph depicts pigs being slaughtered in the most barbaric way. The sixth photograph shows viscera and other organs under most unhygienic conditions in a small pond. The seventh photograph shows skinning of animals carried out under unhygienic condition. Even skin of semi-conscious animals is taken out. The eighth photograph shows a single rope which passed through the nostrils so that they cannot move. The ninth photograph depicts that large number of buffaloes are virtually lying dead. The tenth photograph shows a buffalo lying completely exhausted in a heap of filth, garbage and mud. The eleventh photograph shows intestines, stomach and internal organs lying in open. The twelfth photograph shows that large number of buffaloes have been loaded in cycle rickshaw in most cruel way. The thirteenth photograph shows rods being inserted in buffaloes. The fourteenth photograph shows that large number of animals are loaded in a truck in a most barbaric way, with the rope passing through their nostrils so that they cannot move. The fifteenth photograph shows that in one truck dozens of large animals are put in the most inhuman manner.
(15) Similarly, large number of photographs have been placed bylawyers’ committee, which also depicts extremely pathetic unhygienic and inhuman condition prevalent at the slaughter house. All the photographs and video film were taken in the presence of butchers and other functionaries of the slaughterhouse. The video cassette and the photographs depict extremely horrible, unhygienic, distressing and disgusting conditions prevalent at the slaughterhouse. There is no semblance of hygienic conditions prevalent there. Animals are slaughtered in most inhuman and barbaric manner. It seems the effort is not to reduce the avoidable pain but to inflict as much pain and torture as possible. Some photographs depict the filth almost up to the ankle level.
(16) It was with extreme difficulty we could see these photographs and witness the video cassette. It requires enormous courage to see the video cassette.
(17) In answer to show cause, reply affidavit has been filed by Dr. R.K. Bhargava on 29th January, 1993. It is unfortunate that in para 5 of the affidavit. Dr. Bhargava tried to give impression that sanitation conditions are proper and animals are properly examined. The relevant portion is reproduced below: "THE precautions for maintaining sanitation and proper technical examinations of animals are being taken in the existing facilities available at the slaughter house." (18) In para 6 of the affidavit, he has mentioned, as under:- "IT is denied that animals are butchered in most cruel manner and under unhygienic condition in busy market and residential area in broad day light in full knowledge of the respondent." (19) The responsible officers of Government and public undertakings are expected to give true and correct picture of the conditions prevalent. There is no doubt that Dr. Bhargava in his affidavit has deliberately not depicted the true and correct picture of the conditions prevalent at the slaughterhouse. The trust and credibility of the public institutions are eroded in this manner. (20) When we test the petitioner's averments with large number of photographs placed on. record by the petitioner and by the lawyers' committee, then conclusion becomes irresistible that the prevailing conditions at the Idgah slaughterhouse are most unhygienic, inhuman, dreadful and horrifying. (21) The said slaughter house is also posing serious problems of water and air pollution in the city. (22) The petitioner has categorically averred that about 13000 litres of blood from the said slaughter house joins river Yamuna every day. The slaughtering of animals is done in most unhygienic conditions, filthy interiors, littered with amalgam of urine, dung, blood and viscera. Flies, maggots and roaches cause pollution in the water and air leading to serious health hazard. Effluents discharged in open drains and sewers go to Okhla and many times without even partial treatment joins the river Yamuna. (23) In reply affidavit. Dr. R.K. Bhargava, Manager, Slaughter House, Municipal Corporation of Delhi has of course not accepted the averments but the relevant portion of reply is reproduced hereinunder: "THE waste water from the slaughter house is put in the supply line which is connected through a close conduit sewer system from slaughterhouse to Okhla Treatment Plant, where effluent plant has been installed and the water is discharged in river Yamuna only after. treatment."
(24) Admittedly, the waste water joins river Yamuna, the main source of water supply in Delhi. The only question remains, whether it joins river Yamuna after full treatment or partial treatment or without any treatment. It is difficult to completely adjudicate upon the conflicting claims of the parties in these proceedings but after seeing large number of colour photographs and video film and the report of the Lawyers’ Committee, we can safely come to the conclusion that conditions prevalent at the slaughter house are most unhygienic and are posing serious threat to life and health of entire population of Delhi, and particularly to the large meat-eating population of Delhi.
(25) In order to improve the prevailing conditions in the larger public interest, we deem it appropriate to give following directions:- 1)The Municipal Corporation of Delhi must ensure supply of wholesome and pure drinking water to the residents of Delhi, and adjoining areas. The Administrator, of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi must set up a committee of experts to ensure supply of wholesome and pure water. The committee must send its monthly report to the high-powered Committee, set up by this court. 2) The Idgah slaughter house must he closed as directed by the judgment in C.W.P.N0.2267/90, C.W.P.158/91 and C.W.P.830/92 on 1-10-1992, but if for any reason it continues for some time, in that event, for maintaining at least the minimum standard of hygiene and sanitation, number of animals slaughtered must be reduced to 2500 per day i.e. 2000 sheeps/goats and 500 buffaloes, as suggested hy the Lawyers’ committee. The Administrator, M.C.D. is directed to ensure meticulous compliance of these directions and submit a monthly report to the Committee. 3) Children below the age of 18 years shall not he allowed to work in the slaughter house. 4) The M.C.D. is directed to take necessary steps to stop illegal slaughtering. 5) licenses be issued to the butchers by the M.C.D. within three months from today, and the M.C. D. may also prescribe necessary conditions for ensuring the object of hygienic conditions and to provide wholesome meat to the meat eating population of Delhi. 6) The M.C.P. is directed to appoint adequate number of veterinary doctors for the purpose ;of proper ante-mortem examination of animals. 7) Slaughtering hours must be fixed and strictly maintained, so that sufficient time is left for cleaning the abattoir and the other sections of the slaughter house. 8) The M.C.D. shall ensure anti-mortem medical examination of the animals. 9) The M.C.D. must ensure compliance of the provisions and rules framed there under regarding minimum prescribed age of animals before they are slaughtered. 10) The M.C.D. must ensure supply of adequate drinking water for the livestock and for washing and chicaning the abattoir, and other sections of the slaughter house. 11) The maximum number of animals allowed to be curried in open trucks must not exceed 40 goats/sheep’s and 4 buffaloes as specified by the Notification No.F.I 8(57-57) issued by the Development Commissioner, Delhi Administration, ]on September 21, 1961. 12) The M.C.D. must ensure proper light, electricity, fans and coolers, in various sections of the slaughter house. 13) Compounding fee in respect of sheep/goats is increased from Rs.50.00 to Rs.500/ and for buffaloes from Rs. 200.00 to Rs.2000.00 as suggested bylawyers’ committee. 14) The M.C.D. is directed to frame comprehensive bye-laws/rules for the smooth functioning of slaughter house within three months. In preparing bye-laws and rules, emphasis be given to avoid unnecessary distress and pain to the animal and provide humane conditions even to animals awaiting their slaughter.
(26) We would like to place on record our sense of appreciation for the three learned advocates, namely, 1) Mr. Raj Panjwani, 2) Mr. Atul Nanda and 3) Ms.Seema Midha, who on our request visited various sections of the slaughter house and submitted a meticulous and comprehensive report. Despite the fact, that because of the prevalent conditions, the members of the lawyers’ committee fell sick and their stomach turned squeamish, even then they completed the report and submitted the same with large number of coloured photographs and video cassette. The committee’s report has provided us true and correct picture regarding prevailing conditions at the slaughter house and helped us in deciding this petition.
(27) We would also like to place on record our deep sense of appreciation to the petitioner for filing petition regarding the matter which very vitally concern all of us. The petitioner has made earnest efforts in preparing such a detailed and meticulous petition, and placed on record large number of photographs with the sole idea of improving the prevailing conditions at the slaughter house in the larger public interest.
(28) We are of the opinion that strict compliance of the aforesaid directions is extremely vital in the larger public interest. It seems that despite large number of committees which have been set up by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, and recommendations from various quarters, the conditions at the slaughter house have not improved.
(29) Even the increased fee collected by the M.C.D. for improving the conditions of the slaughter house has not been fully utilised. Dr. Bhargava, Manager, Slaughter House, who filed reply on behalf of the M.C.D. has denied the averments of the petitioner and has not given true and correct picture of the conditions prevalent at the slaughter house. A large number of inspection notes have been placed on record by the M.C.D. to give impression that prevalent conditions are not what have been indicated by the petitioner. These inspection notes and reply affidavit of Dr. Bhargava totally stand discredited in view of. the Court Commissioners’ report. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi has also not fulfillled its obligations as envisaged under Sections 42, 405, 406 and 407 of the M.C.D. Act. Provisions of other Acts and Rules framed there under are also being violated in the day to day functioning of the slaughter house.
(30) It is unfortunate that directions given by the Division Bench Judgment of this court dated 1st October, 1992 in .C.W.2267/90,C.W.158/91 and C.W.830/92 have not been carried out. Therefore, in order to ensure compliance of our directions, we deem it appropriate to appoint a high-powered committee, headed by Mr. Justice J.D. Jain, retired Judge of this court. He is requested not only to ensure compliance of our directions, but also give necessary directions from time to time after hearing concerned parties. The District Judge, Delhi, is directed to depute one officer of the Delhi Judicial Service to assist the Committee. He would act as Secretary of the Committee. The M.C.D. is directed to provide necessary help and assistance to the committee in its functioning.
(31) The writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid directions.
(32) The petitioner is entitled to Rs.11,000.00 as costs to be paid by the M.C.D. within 4 weeks from today.
