{"id":73760,"date":"1996-11-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1996-11-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996"},"modified":"2016-02-27T01:43:19","modified_gmt":"2016-02-26T20:13:19","slug":"buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996","title":{"rendered":"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; &#8230; vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; &#8230; vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Kuldip Singh, B.L. Hansaria<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nBUFFALO TRADERS WELFARE ASSN. &amp; ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nMANEKA GANDHI &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t30\/11\/1996\n\nBENCH:\nKULDIP SINGH, B.L. HANSARIA\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t       THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996<br \/>\nPresent:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t      Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh<br \/>\n\t      Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice B.L. Hansaria<br \/>\nS.K. Dhokakia,\tR.F. Nariman,  Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Arun Jetly,<br \/>\nSr. Advs.,  Amit Dhingra,  Shakil Ahmad\t Syed, P.H.  Parekh,<br \/>\nK.C. Dua,  M.M. Isreily,  M.C. Uddin,  T.Qureshi, A.R. Khan,<br \/>\nS.P. Jha,  Ms. Sheil Sethi, (M.C. Mehta), Adv. (NP), Hardeep<br \/>\nSingh, B.S.  Banthia, R.C. Asthana, R.K. Maheshwari Ashok K.<br \/>\nSrivastava, Sushil  Kumar Jain,\t Advs.\twith  them  for\t the<br \/>\nappearing parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t O R D E R<br \/>\n     The following Order of the Court was delivered:<br \/>\n\t\t\t O R D E R<br \/>\n     These two applications relate to Idgah Slaughter House,<br \/>\nDelhi. The common prayer in both of them is to hold that the<br \/>\norder dated  July 8,  1996 passed in IA No.22 connected with<br \/>\nWp (C) No.4677 of 1985 does not have the effect of modifying<br \/>\nand\/or setting aside the order dated 19.2.1996 passed in the<br \/>\nconnected Civil\t Appeals, by  which interim  order of status<br \/>\nquo was\t passed, while\tgranting special leave. As the order<br \/>\nof status  quo is  in conflict\twith the order passed in the<br \/>\nwrit petition,\ta clarification\t has also  been sought\tthat<br \/>\nnotwithstanding the  later order,  the order  of status\t quo<br \/>\nwould continue to remain in operation.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   The order\tin the\twrit petition  relates not  only  to<br \/>\nIdgah Slaughter\t House, but  to 168 industries, of which the<br \/>\nSlaughter House\t is one.  By that order it was held that all<br \/>\nthe  168   named  industries  are  &#8220;hazardous\/noxious&#8221;\tand,<br \/>\ntherefore, a direction was given that these industries shall<br \/>\nstop functioning  and operating\t in the\t city of  Delhi with<br \/>\neffect from November 30, 1996. Direction No. (8) stated that<br \/>\nthe closure order shall be unconditional by adding that &#8220;(e)<br \/>\nven if\tthe re-location\t of industries\tis not complete they<br \/>\nshall stop  functioning in  Delhi with\teffect from November<br \/>\n30, 1996.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.   As the  aforesaid order is relatable to 168 industries,<br \/>\nit has\tto be seen whether any exception can be made insofar<br \/>\nas the\tSlaughter House is concerned to permit it to operate<br \/>\nand function  beyond November 30, 1996. It is worth pointing<br \/>\nout that  when the  Inter Locutory  Application in  the Writ<br \/>\nPetition was  being heard,  nobody had appeared on behalf of<br \/>\nthe Slaughter  House,  despite\tample  opportunities  having<br \/>\nbeen given.  this apart,  perusal of the order dated July 8,<br \/>\n1996 shows  that that had come to be passed after this court<br \/>\nwas satisfied beyond doubt regarding the bazardous nature of<br \/>\nthe Slaughter  House, because  of what\twas found by Central<br \/>\nPollution Control  Board, Delhi\t Pollution Control Committee<br \/>\nand a Special Committee Constituted by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   Further, insofar as the Slaughter House is concerned, a<br \/>\nDivision  Bench\t of  Delhi  High  Court\t had,  as  early  as<br \/>\n1.10.1992 by  its judgment  in CW  Nos. 2267\/90,  158\/91 and<br \/>\n130\/92, directed, inter alia, that the Slaughter House shall<br \/>\nbe closed  with effect\tfrom December  31, 1993\t or from any<br \/>\nearlier date which may be fixed by the Court keeping in view<br \/>\nthe facts  and circumstances  which may\t arise\tbefore\tthat<br \/>\ndate. The  Delhi High  Court came  to be seized with another<br \/>\npetition on the same subject filed by Maneka Gandhi, who had<br \/>\ninitially  approached  this  Court  by\tmaking\ta  grievance<br \/>\nregarding the  &#8220;unhgienic, inhuman  and horrible  conditions<br \/>\nprevalent at  Idgah Slaughter  House of\t Delhi.&#8221; This  Court<br \/>\ndirected the  High Court  to dispose  of  the  petition.  By<br \/>\njudgment dated\t27th January,  1995 in Civil Writ No.2961\/92<br \/>\nanother Division  Bench, inter\talia, ordered for closure of<br \/>\nSlaughter House\t on or\tbefore 31.12.1995. The aforesaid two<br \/>\nappeals have  challenged the  later judgment  of Delhi\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt in  which, while\tgranting special  leave, status\t guo<br \/>\norder reading as below was passed:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;Our  attention  is  drawn\t to  the<br \/>\n     minutes  of   the\t meeting   dated<br \/>\n     14.2.1996\twhich\tstate  that  the<br \/>\n     consensus between\tthe  authorities<br \/>\n     and  parties   concerned  was  that<br \/>\n     there was\tno place available in or<br \/>\n     around Delhi to which the slaughter<br \/>\n     house  could   be\tshifted.  Having<br \/>\n     regard    to    this    unambiguous<br \/>\n     statement the matters shall have to<br \/>\n     be fully heard.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     Special leave  granted. The appeals<br \/>\n     re expedited.  Liberty is\tgiven to<br \/>\n     the parties to move the Hon&#8217;ble the<br \/>\n     Chief Justice  for the  purposes of<br \/>\n     early  hearing.  In  the  meantime,<br \/>\n     status-quo shall be maintained.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>5.   A perusal\tof the\tstatus quo  order leaves  nothing to<br \/>\ndoubt that it is founded on the consensus regarding no place<br \/>\nbeing available\t in or around Delhi to which Slaughter House<br \/>\ncould be  shifted. This consensus is reflected in minutes of<br \/>\nthe meeting  dated 14.2.1996.  We have\tperused the same. It<br \/>\nshows that  in the  meeting 35\tpersons were present and the<br \/>\nparticipants   showed\t their\t concern    about   &#8220;illegal<br \/>\nslaughtering in\t different localities&#8221;\tbut because  of non-<br \/>\navailability of\t alternative  place,  modernisation  of\t the<br \/>\nSlaughter House\t was agreed to. Now, insofar as availability<br \/>\nof some\t other place  in  and  around  Delhi  is  concerned,<br \/>\nbecause of  the sustained  efforts made\t by this  Court from<br \/>\n16th September\tonwards, an  area of about 55 acres has been<br \/>\nmade available\tand possession\tof the\tsame has  also since<br \/>\nbeen reportebly\t delivered. Thus,  the basis  of passing the<br \/>\nstatus-quo order no longer exists.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.   S\/Shri Dholakia  and Nariman,  learned  senior  counsel<br \/>\nappearing for the applicants have nonetheless contended that<br \/>\nto take\t care of  the difficulty  which the  consumers would<br \/>\nface if\t the slaughter house would be closed as directed, it<br \/>\nshould be  permitted to\t function at  least upto  the period<br \/>\nwhen alternative arrangement for slaughtering is made at the<br \/>\nnew site.  Shri Nariman\t read out  to us the order passed by<br \/>\nthis Court  on May 18, 1994 in SLP(C) No. 7790-91 of 1994 in<br \/>\nwhich questions\t were raised  as to  what would\t happen when<br \/>\nthousands of  workers would be thrown on the streets jobless<br \/>\nand how\t the meat requirements of a large city would be met?<br \/>\nIt was\tsubmitted by  Shri Dholakia  that if  the  Slaughter<br \/>\nHouse would  be closed, unhygienic meat would be supplied to<br \/>\nthe consumers which would be more hazardous.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.   Insofar as the workers are concerned, it may be pointed<br \/>\nout that  due attention\t has been paid, inter alia, to their<br \/>\ncontinuity of  service and  payment with full wages till the<br \/>\nclosure and  restarting of  all\t the  industries,  as  would<br \/>\nappear from  direction (9) as contained in the order of July<br \/>\n8, 1996, relevant part of which reads as below:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;(9) The  workmen employed\t in  the<br \/>\n     abovementioned 168 industries shall<br \/>\n     be\t entitled   to\tthe  rights  and<br \/>\n     benefits as directed hereunder:-<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (a)   The\t  workmen   shall   have<br \/>\n     continuity of employment at the new<br \/>\n     town and  place where  the industry<br \/>\n     is\t  shifted.    The   terms    and<br \/>\n     conditions\t of   their   employment<br \/>\n     shall  not\t  be  altered  to  their<br \/>\n     detriment:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (b) The  period between the closure<br \/>\n     of the  industry in  Delhi and  its<br \/>\n     restart at the place of re-location<br \/>\n     shall   be\t   treated   as\t  active<br \/>\n     employment and the workmen shall be<br \/>\n     paid   their    full   wages   with<br \/>\n     continuity of service.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>8.   As regards\t the consumers, we are of the view that they<br \/>\nwould not  face much  of the  problem. It has been stated in<br \/>\npara 119  of the  impugned judgment  that hygenic  and fresh<br \/>\nmeat in\t adequate quantity  can be  brought from  the nearby<br \/>\nslaughter houses  as purely temporary measure. As the cattle<br \/>\nwhich are slaughtered are brought from outside, according to<br \/>\nus, there  should be  no difficulty  in bringing  the  meat,<br \/>\ninstead of the animals themselves.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.   As to the argument that closure of the slaughter houses<br \/>\nshould see  unhygienic meat in the market, we should like to<br \/>\nobserve\t that  this  apprehension  does\t not  see  justified<br \/>\nbecause there  are licensed  slaughter houses near Delhi. It<br \/>\nis worth  pointing out\tthat when  the Idgah Slaughter House<br \/>\nhad remained closed for nearly three months in 1994, because<br \/>\nof the\tstrike by  butchers, there  is nothing\ton record to<br \/>\nshow that  the consumers  had to  remain satisfied by eating<br \/>\nunhygienic meat.  The availability  of the meat also did not<br \/>\nget adversely affected.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.  In the  aforesaid premises,  though  the  interlocutory<br \/>\napplications  are   liable  to\t be   dismissed,   but\t the<br \/>\nconsideration which  is weighing  with us  in not dismissing<br \/>\nthe same  altogether is\t the interest  of  large  number  of<br \/>\nconsumers in  the territory  of\t Delhi.\t This  is  the\tonly<br \/>\nindustry of  its type in the territory. There being no other<br \/>\nslaughter house\t near at  hand to  cater the  needs  of\t the<br \/>\nresidents of  Delhi some  hardship is likely to be caused to<br \/>\nthe meateaters. At the same time the interest of environment<br \/>\nand ecology  cannot be\tignored. It  cannot be disputed that<br \/>\nthe slaughter  house is\t being\trun  under  highly  polluted<br \/>\nenvironment. With a view to keep balance between the need of<br \/>\nthe people of Delhi and the environment, we direct as under:<br \/>\n(1)  We permit\tthe Idgah  Slaughter House  to function till<br \/>\nJune 30, 1997 on the following conditions:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     (i) Goats\/he  goats\/sheep numbering<br \/>\n     2000 per  day shall be permitted to<br \/>\n     be slaughtered  in the premises, no<br \/>\n     other animals shall be slaughtered.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (ii)  Buffaloes  (any  sex),  cows,<br \/>\n     bulls (i.e.  large\t animals)  shall<br \/>\n     not be  permitted to be slaughtered<br \/>\n     as their  slaughter generates  more<br \/>\n     pollution. The  Buffalo section  is<br \/>\n     the most  polluted section\t in  the<br \/>\n     slaughter house,  We reiterate that<br \/>\n     except  2000  (Two\t thousand  only)<br \/>\n     goats\/he\tgoats\/sheep   no   other<br \/>\n     animals to\t be slaughtered\t in  the<br \/>\n     premises. The  buffalo  section  of<br \/>\n     the slaughter house shall be closed<br \/>\n     with immediate effect.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (iii) The\tslaughter house shall be<br \/>\n     kept environmentally  clean by  the<br \/>\n     MCD.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>(2)  The Central  Pollution Control  Board shall  visit\t the<br \/>\nslaughter house every two months till June 30, 1997 and file<br \/>\nreport in  this Court indicating the environmental status of<br \/>\nthe premises.\n<\/p>\n<p>(3)  The animal\t market shall  not be  permitted to function<br \/>\nnear the  slaughter house. Holding the animals market in the<br \/>\ncrowded part  of the  city is  environmentally hazardous and<br \/>\ncannot be permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>(4)  The Deputy\t Commissioner of  Police of  the area  shall<br \/>\nstop the  holding of  the market  in  the  vicinity  of\t the<br \/>\nslaughter house.  The meat  sellers\/butchers may  bring\t the<br \/>\nanimals to  the slaughter  house in an environmentally clear<br \/>\nmanner and  take the  meat back\t in similar  way. No  market<br \/>\nshould be permitted in the area.\n<\/p>\n<p>(5)  The Municipal  Corporation\t of  Delhi  shall  stop\t all<br \/>\nillegal slaughtering  in Quasebpura  area near\tIdgah or any<br \/>\nother\tpart   of   Delhi.   The   Commissioner,   Municipal<br \/>\nCorporation, Delhi  shall take\tnecessary steps\t to stop the<br \/>\nillegal slaughtering  in all  parts of\tDelhi. If  necessary<br \/>\npolice help be taken in this respect.\n<\/p>\n<p>(6)  We make  it clear\tthat heavy  pollution fine  shall be<br \/>\nimposed by  this Court\ton polluters  indulging\t in  illegal<br \/>\nslaughtering. Even the MCD shall be liable to pollution fine<br \/>\nif the\tslaughter house\t is not\t kept environmentally clean.<br \/>\nThe staff in charge of the slaughter house may personally be<br \/>\nliable to pay the fine.\n<\/p>\n<p>(7)  Municipal Corporation of Delhi shall take steps on war-<br \/>\nfooting to  construct the  modern  slaughter  house  on\t the<br \/>\nalternative land  already acquired  by the  Corporation.  We<br \/>\nmake it\t clear that  the Idgah\tSlaughter house would not be<br \/>\npermitted to  continue at  the present\tsite beyond June 30,<br \/>\n1997.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The I.A.S are disposed of accordingly.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; &#8230; vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996 Bench: Kuldip Singh, B.L. Hansaria PETITIONER: BUFFALO TRADERS WELFARE ASSN. &amp; ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: MANEKA GANDHI &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 30\/11\/1996 BENCH: KULDIP SINGH, B.L. HANSARIA ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-73760","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; ... vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; ... vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1996-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-26T20:13:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; &#8230; vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996\",\"datePublished\":\"1996-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-26T20:13:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996\"},\"wordCount\":1833,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996\",\"name\":\"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; ... vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1996-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-26T20:13:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; &#8230; vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; ... vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; ... vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1996-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-26T20:13:19+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; &#8230; vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996","datePublished":"1996-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-26T20:13:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996"},"wordCount":1833,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996","name":"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; ... vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1996-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-26T20:13:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/buffalo-traders-welfare-assn-vs-maneka-gandhi-ors-on-30-november-1996#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Buffalo Traders Welfare Assn. &amp; &#8230; vs Maneka Gandhi &amp; Ors on 30 November, 1996"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73760","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=73760"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73760\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73760"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73760"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73760"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}