Dismissed

Sri Lakshmi Nrusimha Rytu Sangham, v. The Union of India, rep. by its Secretary

Telangana HC11 Mar 2010WP/2004/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a voluntary organization challenging a radio message prohibiting bull races under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. Relying on prior High Court judgments that banned such races as cruelty, the Court found the petition lacked merit.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and the interim relief application WPMP.No.2670 of 2010 were dismissed.

Sri Lakshmi Nrusimha Rytu Sangham, Vs The Union… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND TEN

¶3

PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶4

WRIT PETITION No.2004 of 2010

¶5

Between:

¶6

Sri Lakshmi Nrusimha Rytu Sangham Morjampadu Village, Machavaram Mandal, Guntur District.

¶7

… Petitioner

¶8

And

¶9

The Union of India, rep., by its Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry, Ministry of Social Justice and Enforcement, New Delhi & others.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Nagesh Bheemapaka

¶12

Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home

¶13

This Court made the following:

¶14

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.2004 of 2010

¶16

ORDER:-

¶17

This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare radio massage dated 09.01.2010 of respondent No.3, as illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 34 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (for short, “the Act”). The petitioner sought for a direction to the respondents not to interfere with conduct of bull races.

¶18

This case was adjourned on three occasions. On 11.02.2010, there was no representation for the petitioner. On 03.03.2010, the case was adjourned at the request of the petitioner. Today, at the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner.

¶19

In its affidavit, the petitioner, which claims to be a voluntary organization of agriculturists of Morjampadu area, pleaded that it is conducting games and sports for men and women like Volleyball, Kolatam and Bull races; that in its area, the bull races are conducted by making the bull draw a boulder; that a strict code of conduct is printed in the invitation itself prohibiting cruel practices like twisting the tail of the bull or using a spiked stick to beat the bull and that the welfare of the bulls is taken care by following well laid down practices. The petitioner further pleaded that the Act does not refer to bull races. I have perused the impugned radio massage, wherein it is stated hereunder:

¶20

“Ref: Fax Message, dt.08.01.2010 of Member, A.P. State Animal Welfare Board and A.P. State Cow Protection and Animal Prevention Committee (1) Quote: Today I got

¶21

information that there is a competition for Ongole bulls (Ox races and bolder dragging at various other places in your district. Where the animals were subjected to various types of cruelties. Conduct of Ox races amounts to cruelty towards animals, which is prohibited under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and contrary to Section 11 of the PCA Act and Articles 48 and 51(A)(g) of the Constitution of India. I wish to draw your attention towards High Court judgment in W.P.No.6853 of 2001 in which Hon’ble Chief Justice directed not to permit in state of Andhra Pradesh. This is an clear cut violation of Hon’ble High Court judgment and it is contempt bolder dragging and other cruelty affected competitions. () Unquote () All officers for information and take necessary action().”

¶22

Section 11 of the Act described as to what constitutes animal cruelty. It inter alia included beating, kicking, overriding, overdriving, overloading, torturing etc. The question as to whether the Ox races fall within the ambit of the Act fell for consideration of this Court in W.P.No.4414 of 1997. This Court held that conduct of Ox races amounts to cruelty towards animals within the provisions of the Act.

¶23

A Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.6853 of 2001 made interim order earlier granted prohibiting Ox races final by disposing of the said writ petition.

¶24

In view of the abovementioned orders, the issue raised in this

¶25

writ petition is no longer res integra.

¶26

For the above mentioned reasons, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.

¶27

As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.2670 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed.

¶28

_____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶29

Date: 11.03.2010 ES

Sri Lakshmi Nrusimha Rytu Sangham, v. The Union of India, rep. by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Lakshmi Nrusimha Rytu Sangham, v. The Union of India, rep. by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P. Vijayanand Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Thatha Ramachandra Rao Vs Puvvada Sanjeeva Rao

V. Anusha, Vs The Regional Pass Port Officer

E.Satyanarayana Vs The Prohibition and Excise Commissioner, Hyderabad

M/s. Balaji Rice Mill, Bandumilli Road, Vs The Superintending Engineer Operation

Goguladinna Slate Quarry Workers Labour Contract Vs The STate of Ap. rep.by its Secretary (Mines)