The petitioner voiced the apprehension that the High Court's directions can lead to the increase of stray dog menace and contended that the High Court failed to appreciate the differences in the behavioural patters of stray dogs and dogs reared by humans. The petitioner contended that the High Court order is based upon several "blatantly misleading, irrelevant and factually incorrect statements and misinformation with regard to dog behaviour, problems associated with stray dogs, general information regarding dogs and as also with respect to the existing laws". 691 of 2009 directing "High Courts not to pass any order relating to the 1960 Act(Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act) and the Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules 2001 pertaining to dogs." The petitioner NGO argued that the High Court's directions were contrary to an order passed by the Supreme Court on in SLP (c) No. Issue notice, returnable in six weeks.Meanwhile, operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed", the bench stated in the order. "Permission to file special leave petition is granted.
The bench has also issued notices to the Animal Welfare Board of India, the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and other private respondents in the special leave petition. The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the operation of an order of the Delhi High Court which issued a set of guidelines for feeding street dogs after holding that citizens have a right to feed street dogs.Ī division bench comprising Justices Vineet Saran and Aniruddha Bose stayed the High Court's order on a petition filed by an NGO 'Humane Foundation for People and Animals' challenging it.
0 kommentar(er)
