Page 1

1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.309 OF 2003

Laxmi Narain Modi …. Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others …. Respondents

WITH

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.330 OF 2001,  WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.44 OF 2004,

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.688 OF 2007,  AND  

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.14121 OF 2009

O R D E R

K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

1. We,  in  our  order  dated 23.8.2012,  had highlighted  

the extreme necessity  of  constituting State Committees  

for  the  purpose  of  supervising  and  monitoring  the  

implementation  of  the  provisions  of  the  Prevention  of  

Cruelty  to  Animals  (Establishment  and  Registration  of  

Societies  for  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals)  Rules,  

2000,  the  Environment  Protection  Act,  1986,  the  Solid

Page 2

2

Waste  (Management  and  Handling)  Rules,  2000,  the  

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Slaughter House) Rules,  

2000 etc.  

2. We  passed  another  order  on  10.10.2012  and,  

following  that  order,  almost  all  the  States  and  Union  

Territories have constituted the State Committees.   On  

27.8.2013,  we  passed  a  detailed  order  directing  those  

Committees to implement the broad framework prepared  

by  the  MoEF,  which  we  have  incorporated  in  the  said  

order.   We also directed the various State Committees to  

file an Action Taken Report.  Few Committees have filed  

their Action Taken Reports.    

3. We notice that there is no periodical supervision or  

inspection of the various slaughter houses functioning in  

various parts of the country.  Action Taken Reports would  

indicate  that,  in  many  States,  slaughter  houses  are  

functioning  without  any  licence  and  even  the  licenced  

slaughter  houses  are  also  not  following  the  various  

provisions as well as the guidelines issued by the MoEF,  

which we have already referred to in our earlier orders.

Page 3

3

We  feel  that  the  presence  of  an  experienced  Judicial  

Officer in the State Committees would give more life and  

light to the Committees, who can function as its Convener.  

The  Convener,  so  appointed,  would  see  that  the  

Committees meet quite often and follow and implement  

the provisions of the Act as well as the guidelines issued  

by the MoEF, which has been made a part of our order  

dated 27.8.2013.    

4. In such circumstances, we are inclined to request the  

Chief Justices of the various High Courts in the country to  

nominate the name of a retired District Judge for a period  

of  two years as a Convener of the Committee so as to  

enable him to  send the  quarterly  reports  to  this  Court.  

First report be sent within two months.   Communicate this  

order to the Chief Justices of the various High Courts in the  

country,  along with  a  copy of  this  Court’s  orders dated  

23.8.2012,  10.10.2012  and  27.8.2013.  We  fix  a  

consolidated  remuneration  of  Rs.20,000/-  per  month  as  

honorarium to be paid to the District Judge (Retd.), which  

will be borne by the respective State Governments/Union

Page 4

4

Territories, as the case may be. Union of India and various  

State Governments have raised no objection in adopting  

such  course,  so  that  the  Committees  could  function  

efficiently and the provisions of the Act and the framework  

prepared by the MoEF could be given effect to in its letter  

and spirit.   

………………………….J. (K.S. Radhakrishnan)

………………………….J. (Pinaki  Chandra  

Ghose) New Delhi, January 30, 2014.