Hope for Critters v. Honble Madras High Court,

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by The Chief Justice) This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief. " To call for the records culminated in the impugned order No.R.O.C.No.1-SD/2017/D1 and R.O.C. No.4236/2025/D1 dated 18.12.2025 issued by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to not to take any coercive action against the dogs."

¶2We have gone through the petition and also we have given a patient hearing to the petitioner-in-person.

¶3The order under challenge has been issued by the second respondent in compliance with the directions already issued by the Supreme Court of India on 07.11.2025 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.5 of 2025 as contained in Paragraph 45 therein.

¶4What appears to be the basis for filing this writ petition is that, the directions of the Supreme Court have not been properly implemented as there are no proper facilities for getting the dogs into designated dog centres and even while taking the dogs away from the premises, there is no proper handling.

¶5The grievance in substance does not appear to be against the order, but the manner in which action is being taken in implementation of the directions issued by this Court, which is in turn in compliance with the directions given by the Supreme Court in the matter of removal of dogs from institutions.

¶6The order passed by the second respondent on 18.12.2025 reads thus, " I am to state that the Hon'ble Building Committee and the Hon'ble Security Committee in the Joint Meeting held on

10.12.2025, discussed the issue of stray dogs in the Madras High Court premises and passed the following directions:-

(a) A set of directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Paragraph 25 of Writ Petition Civil No.5 of 2025 dated 07.11.2025 on Stray dog menace shall be complied with.

(b) As directed in Paragraph 25(E) of the aforesaid Writ Petition, the Chennai Corporation shall take endeavour to comply with the directions issued to remove every stray dog found in the Court premises. While making such exercise, due care must be taken by the local body that no harm would be inflicted on the animal and it should be ensured that such removed dogs are safely placed in the dog shelter earmarked by the Corporation in both the places and further ensure that adequate feeding facilities are provided and the well being of the stray dogs so removed and kept in the shelter is protected in all respects. The Greater Chennai Corporation shall ensure the aforesaid directions and measures indicated above in consonance with the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment cited supra shall be scrupulously followed. The aforesaid measures shall be first implemented within the High Security Zone (HSZ) ie., CISF Coverage area. I am therefore to request you to take necessary action forthwith on the aforesaid directions and to submit a compliance report to the Registry within a period of four weeks for the necessary follow up action."

¶7The directions clearly record that the Chennai Corporation shall comply with the directions issued to remove every stray dog found in the Court premises. While making such exercise, due care must be taken by the Corporation that no harm is inflicted on the animals and it should be ensured that such removed dogs are safely placed in the dog shelter earmarked by the Corporation in both the places and further ensure that adequate feeding facilities are provided and the well being of the stray dogs so removed and kept in the shelter is protected in all respects. The direction issued requires to be scrupulously followed by all concerned.

¶8Learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation submits that the directions issued by the second respondent in the matter of removal of dogs from the premises of the Court and getting them in the shelters, due care would be provided strictly in accordance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court as well as this Court.

¶9Placing the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Corporation, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, C.J.) (R.SURESH KUMAR J.) 02-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order KST To

¶1The Registrar General, High Court of Madras Chennai-600 104.

¶2The Registrar (Administration) Madras High Court, Chennai-600 104

¶3The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-600 003

¶4The Veterinary Officer Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-600 003

¶5The Authorised Representative Tamilnadu Animal Welfare Board Rep. by its Authorised Representative, No.571, Anna Salai, Veterinary Hospital Campus, Nandanam. Chennai-600 035

¶6Animal Welfare Board of India, Rep. by its Authorised Representative, 42, KM Stone, Delhi-Agra Highway Village-Seekri, Ballabhgarh, Faridabad, Haryana-121 044 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND R.SURESH KUMAR J. KST 02-03-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND WMP Nos. 7079,7076 and 7074 OF 2026 Hope for Critters Managing Trustee RA. Kirthana, No.58, Avvai Nagar Road, Avvai Nagar, Thiruvanmaiyur, Chennai-600 041 Rep. by power of Attorney, Hema Kalyanasundaram, Reflection Tower B, B1, ECR, Thiruvidhandai, Chennai-603 112 ..Petitioner Vs 1. Honble Madras High Court, Rep. by its Registrar General, Chennai-600 104. 2. The Registrar (Administration) Madras High Court, Chennai-600 104 3. The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-600 003 4. The Veterinary Officer Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Building, Chennai-600 003 5. Tamilnadu Animal Welfare Board Rep. by its Authorised Representative, No.571, Anna Salai, Veterinary Hospital Campus, Nandanam. Chennai-600 035 6. Animal Welfare Board of India, Rep. by its Authorised Representative, 42, KM Stone, Delhi-Agra Highway Village- Seekri, Ballabhgarh, Faridabad, Haryana-121 044 ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records culminated in the impugned order No.R.O.C.No.1-SD/2017/D1 and R.O.C. No.4236/2025/D1 dated 18.12.2025 issued by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to not to take any coercive action against the dogs. For Petitioner : Ms. Hema Kalyanasundaram For Respondents : Mr. B. Vijay, Standing Counsel For 1 & 2 Mr. D.B.R. Prabhu, Standing Counsel For R3 & R4 Mr. M. Habeeb Rahman Government Advocate For R5 Mr. V. Chandrasekaran, For R6