http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: AKHIL BHARAT GOSEVA SANGH ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       12/03/1997

BENCH: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, SUHAS C. SEN

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.      This order  may be  read in  continuation of  our order dated October  25, 1994.  By the  order  aforesaid,  we  had requested the  Central Government  to look into all relevant aspects as  directed by  the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in it judgment  dated November  16,  1991  and  to  record  its opinion with  reasons. The  said, record  was directed to be placed before  this Court  for consideration  for passing of further orders.      The Central  Government is  said to have constituted an inter-ministerial committee  headed by  Sri C.K. Basu, Joint Secretary,  Ministry  of  Food  Processing  Industries.  The Committee comprised  three other  members, viz.,  Sri  Shyam Lal,  Director,   Ministry  of  Environment  and  of  Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Agriculture and Dr. G.S. Singh, Deputy  Commissioner,  Ministry  of  food  processing industries. The  said  Committee  has  submitted  a  Report, Paragraph 11 whereof states its conclusions in the following words:      "11. CONCLUSIONS      In  the   light  of  the  foregoing      discussions, the  Committee  is  of      the opinion that:      (i) with regard to the pollution of      air and  water the  suggestions and      recommendations   made    by    the      Krishnan  recommendations  made  by      the Krishnan  Committee as  well as      the expert opinion contained  in it      are good  and are  acceptable.  The      Government of India in the Ministry      of  Environment  and  Forests  have      already accepted  the same  and the      steps  to  implement  have  already      been long  with  the  Environmental      Management Firm  Report along  with      the Environmental  Management  Plan      prepared  by   the     company  are      acceptable.    However,     regular

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

    monitoring of  pollution of air and      water need  to be  continued by the      company itself  as well as checking      by   the   Andhra   Pradesh   State      Pollution Control Board.      (ii)   the   Krishnan   Committee’s      assumption  and   apprehensions  in      depletion   of    cattle   due   to      establishment of  M/s  Al  Kabeer’s      slaughter house  are not  based  on      correct  scientific   analysis  and      adequate reasoning,  and therefore,      are not  acceptable. From the facts      and analysis in the foregoing paras      it  is  obvious  that  amongst  the      bovine animals,  the project of M/s      Al Kabeer  is to  utilise only  the      unproductive buffaloes  and and cow      & its  progeny. In  fact,  adequate      number  of  unproductive  buffaloes      are and  will be  available for the      use in  this  slaughter  house  and      other slaughter  houses   in Andhra      Pradesh.      (iii)  the   krishnan   committee’s      suggestion  of   State   Government      taking  over   the  M/s  Al  Kabeer      slaughter house  for supply of meat      for   domestic   requirement   goes      contrary to the objective of giving      permission  for   setting   up   of      abattoir by M/s. Al Kabeer, as well      as Government  of India’s programme      for increase  of export to meat and      meat products.  There is,  however,      need for  modernising the  existing      abattoirs in  the State  for  which      the  State   Government  may   take      appropriate steps separately.      (iv)  the  suggestion  of  Krishnan      Committee  of  company  undertaking      effective programmes  to raise feed      cattle for meeting 50% requirements      of the  abattoir is not practicable      and therefore,  is not  acceptable.      However,  as   per  the   terms  of      license, the company should prepare      a plan  in  consultation  with  the      State Government  and take  up  its      implementation in  conjunction with      the State  Government for promoting      better animal husbandry practices."      The appellants have filed a number of objections to the said report. We shall briefly deal with the main objections: (i) In  Paragraph 10.11  of the  Report, reliance  is placed upon 15th  quienquennial live-stock  Census 1993 prepared by the Directorate  of Economics  and Statistics, Government of Andhra Pradesh  [Annexure VI  to the  Report]. [According to the learned  counsel for  the Central  Government, the  said report reflects  the position upto September-October, 1993.] According  to   the  Report,   the  buffalo  population  has increased by  4.28 percent  between 1987  and 1993. In other words, the  buffalo population has risen from 87.57 lakhs to 91.32 lakhs.  The increase  is thus  0.7 percent  per  annum approximately. these  figures  are  misleading  because  Al-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

kabeer has  commenced its  operation only in April, 1993 and the requirement  of Al-Kabeer  is 1.8  lakhs  buffaloes  per annum. If  the  requirements  of  Al-Kabeer  is  taken  into consideration, there  will be  a  substantial  depletion  of buffalo population as a result of the working of Al-kabeer. (2)  The aforesaid  Census Report  further  shows  that  the population of male buffaloes of over three years has shown a decline of  29 percent  between 1987  and  1993  though  the female buffaloes has shown a rising trend of seven to twelve percent. The  population of  male buffaloes over three years has also  shown a  substantial decline  ranging from  twenty four percent  of forty four percent. The only increase is in the  buffaloes   in  milk.   The  above   figures  taken  in conjunction with the annual intake of buffaloes of Al-Kabeer would establish  that the  working of  Al-Kabeer would cause serious depletion  of buffalo  population in  the  Telengana region of  Andhra  Pradesh  and  other  adjoining  areas  in general. Besides, all the facts and figures which constitute the basis of the said Report are the facts and figures taken upto 1993.  These do  not and  cannot represent  the correct state of  affairs because Al-Kabeer started functioning only in April,  1993. Only  it one studies  the facts and figures relating to  1994 and/or  subsequent years, could he be able to assess  the impact  of the  working of  Al-Kabeer on  the cattle wealth of the area concerned. (3)  The Report  further shows  that between April, 1993 and December, 1994,  29.3% of animals required by Al-Kabeer have been procured  from other  States whereas  40.2%  came  from Telengana region,  12.3% from  Rayalseema region  and  7.13% from the  coastal areas of Andhra Pradesh. At the same time, the committee  says that inasmuch as the buffalo populations a whole  [which includes  those in  milk] has  increased  in Telengana region  by eleven  percent between  1987 and 1993, the apprehension  of  depletion  of  cattle  wealth  is  not acceptable.  Apart   from  certain  inconsistencies  in  the Report, it is difficult to understand how the Census figures of the  years 1987  to 1993 cam constitute a valid basis for arriving at  the conclusion  that the substantial drawals of buffaloes from  Telengana region  from April,  1993  onwards would not have a negative effect upon the cattle wealth. (4)  The Central  Government’s Report  is largely influenced by the  letter of  and the material furnished by Sri M. Yogi Reddy, Director  of Animal  Husbandry Government  of  Andhra Pradesh dated November 29, 1994. The said Sri Yogi Reddy was retiring on  the day  after. He  sent  the  said  report  in indecent haste even before he was asked to submit any Report by the  inter-ministerial committee  or by the government of India, as  the case  may be.  This aspect has been adversely commented upon  by the Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries  Department, Government  of Andhra  Pradesh in his letter  dated August  28, 1995  addressed to Dr. Krishna Ashrith,  Director  of  Animal  Husbandry,  Andhra  Pradesh, Hyderabad [successor  to Sri  Yogi Reddy].  The said  letter states that  "a special  report was sent by your predecessor to the  Government of  India vide his Do.Lr.No. 25142/D6/94, dt. 29-11-1994  (just one  day before  his retirement)  on a controversial issue  like Al-Kabeer Export Ltd., without any reference to  the Government  even though the Directorate is well aware  of the  sensitive nature of the subject, in view of  the   Public  agitation   on  the   issue".  The  letter accordingly requested  the  Director,  Animal  Husbandry  to check up  the records  "and fix  up  responsibility  on  the persons who  are instrumental  in sending  such unauthorised reports  to   the  Government   of  India  directly  without reference to the Government of Andhra Pradesh". A comparison

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

of the  contents of the enclosures to the Report sent by Sri Yogi  Reddy   and  the   Report  submitted  by  the  Central Government  of   this  Court   draws  heavily  upon  and  is influenced to  a large  extent by  the  Report  of  and  the material supplied  by said  Sri Yogi Reddy. Since the Report of Sri  Yogi Reddy  has been  disowned by  the government of Andhra Pradesh  as "unauthorised",  the reliance  s upon the said  Report   has  vitiated   the  Report  of  the  Central Government. (5)  The  Central  Government  Report  has  not  taken  into consideration the  inherent contradiction lying at the heart of the  issue. A  perusal of  the provision  of  the  Andhra Pradesh   Prohibition    of   Cow   Slaughter   and   Animal Preservations Act,  1977 shows  that slaughter of animals ]- [which expression is defined to include buffaloes, both male and female  and their  calves   which   are or are likely to become economical  for the  purpose of  (a) breeding, or (b) drought or  any kind  of  agricultural  operations,  or  (b) drought or  any kind  of  agricultural  operations,  or  (c) giving milk  or bearing  off-spring, is  prohibited. This is also the  purport of  the decisions  of this  Court  on  the subject. This  means that only old and infirm buffaloes  are available for  slaughter whereas  Al-kabeer is  said to be a most modern  slaughter house  and the beef obtained by it is meant exclusively  for export.  Can it  be believed that Al- Kabeer  would confine itself to old and infirm buffaloes. No one abroad  would like  to purchase  to consume  the meat of such old  and infirm buffaloes. They would require fresh and healthy beef  which can  be obtained  only  from  young  and healthy buffaloes,  whether male  or female.  The failure to notice this  inherent contradiction has vitiated the Central Government’s Report. On the contrary, the Krishnan Committee Report has laid particular emphasis upon this aspect.      Sri Goswamy, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India, and  Sri Gopal  Subramanium. learned counsel for  Al- Kabeer, disputed  the correctness of the aforesaid objection and submitted  that  his  project  has    been  cleared  and promoted as part of export promotion scheme of Government of India.  Indeed,  the  Parliament  has  enacted  Agricultural Processing Export  Development Authority  Act, 1986  [APEDA] with a  view of  promote the export of agricultural products including beef  and meat and that environmental an all other aspects have  been fully  taken  into  consideration  before permitting the establishment of this unit.      So  far   as  the   Government  of  Andhra  Pradesh  is concerned, Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for it, has specifically  stated, on  instructions received from the government, that  the Government of Andhra Pradesh Stands of Krishnan Committed  Report which means that it is opposed to the  contents   and  conclusions   recorded  by  the  Report submitted by  the Government  of India, Rather curiously, in the written  submissions of  State  of  Andhra  Pradesh  and Andhra Pradesh  Pollution Control  Board filed  in September 1994 [i.e.,  prior to our order dated October 25, 1994], the Government of  Andhra Pradesh had taken a different view. It had supported  the establishment  and working  of  Al-Kabeer fully.      We are  of the  considered opinion  that there  is good amount of  substances in  the  submissions  of  the  learned counel for  the appellants.  The statistics which constitute the basis of the Report submitted by the Government of India re not  really relevant  to the  issue before us. As rightly pointed out  by the  learned counsel for the appellants, Al- Kabeer started  functioning only  in  April,  1993  and  the effect and  impact of  its functioning  will be know only if

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

one studies  the figures of availability and/or depletion of buffalo population  over a  period of one or two years after Al-Kabeer has started functioning. Merely showing that there has been a marginal increase in buffaloes population between 1987 and  1993 is  neither here  nor there.  Even if  it  is assumed that  the 1993  figures refer  to the  figures  upto September-October, 1993,  that will taken in only six months of working of Al-Kabeer. The proper impact of working of Al- Kabeer on  the depletion  of cattle,  if any, would be known only if  one takes  into consideration the census figures of cattle in  Telengana region  or in  the areas  contiguous to Medak district [where the said unit is located], as the case may be,  after atleast two years of working of Al-Kabeer. In short, the  position obtaining after April, 1995 would alone a  give  a  correct  picture.  We  cannot  also  reject  the contention of  the learned  counsel for  the appellants that the  Government   of  India’s  Report  is  influenced  to  a considerable extent  by the  Report of  Sri  Yogi  Reddy  is influenced to a considerable extent b the Report of Sri Yogi Reddy, the  then Director of Animal Husbandry, Government of Andhra  Pradesh,   whose   Report   has   been   termed   as "unauthorised" by the Special Secretary to the Government of India’s Report,  the requirement  of Al-Kabeer is 1.5 to 2.0 lakhs buffaloes  every year,  which is  not an insubstantial figure. We  must also  take into    consideration  what  the appellants’ counsel  call the  Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of Cow Slaughter  and Animal  Preservation Act,  1977  and  the effect of  the decisions of this Court, which leave only old and infirm  buffaloes for slaughter. We, therefore, think it appropriate that  the Government  of India  should be called upon to  sent a  fresh Report  after studying the impact and effect  of   the  working  of  Al-Kabeer  upon  the  buffalo population of  the Telengana  region of  Andhra Pradesh  and also of the areas adjacent to Al-Kabeer, two years after the commencement of  the operations  by  Al-Kabeer.  It  is  not possible for us to pass any final orders on the basis of the Report now  submitted, which  as stated  above is based upon the statistics/census figures of cattle population including buffalo population for the period 1987 to 1993. Accordingly, we call upon the Central Government to submit a fresh Report in the  Light of  the observations  made herein  within  six months.      Pending further orders and in the light of the material placed before  us, we  direct that with effect from April 1, 1997, Al-Kabeer  shall function  only at  half the installed capacity. The  Government of India, the State Government and the Andhra  Pradesh Pollution  Control  Board  shall  ensure compliances with this direction.      List after six months.