http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 14  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  246 of 2007

PETITIONER: Milkmen Colony Vikas Samiti

RESPONDENT: State of Rajasthan & Others

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/01/2007

BENCH: S.B. SINHA & DALVEER BHANDARI

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

[Arising out of SLP (C) No.16751 of 2004) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.      247          OF 2007 [Arising out of SLP (C) No.23389-90 of 2004)

Shri Ghanchi Mahasabha, Jodhpur ....            Appellant                 Versus Rajasthan Chapter of Indian  Association of Lawyers & Others ....            Respondents

DALVEER BHANDARI, J.         Leave granted.           In a public interest litigation instituted under Article  226 of the Constitution, the High Court of Rajasthan at  Jodhpur, by the impugned judgment, has directed that the  milk dairies located in the city of Jodhpur be shifted from  their present location to alternative sites.  These appeals by  grant of special leave are preferred against the said  judgment and order dated 12th July, 2004 of the High Court  passed in D.B. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.4409 of 1994.

       Both these appeals are inter-connected and are  arising out of a common judgment, therefore, we would  refer to the facts as mentioned in Civil Appeal No. 246 of  2007 arising out of SLP (C) No.16751 of 2004.   

       The appellant-Milkmen Colony Vikas Samiti is an  association of milkmen engaged in the business of selling  milk and milk products in the city of Jodhpur  (Rajasthan) for the last 44 years.  The Government of  Rajasthan vide Notification No.F.1 LSG/56 dated  5.11.1956 introduced a scheme, namely, ’Masuriya  Colony Scheme’, under which the members of the  appellant Samiti and other milkmen, who were carrying  on business of selling milk and milk products, were  allotted plots of land in the city of Jodhpur @ Rs.2/- per  sq. yards. In all, 332 plots were allotted by the  Government under the said scheme to different milkmen  for developing dairies.  Since 1956, the said milkmen  have been carrying their business of selling milk and  milk products in the above colony.   The said colony was  duly conceived and planned as a milkmen colony by the  Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur with the approval of  the State Government.  

       It is stated that the owners of the bovine animals, in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 14  

the city of Jodhpur, after milching the bovine animals  were turning them out of dairies so that they could eat  whatever was available on the roads.  The stray cattle  including the cows, bulls, dogs etc. freely roam in the city  of Jodhpur and in the porch of the Mahatma Gandhi  Hospital, the principal government hospital in the city.     It is further stated that the excreta of these animals was  also visible all over, even in the corridors of the High  Court.  This totally unhygienic, unhealthy and injurious  practice was creating considerable nuisance to the  citizens of the city of Jodhpur.   

The citizens of the City, being aggrieved by the said  nuisance caused by the stray cattle and dogs, filed a  petition in public interest in the High Court of Rajasthan  at Jodhpur through the Rajasthan Chapter of Indian  Association of Lawyers, respondent no.4 herein,  associated with the International Association of  Democratic Lawyers established in 1946 and in  consultative status with UN Economic and Social  Council, UNESCO and UNICEF.   

In the instant petition, it was stated that stray  animals, such as, bulls, dogs and cattle were roaming all  around inside and outside the city freely.  Cattle were  found loitering and squatting on the roads of Jodhpur  City and that they were causing danger to human life  and were creating a traffic hazard.  It is stated in the  petition that the entire city was full of dirt, refuge and  was stinking beyond all limits and that the excreta of  stray cattle was a breeding ground for various diseases.   Drains were clogged and sewerage water was getting  mixed up with the drinking water spreading many  diseases.  These unhygienic and unhealthy prevalent  conditions are adversely affecting the quality of life of the  residents living in the city of Jodhpur and thereby  impinging upon their constitutional rights enshrined  under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.  In the writ  petition, following reliefs were prayed: 1.      To direct the respondent Jodhpur  Municipal Corporation and the Urban  Improvement Trust to take steps to  ensure that animals and cattle do not  inhibit roads and public places and make  proper arrangement in this behalf;

2.      In order to oversee that all this is done, to  appoint a Committee constituting of  eminent citizens authorizing such  Committee to see:

(i)     that the direction aforesaid are given  effect to;

(ii)    to receive complaints from the  people; and

(iii)   make appropriate directions to meet  genuine grievances; and  

(iv)    the respondents be directed to  comply with the direction of the  aforesaid committee in this behalf;

(v)     to take immediate steps to make city

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 14  

clean, revamp sewerage system;

(vi)    For above purposes, if necessary,  the State Government be directed to  make funds available to respondent  Municipal Corporation.

It was stated before the High Court that with the passage  of time, Jodhpur City became very dense and, therefore,  it was necessary to eliminate the menace of stray animals  from the roads of the city of Jodhpur.   It was also urged  before the High Court that the milkmen colony when  devised was more or less outside the city but now it is in  the heart of the city because of expansion of the City.   The main cause of expansion has been unchecked growth  in the population.  Therefore, a direction was sought to  relocate the dairies out of the city of Jodhpur.

       The High Court entertained the writ petition and,  looking to the seriousness of the matter, issued certain  directions, vide its order dated 23.1.2003, which are  reproduced hereinbelow: (i)     The Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur  shall make every endeavour to shift  dairies from the city and have them  relocated with the assistance of the State  to the outskirts and periphery of the city  or beyond the city limits.

(ii)    The Municipal Corporation shall relocate  stray cattle from the roads to Gaushalas  or institutions made for providing shelter  to stray cattle including the institutions  at Pawapuri.

(iii)   For the removal of stray cattle, bulls and  dogs from the roads and for their  relocation to shelter etc. the Municipal  Corporation shall press into service  sufficient number of persons and vehicles  for impounding and relocating animals.

(iv)    Cattle and animals located in Jodhpur  City shall have a tag number tied around  their necks.  The tag numbers should be  indicative of the name and address of the  person to whom the animal belongs so  that there will be no difficulty in tracing  their owners.  This direction shall be  carried out by the person(s) owning the  cattle and animal(s).  The enforcement of  the condition shall be made by the civil  authorities.

(v)     Prosecutions should be launched under  the various penal provisions against the  owners of such cattle and animals which  are found on the streets and roads  unattended.

(vi)    The Municipal Corporation shall employ  sufficient number of persons to catch  stray cattle and animals found on the  roads and streets.  Once they are caught,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 14  

they shall be impounded and may be  released to owners on pay of fine of  Rs.500/- each and subject to other  directions mentioned herein.

(vii)   The vehicles which are used for carrying  impounded cattle and animals shall be  fitted with ramps in order to avoid the  chances of injury to them.

(viii)  The transit and handling of the stray  cattle and animals will be in conformity  with the laws providing for their safety  and prevention of injuries to them  including Prevention of Cruelty to  Animals Act, 1960.

(ix)    Electric supply to unauthorized dairies  which are operating in the city shall be  disconnected with immediate effect.

(x)     The direction of serial No. (ix) above shall  also be applicable to the organized and  unauthorized dairies located within the  city in the event of their failure to shift  out of the city within the time allowed to  them by this order.  The place to which  such dairies are to be shifted shall be  earmarked by the competent authority  within three weeks.

(xi)    The Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur  shall file statements detailing the fine(s)  collected by it in terms of directions given  at serial no. (vi) above.

(xii)   The roads of Jodhpur City shall be made  free of stray cattle bulls and roaming  animals by 31st March 2003.

(xiii)  Periodical progress report shall be  submitted by the Municipal Corporation  by 15th of each calendar month.

(xiv)   The State Government shall assist the  Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur in  securing the implementation of the  aforesaid directions.  This will include  financial assistance, which would be  required by the Municipal Corporation of  Jodhpur to carry out the directions  contained in this order effectively.

(xv)    The Chief Execution Officer of the  Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur shall  nominate two officers, who shall be  responsible for carrying out the directions  of this Court.

The aforesaid directions will not only bind  the Municipal Corporation of Jodhpur, its  functionaries and officers nominated by the  Chief Executive Officer, Municipal Corporation,  but it shall also be equally binding on the  State Government and its functionaries and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 14  

electric supply companies.  Needless to say  that failure on the part of the concerned  authorities and functionaries shall be  actionable under Article 215 of the  Constitution and the Contempt of Courts Act,  1971."

       The aforesaid petition again came for consideration  before the High Court on 06.1.2004.  On that day, the  Court found that the Collector, Jodhpur had complied  with the orders and allotted 2500 bighas of land to the  Urban Improvement Trust for the purpose of shifting  dairies from the city of Jodhpur.  The State Government  had also made a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- available to the  Municipal Corporation to meet the expenses of (i)  catching the stray cattle; (ii) for their transportation; and  (iii) for purchase of fodder for the stray cattle.  The  Collector further made 500 bighas of land available to the  Municipal Corporation in Kali Beri, Soor Sagar, Jodhpur  for creation of a pond.  The Court further issued the  following directions: "We direct that dairy owners/operators who  were allotted the land in the Milkmen Colony  at Pal Road or who are now operating within  the city limits should be shifted to the new  area which has been made available by the  Collector to the Urban Improvement Trust.   For this purpose, the Urban Improvement  Trust shall provide 30 days to the dairy  operators to apply for allotment of lands in the  new area.  The dairy operators shall deposit  the requisite amount with the Urban  Improvement Trust for allotment of lands in  the new area.  In case, the dairy operators do  not deposit the amount within the aforesaid 30  days, their dairies will be sealed by the  Municipal Corporation and the bovine animals  shall be impounded.   

       The Municipal Corporation is also  directed to develop the pond in Kali Beri, Soor  Sagar, Jodhpur within a period of two months  from today.  75% of the requisite funds for  development of the pond shall be allocated by  the State Government."

On 10.2.2004, the High Court again heard the  above matter when the appellant Samiti herein was  allowed to intervene in the matter being a necessary  party.   The learned counsel for the Samiti stated that the  milkmen colony was being shifted to Barli, which was a  hilly area and which was not a suitable place for bovine  animals.  However, the High Court rejected this  contention of the learned counsel for the Samiti by  observing as under: "We are told by the counsel for the  respondents that the area in question has  been selected after the experts had opined that  the land is suitable for the purpose of  establishing the milkmen colony.  In the  circumstances, therefore, we will not permit  attempts on the part of certain persons to stifle  our order.  The milkmen and dairy owners

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 14  

must shift to Barli and subsequently in case, it  is found that there are some practical  difficulties for them only in that event the  Collector can be asked to allot some other land  to them.  It appears that there are a large  number of milkmen and they are entrenched  in city.  It is surprising that after milching the  bovine animals, the dairy owners turn them  out so that they can eat whatsoever is  available on the roads.  Bovine animals in  order to satisfy their hunger even consume  plastics.  Once plastic goes in their systems, it  causes severe harm to them and some of them  even die.  But this is not the concern of the  dairy owners.  Though people consider cow as  mother yet the treatment which is meted out to  it is extremely harsh and cruel.  There is no  justification whatsoever for the diary owners  not to shift from the city to the designate  area."   (Emphasis supplied)

       After passing the above order, the High Court  adjourned the matter to 11th March, 2004, on which  date, the learned counsel appearing for Municipal  Corporation and the learned counsel appearing for  milkmen made their statements.  The order dated 11th  March, 2004 reads thus: "Learned counsel appearing for the Municipal  Corporation says that pond is being created at  Kali Beri within a period of six weeks.  Learned  counsel appearing for the Milkmen says that  the entire Milkmen community will shift on  their own to another site.  He says that his  clients undertake to comply with the order  passed by this Court and shift from the  present site within two weeks.  In case, the  Milkmen do not comply with the undertaking,  the Municipal Corporation shall in compliance  of the order seize the dairies."

       The aforesaid matter once again came for hearing  before the High Court on 14.5.2004.  On that day, the  learned counsel appearing for the respondents sought  some time so as to enable them to make arrangement for  preventing the cattle and bulls from moving on roads.   They undertook to do the following exercise: "(i)    all the bovine animals in Jodhpur shall  have the tags in consonance with the  directions issued by the Court;

(ii)    the work for construction of wall around  the milkmen colony shall be started in  right earnest;

(iii)   that no bovine animals including bulls  shall be seen on the roads as the same  shall be caught by the milkmen and  handed over to the Municipal  Corporation."

Having regard to the submissions of the learned

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 14  

counsel, the High Court granted 10 days time to the  milkmen for doing the needful.  The High Court  constituted a monitoring committee to evaluate the  progress made by the milkmen in preventing the animals  from moving on the roads.   

Finally, the aforesaid matter came up for hearing  before the High Court on 12th July 2004, when the High  Court passed the impugned order: "We find that the order dated 14th May, 2004  has not been complied with.  The milkmen  were provided sufficient opportunity to shift  from the city area as the bovine animals are  creating nuisance in the city.

       The District Magistrate is directed to see  that the public nuisance caused by the stray  animals is removed and the bovine animals are  shifted outside the city limits in consonance  with the order dated 6.1.2004.  The District  Magistrate shall file a compliance report within  two weeks.  The Municipal Corporation shall  assist the District Magistrate in effecting the  compliance of the order.

       The Municipal Corporation and the U.I.T.  shall be duty bound to construct a pond and  provide necessary facilities to the milkmen  shifting to Barli."

       Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, these  appeals have been preferred before this Court.  

       In the appeals before this Court, certain issues have  been raised.  The learned counsel appearing for the  appellant urged that the High Court was not justified in  issuing directions to evict milkmen from the land, which  was allotted to them by the Government for the purpose  of milk dairies after accepting allotment charges; that,  the High Court was not justified in passing an order of  eviction of milkmen from the land, without following the  procedure established by law i.e. under the Land  Acquisition Act or Public Premises Act; that, the High  Court was not justified in not appreciating the fact that  the land allotted for shifting of cattle and bulls of the  milkmen was located in a hilly area and no rehabilitation  facilities were provided by the authorities to facilitate the  shifting of the cattle; and that, the High Court erred in  not considering the fact that the Committee set up for  monitoring the progress made by the milkmen for  preventing their cattle from coming to the roads had  failed to appreciate the genuine problems of shifting the  animals, especially in terms of the report of the specialist  that Barli was a hilly area and cows and other animals  would not be able to survive.  It was further argued that  the milkmen were ready to shift out of milkmen colony if  some suitable area was earmarked for them, where the  land was not rocky and water was sufficiently available  for their cattle.  If such suitable site was allotted to them,  they would move to that place within such reasonable  time as may be granted by this Court.  They would also  deposit the amount as per the directions of this Court.   The learned counsel for the appellants urged that that  the State Government may be directed to allot suitable

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 14  

land located at some other place in Jodhpur City like in  Salawas, Old Pali Road in place of Barli.         The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the  State of Rajasthan stated that the order passed by the  High Court was just and fair and the same had been  passed after carefully appreciating all the circumstances  and interest of all sections of the residents of Jodhpur.   The milkmen were provided sufficient opportunity to shift  from the city of Jodhpur.  It was stated that the members  of the appellant Samiti were allotted plots at nominal  rates for construction of milk dairies way back in 1956.   There was a condition in the letter of allotment that the  allottees shall carry out constructions according to the  type design issued to them.  However, no construction in  accordance with the type design was carried out by the  milkmen.  Most of the milkmen had constructed houses  and shops in the plots meant for milk dairies.  The  milkmen were leaving their cattle stray on the roads,  which were leading to public nuisance, accidents etc.  It  was further argued that a bare perusal of the various  orders passed by the High Court would make it clear that  sufficient opportunities were granted to the milkmen to  shift from the city of Jodhpur and a specific undertaking  was also given on their behalf before the High Court that  they would shift from the city of Jodhpur within a  specific period.  However, they neither shifted from the  area nor deposited the requisite amount with the  Government.  On the other hand, the Government had  already developed a pond at the site as per directions of  the High Court.  The plea of the appellant Samiti was  without any basis that the land could not be developed so  far.   The learned counsel for the State further drew our  attention towards the public notice dated 20.7.2004  issued by the Office of Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur  and notification dated 23.7.2004 issued by Urban  Improvement Trust, Jodhpur, which read as under: "Office of Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur.  No. Writ/Stray Cattle/04/S.P.3 Dated: 20.7.2004 PUBLIC NOTICE In the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan at  Jodhpur, a Writ Petition No. 4409/94 relating  to stray cattle is pending for consideration.  In  this writ petition, the Hon’ble High Court has  passed the orders from time to time in which it  has found that in Jodhpur city on roads, ways  in colonies, bastis etc., the cattle wander in  stray condition.  In this connection, the  Hon’ble High Court has given orders to the  Town Development Trust that in the city for  cattle dairies in Barli area plots should be  allotted in which the cattle dairies which are at  present in city should be shifted in that area.   For this purpose, the owner of the cattle  should get the certificate of owner of the  cattle/guardian of the cattle and then an  application should be submitted for allotment  of plot by these persons in the Town  Development Trust.  Some persons have given  such applications for allotment of plot and out  of them the plots have been allotted by the  trust on 6.1.2004. The Hon’ble High Court has  passed the orders to shift the dairy owners  who are in the city at present and also to apply

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 14  

for allotment of plots by giving application to  the Town Development Trust.  This order has  been issued to the corporation that those  cattle owners who are not shifting their dairies  out of the city should be sealed. The Hon’ble  High Court on 12.7.2004 has passed the order  that all the owners of the animal husbandry  should be transferred out of the city.   Therefore, it is requested to all the cattle  owners that they should transfer/shift their  animals within 7 days from the receipt of this  notice out of the boundary of Municipal  Corporation failing which the proceedings with  the help of District Administration to  transfer/shift their animals outside the  boundary of corporation and expenses to be  recovered from the owners of the animals.  The  proceedings for contempt of court order shall  also be started against them.

Sd/- Chief Executive Officer Municipal Corporation, Jodhpur"

"Office of Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur.  No. 1348 Dated: 23.7.2004 NOTIFICATION It is informed to all the animal husbandry  holders that in the implementation of the  Hon’ble High Court order the scheme has been  prepared by the trust which is in New/Nai  Milkmen colony at village Barli in Kharas  No.88, for which the application form should  be filled after obtaining from the trust office  within 7 days.  These forms should be  submitted in the office of the trust for which  the proceedings of the distribution of plots  shall be started for the animal husbandry  holders.  The terms and conditions of the  allotment of the plots are given as below.

1.      The certificate of animal husbandry of the  applicant, which should be certified by  the corporation of Jodhpur and it is  necessary that this certificate should be  attached with the application form.

2.      The demand draft of Rs.1000/- (One  Thousand Rupees) as an earnest money  should be attached in the name of  Secretary, Town Development Trust,  Jodhpur.

3.      The whole amount should be deposited  after obtaining the order of the allotment  of the plot within 30 days.  An allotment  will be done at the reserved rate.

4.      In this scheme, the cancellation of the  corner plots will not be done.  The  execution rules of 1974 of Rajasthan  Town Development will be applied on the  allotments.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 14  

5.      The use of the allotted plot will be done  only for animal husbandry and the work  regarding transferring the animal  husbandry should be started as early as  possible in his allotted plot by the  allottee.

Sd/- Secretary Town Development Trust, Jodhpur"  

In the background of the above notifications, the learned  counsel appearing for the State stated that the  respondent State Government had complied with the  orders of the High Court.  The members of the appellant  Samiti were not complying with the orders of the High  Court and, therefore, no interference was called for in the  impugned orders of the High Court.

       Respondent No.4, Rajasthan Chapter of Indian  Association of Lawyers, who filed the writ petition in the  High Court, also sought dismissal of the present appeals  on the ground that the appellant Samiti itself chose to  undertake before the High Court that the milkmen were  willing to shift their dairies from the milkmen colony and  that for this purpose, the milkmen repeatedly sought  time from the High Court.  The High Court found the  milkmen resiling from their undertakings that they were  ready to shift from the city of Jodhpur and thereafter the  High Court issued certain directions to the Government  to comply with its earlier orders regarding shifting of milk  dairies from the city of Jodhpur.  It was only after these  directions that the milkmen have come to this Court.  It  was further argued that the High Court had nowhere said  that the milkmen would be deprived of the plots allotted  to them.  Only the dairies had been directed to be shifted  out of the city of Jodhpur.  The High Court never gave  any direction affecting ownership of the plots of the  milkmen in the milkmen colony, which now fall in the  heart of the city after expansion.  The High Court’s  directions are based on larger public interest and  protection of clean and healthy environment.         In Virender Gaur & Others v. State of Haryana  & Others reported in (1995) 2 SCC 577, referring to  principle No.1 of Stockholm Declaration of United  Nations on Human Environment, 1972, this Court  observed that right to have living atmosphere congenial  to human existence is a right to life.  The State has a  duty in that behalf and to shed its extravagant unbridled  sovereign power and to forge in its policy to maintain  ecological balance and hygienic environment. Where in  the Zonal plan, a land is marked out and reserved for  park or recreational purpose, it cannot be allotted for  building purpose though housing is a public purpose.  Further, it was observed that though the Government  has power to give directions, that power should be used  only to effectuate and further goals of the approved  scheme, Zonal plans etc. and the land vested under the  Scheme or reserved under the plan would not be directed  to be used for any other public purposes within the area  envisaged thereunder.          While it is true that the High Court has directed the  relocation of the milk dairies from the city of Jodhpur on  the grounds mentioned above and the same may cause  some inconvenience to a set of people of the Society but  the sole aim, object and spirit of the order was to meet

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 14  

the community need.  Clean surroundings lead to  healthy body and healthy mind.  The public interest has  to be understood and interpreted in the light of the entire  scheme, purpose and object of the enactment. The  hazard to health and environment of not only the persons  residing in the illegal colonization area but of the entire  town as well as the provision and scheme of the Act have  to be taken into consideration. [See: Administrator,  Nagar Palika v. Bharat & Others reported in (2001) 9  SCC 232].

       From the facts set out above and on hearing the  rival contentions of the parties, avowedly, the menace by  stray cattle has grown without any check from the  authorities in the city of Jodhpur.  The plots meant for  developing milk dairies have become large commercial  houses.  The manner in which such large-scale violations  continue leaves no doubt that it was not possible without  the connivance of those who are required to ensure  compliance with law and the reasons are obvious.  Such  activities result in putting extra load on the  infrastructure.  The entire planning has gone haywire.   The law-abiders are sufferers.  All this has happened at  the cost of the health and decent living of the residents of  the city violating their constitutional rights enshrined  under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Government  and its agencies have been negligent in discharging of  their functions and obligations.  Inaction by the  Government amounts to indirectly permitting  unauthorized use which amounts to the amendment of  the master plan without following due procedure.  [See:  M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Others reported in  (2004) 6 SCC 588].         In State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi  Kassab Jamat & Others reported in (2005) 8 SCC 534,  this Court held as under:  "176. \005The court should guard zealously  Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the citizens  of the society, but at the same time strike a  balance between the Fundamental Rights and  the larger interests of the society. But when  such right clashes with the larger interest of  the country it must yield to the latter.  Therefore, wherever any enactment is made for  advancement of Directive Principles and it  runs counter to the Fundamental Rights an  attempt should be made to harmonise the  same if it promotes larger public interest."

       In Milk Producers Association, Orissa & Others  v. State of Orissa & Others reported in (2006) 3 SCC  229, this Court considered the question of town planning  and removal of encroachment by the milk dairies.   In  that case, this Court considered the law as laid down by  this Court in its earlier decisions.  The relevant para is  quoted as under: "17.            The question came up for  consideration, in Friends Colony  Development Committee v. State of Orissa  reported in (2004) 8 SCC 733, wherein this  Court observed:         "\005The individuals as property  owners have to pay some price for  securing peace, good order, dignity,  protection and comfort and safety of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 14  

the community. Not only filth,  stench and unhealthy places have to  be eliminated, but the layout helps  in achieving family values, youth  values, seclusion and clean air to  make the locality a better place to  live. Building regulations also help  in reduction or elimination of fire  hazards, the avoidance of traffic  dangers and the lessening of  prevention of traffic congestion in  the streets and roads. Zoning and  building regulations are also  legitimised from the point of view of  the control of community  development, the prevention of  overcrowding of land, the furnishing  of recreational facilities like parks  and playgrounds and the availability  of adequate water, sewerage and  other governmental or utility  services."

       On careful consideration of the arguments advanced  on behalf of the parties and the case law as discussed  above, we are of the opinion that the High Court was fully  justified in entertaining the writ petition filed in public  interest.  The High Court rightly opined that it is the dire  need of the city of Jodhpur to relocate the milk dairies  which were creating nuisance for the citizens of the city  of Jodhpur.  We do not find any illegality in the directions  of the High Court particularly when the High Court did  not give any directions affecting their ownership of the  existing plots though these plots of land were allotted to  them on a highly concession rate (Rs.2 per square yard)  for a definite purpose and majority of the milkmen did  not use the land for the purpose it was allotted to them.

       Now what remains to be dealt with is the plea raised  by the appellants regarding relocation of the milk dairies  on any site other than Barli.  We are of the opinion that  the appellant Samiti cannot take this plea at a belated  stage.  The milkmen have already undertaken before the  High Court to shift at the place earmarked by the  Government of Rajasthan and have sought more time for  the said purpose. Even the extended period for shifting  has lapsed a long time ago.  The Government of  Rajasthan has earmarked and allotted the land on  experts’ advice.  In view of the directions of the High  Court, the Government of Rajasthan has already  provided basic amenities at the New Milkmen Colony.   The plots have been allotted to a number of milkmen in  view of the notification issued by the State Government.   The Government is the best judge of what is good for the  community.  Therefore, the decision of the Government of  relocating the milkmen to a new site can not be  questioned at this stage particularly when the State  Government has taken the decision based on expert’s  advice in the larger public interest.   

       It has been submitted on behalf of the State  Government that the State has taken all steps in  pursuance to the directions of the High Court and has  made available 2500 bighas of land to the Urban  Improvement Trust, Jodhpur for the purpose of shifting

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 14  

dairies from the city of Jodhpur.  The State Government  has also made available a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- to the  Municipal Corporation to meet the expenses- (i)     catching the stray cattle; (ii)    for their transportation; and  (iii)   for purchase of fodder for the stray cattle.   

The Collector, Jodhpur has further made 500 bighas of  land available to the Municipal Corporation in Kali Beri,  Soor Sagar, Jodhpur for creation of a pond.  The land  and the money made available by the respondent State  should be meticulously used for the same purpose.

        In Ramji Patel & Others v. Nagrik Upbhokta  Marg Darshak Manch & Others reported in (2000) 3  SCC 29, this Court has laid down that in a situation  where the interest of the community is involved, the  individual interest must yield to the interest of the  community or the general public.  

       We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at  length and carefully perused the orders passed by the  High Court from time to time.  In our considered view, no  interference is called for in the impugned judgment.   

       On consideration of the totality of the facts and  circumstances of the case, in the larger interest of the  citizens of Jodhpur, we issue the following directions: 1.      We direct the dairy owners/operators who  were allotted land in the milkmen colony at Pal  Road, but are still continuing to operate within  the city limit to shift to a new colony which has  been made available to them by the  respondent State as expeditiously as possible  and in any event on or before 31st March,  2007;

2.      The other milk dairy owners/operators who  are running the dairies and keeping their  cattle in the city of Jodhpur but have not been  allotted land shall also shift their dairies and  their cattle outside the city of Jodhpur on or  before 30th April, 2007.  The respondent State  of Rajasthan and the Municipal Corporation at  Jodhpur are directed to ensure that necessary  facilities and infrastructure as directed by the  Division Bench to the dairy owners/operators  are provided, if not already provided;

3.      The Municipal Corporation of Jodhpur is  directed to remove unattended stray animals,  such as, stray cattle, bulls, dogs, pigs etc. from  the city of Jodhpur as expeditiously as  possible and in any event on or before 30th  April, 2007;   

4.      The respondent State Government is directed  to frame guidelines regarding proper use of  plastic bags in the State because number of  deaths of cattle on account of consuming of  plastic bags have been reported. The State  Government is directed to frame necessary  guidelines on or before 31st March, 2007;

5.      The Municipal Corporation is directed to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 14  

ensure that used plastic bags and other plastic  materials must be separated from other  garbage and destroyed to prevent their  consumption by cattle, bulls and other  animals;

6.      The respondent State Government and the  Corporation are directed to ensure that the  basic infrastructure is made available to the  milk dairy owners/operators as expeditiously  as possible and in any event on or before 25th  March, 2007;

7.      In order to ensure meticulous compliance of  the directions of this Court and that of the  High Court and to ensure relocation of the  milk dairies, we direct the Committee  appointed by the High Court to submit  compliance report on or before 7th May, 2007.  

These appeals to be listed for further directions on  14th May, 2007.