1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION  

I.A.NO.3 IN I.A.NO.1 IN

WRIT PETITION (C) NO.195 OF 2006

PEOPLE FOR ETHICAL TREATMENT  OF ANIMALS       ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

CENTRAL ZOO AUTHORITY & ORS.      ... RESPONDENTS  

O R D E R

This writ petition was filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the

various  State  Governments  to  stop  operation  of  zoos  which  have  been  refused

recognition  by  the  Central  Zoo  Authority  and  to  to  take  over  animals  of  the

unrecognised/de-recognised zoos. The petitioner has also sought certain consequential

directions in regard to the protection of animals and endangered species of animals

apart from providing better and more natural habitat  for animals  in   zoos  and

enclosures.   

2. This Court on 9.10.2006 directed that no zoo shall permit any breeding of

animals  beyond the number specified by the Central Zoo Authority in its directive

dated  7.2.1995.  By  order  dated  6.12.2007,  this  Court  directed  the  Central  Zoo

Authority to come up with comprehensive guidelines as to  (i) how it will deal with

applications for revival of recognition; (ii) the manner in which the animals in de-

recognised zoos should be dealt with. As the Court was of the view that unless there

2

was a direction to stop exhibiting the animals in de-recognised zoos, the zoos will not

be motivated to rectify the shortcomings and provide the up-gradation required as

per the guidelines provided by the Central Zoo Authority, the said Authority  is

directed to come up with proper suggestions in that regard.  

3. In pursuance of it, the Central Zoo Authority came up with guidelines and

suggestions in its affidavit filed in February, 2008 and placed before this Court on

11.3.2008.  This  Court  was  informed that  509  applications  were received by the

Central  Zoo  Authority  from  different  zoos,  rescue  centres  and  circuses  for

recognition; that the Central Zoo Authority rejected 291 applications and granted

other applications. Pursuant to such rejection of 291  applications, 260 zoos/rescue

centres/circuses were closed/wound up. In view of it,  this Court directed action in

regard to the remaining 31. On 31.07.2008, it was reported that out of 31, 15 have

applied for fresh recognition and the same was under consideration and in regard to

the remaining 16, Central Zoo Authority will write to the respective States to take

appropriate action in accordance with law and provisions of the Wildlife Protection

Act, 1972.  

4. We thus find that by and large the purpose of filing the writ petition has

been achieved.  The un-recognised/de-recongnised zoos/circuses/rescue centres have

been closed, guidelines have been issued, State Governments have been notified of the

need to comply with the provisions of the Act, Rules and the guidelines issued by the

Central Zoo Authority from time to time. In view of the above, we are of the view that

this petition can be disposed of reserving liberty to the concerned authorities to take

appropriate  action  in  accordance  with  law if  there  is  violation  of  the  Wildlife

(Protection)  Act,  1972  and  the  Rules  thereunder in  the  respective  States/Union

3

Territories. We dispose of this petition and the pending applications accordingly.

5.  Action was taken against  the  erring zoos   and implementation of  the

provisions of the Act and the Rules could be made a reality to a reasonable extent by

the interest shown and steps taken by Shri Raj Panjwani, Advocate who assisted the

Court. The Court places its appreciation on record for the service rendered by Mr.

Panjwani.

............................J.          ( R.V. RAVEENDRAN  )

   ............................J.                 ( MARKANDEY KATJU )

NEW DELHI,      FEBRUARY 10, 2009.