Cattle ban against constitutional rights, says Madurai Bench of the Madras HC
Madurai: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday stayed for four weeks the central notification banning the sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter in animal markets because the subject of the law under consideration is in the state list.
The court denied the arguments advanced by the additional solicitor general of India that rules are to be presumed as framed by the parliament. "...This court is not in full agreement that a presumption is in favour of the Central government when a particular rule is introduced, not by the parliament, but by the Executive, because the primary aspect is that the subject of the law under consideration is in the State list," said a division bench comprising justices M.V. Muralidharan and C. V. Karthikeyan.
The Court passed the interim order on two writ petitions filed by senior counsel Ajmal Khan and advocate Dhana Aravinda Balaji challenging the constitutional validity of Rules (22) b (iii) and 22 (e) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulations of Live Stocks Markets) Rule 2017 that was notified by the Centre on May 23.
Stating the arguments advanced by the senior counsel, prima facie, call for granting the interim relief, the judges pointed out that the subject of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act is also in the concurrent list. As far as slaughter of animals was concerned, it is exclusively in the State list, said the court.
"Under the above background, it should be tested whether the impugned Rule is within the Constitutional and/ or legal framework and have consideration over and above the State enactments in this secular country", Justice Muralidharan said. This court has take serious note of the question raised by the petitioner that introduction of new rules was not only interfering with the domain of State enactments and the existing laws relating to the slaughtering of animals, but it was also an act of interference in the food habit of the citizens which is everlasting since time immemorial before passing this order.
The judges also pointed out a question raised by the senior counsel that whether the recent amendment is against constitutional rights guaranteed to the citizens of India in respect of right to life including food. The court directed the respondents to file their counter within four weeks.
Dailyhunt
Madurai: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday stayed for four weeks the central notification banning the sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter in animal markets because the subject of the law under consideration is in the state list.
The court denied the arguments advanced by the additional solicitor general of India that rules are to be presumed as framed by the parliament. "...This court is not in full agreement that a presumption is in favour of the Central government when a particular rule is introduced, not by the parliament, but by the Executive, because the primary aspect is that the subject of the law under consideration is in the State list," said a division bench comprising justices M.V. Muralidharan and C. V. Karthikeyan.
The Court passed the interim order on two writ petitions filed by senior counsel Ajmal Khan and advocate Dhana Aravinda Balaji challenging the constitutional validity of Rules (22) b (iii) and 22 (e) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulations of Live Stocks Markets) Rule 2017 that was notified by the Centre on May 23.
Stating the arguments advanced by the senior counsel, prima facie, call for granting the interim relief, the judges pointed out that the subject of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act is also in the concurrent list. As far as slaughter of animals was concerned, it is exclusively in the State list, said the court.
"Under the above background, it should be tested whether the impugned Rule is within the Constitutional and/ or legal framework and have consideration over and above the State enactments in this secular country", Justice Muralidharan said. This court has take serious note of the question raised by the petitioner that introduction of new rules was not only interfering with the domain of State enactments and the existing laws relating to the slaughtering of animals, but it was also an act of interference in the food habit of the citizens which is everlasting since time immemorial before passing this order.
The judges also pointed out a question raised by the senior counsel that whether the recent amendment is against constitutional rights guaranteed to the citizens of India in respect of right to life including food. The court directed the respondents to file their counter within four weeks.
Dailyhunt
No comments:
Post a Comment