HC stays order stating a family can have only 1 dog

The Punjab and Haryana high court has stayed a consumer panel order asking Gurugram administration to ensure that a family keeps only one dog and for the removal of all stray dogs in the city to dog pounds. The high court bench acted on the plea from a resident who argued she was being restrained from keeping another dog by virtue of the order. The order was passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurugram on November 15 after observing the failure of municipalities in regulating stray and pet dogs.

The Punjab and Haryana high court on Wednesday stayed a district consumer court order directing the Gurugram administration and municipal corporation to impose a “one family,one dog” rule and to impound all stray dogs in the city.

Acting on a plea by two Gurugram residents, the high court bench of justice Rajesh Bhardwaj directed the district administration to file an affidavit stating details of steps taken by the Municipal Corporation of Gurugram (MCG), to ensure that residents get their pets registered with immediate effect upon payment of necessary charges.

The consumer court order of November 15 was also passed without authority and jurisdiction and in a manner that is beyond the scope of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, one of the counsels in the matter, senior advocate, Akshay Bhan, said.

Further, justice Bhardwaj directed that it be ensured that every registered owner keeps the dog on a leash when the animal is taken to public places and steps taken to ensure that it does not bite anyone. The owner of the dog would also carry an ecofriendly disposable bag for scooping dog poop off public places and to dispose of it in an appropriate manner to maintain cleanliness of public places. “The administration must impose an appropriate penalty for noncompliance,” the court said.

On November 15, the district consumer disputes redressal commission, while awarding monetary compensation of ₹2 lakh to a dog bite victim, took exception to the failure of civic bodies in regulating stray dogs and pet dogs. It passed a slew of directions, including that one family can keep only one dog.

The order was assailed by animal care organisation and rights activists, who said it is illegal to relocate stray animals under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act of 1960.