correctness of a pure private entity bill not WITHIN WRIT petition and understanding the sensitivity of stray dogs issue

Public Matters Stray Dogs

Posted by: Aditya Pratap Law Offices on 2024-07-19

---

The basis of writ petition filling has to be on a fundamental right and also on public matters. An order of the Bombay High Court further clarified this in an order dated 13th February 2023. 

 

The point originated when two claimants in an Interim Application by, claimants Nos. 3 and 4. The complaint was that basic services had been withheld by the applicant, which was represented by Aditya Pratap Law offices because there is allegedly a large amount due towards maintenance and repairs. Both Applicants say that these services include the right to engage and employ domestic staff etc. Various bills in support of claimants were also annexed. 

 

The court first cleared out its standing on the jurisdiction and scope of the writ petition. It found that neither party had initiated a civil suit but had on their own decided what part of the bills to pay and what should not have to be paid. While granting limited protection, the court stressed it couldn't continue indefinitely. 

The court ordered the outstanding balance to be deposited promptly into its care. It also required the applicants to initiate proper legal proceedings within a reasonable timeframe and in a suitable court. If they failed to do so, the applicant could use the deposited amount to settle their bills. 

The same order also dealt with a question of feeding of stray dogs outside the premises of the applicant. It appears to us that the question is whether a provision ought to be made for the care and feeding of stray dogs outside applicant precincts, as Mr. Pratap would suggest, on some land that can be earmarked by the public authority concerned. It appears that applicant has somewhat adventurously created sheds or temporary structures for feeding stray dogs at three stations on public land from which CIDCO/NMMC (Navi. Mumbai Municipal Corporation) is understandably upset. They claim these works were done without authorization and intend to take action against them.

The court also determined that a solution to this must be determined. There are previous directives from this Court, notably from February 13th, 2023, regarding the care, treatment, handling, and feeding of stray dogs. While we understand and appreciate the concerns raised by the claimants on this matter, we must also consider the interests of individual residents and the collective decision-making process of the company, whose members comprise all residents of this private community.

The court finally pointed out some determinations to be made later regarding the hearing on Advocate Aditya Pratap for the applicant and whether compellations’ can be made on the private entity.