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.