Telangana HC orders immediate and detailed GHMC compliance on stray dog capture, rehabilitation

The court was informed that there is “no list of Nodal Officers and list of Government and private educational institutions, hospitals, sport complexes etc, furnished by the respondent – GHMC authorities” as mandated by the apex court.

The petitioners alleged that the centres currently being used are Animal Birth Control (ABC) units, not designated long-term shelters, raising serious concerns about the proper care of the captured dogs.

GHMC’s counsel initially suggested that a prior High Court order was “causing hindrance” to their implementation of the Supreme Court’s directions and even proposed transferring the matter to the Supreme Court. However, the petitioners countered that their writ petition sought only to enforce the apex court’s existing orders, and did not create a conflict with them.

The court permitted the petitioner, Gowri Vandana of AASRA, to inspect two GHMC animal shelters (NTR Nagar, Kukatpally, and Azad Nagar, Amberpet), and allowed her to “carry her mobile phone inside the premises, and take pictures and videos,” with the caveat that she must not cause inconvenience to the staff.

The High Court made it clear that its directives for compliance and inspection “shall not come in the way of respondent authorities in adhering to the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for catching stray dogs and shifting them to the designated shelters.”

The court instructed GHMC’s standing counsel to appear at the next hearing with “detailed information and also make available one senior officer who can throw light on the aspects relating to the compliance of the directions.”

The matter was listed for further hearing on December 9, when GHMC is expected to provide comprehensive documentation demonstrating its efforts to comply with all Supreme Court mandates.