Akhil Bharat Gosewa Sangh v.State of A.P. and Ors. País/Territorio India Tipo de la corte Nacional - corte superior Fecha Mar 29, 2006 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal Supreme Court of India Juez Tarun Chatterjee, J. Número de referencia 2006(3)SCALE617 Idioma Inglés Materia Ganado, Medio ambiente gen. Resumen The Al Kabir Exports Ltd. was given permission by the central government to slaughter old and useless buffaloes. Some organisations opposed the setting up of the slaughter-house as it would cause cattle depletion. The state government constituted the Krishnan Committee to examine the matter and report to the High Court. The Krishnan Committee found that fundamentalist organisations had opposed the establishment of the slaughter-house. Examining the various conditions for grant of LOI issued by the Central Government carefully, the Court evident that only old and useless buffaloes shall be available for slaughtering and held their production and processing shall be subject to continuous inspection by the Municipal Authorities, Department of Animal Husbandly and Health Department of the State Government. After extensively referring to the constitutional bench decision of the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat, the Supreme Court held, "it is true that it has been held the total prohibition of cow and cow progeny slaughter may be justified. However, it has not been held in that decision that laws and policies which permit such slaughter are unconstitutional." The Supreme Court therefore refused to stop Al Kabir Exports Ltd. from slaughtering cattle and exporting meat. After taking into consideration, the reports submitted by various authorities, it considered that the functioning of the abattoir would not result in depletion of buffalo population in the hinterland of the abattoir. As the policies were passed by the Central Government for promotion of export and product development of scheduled products, the question of striking down of the policy did not arise, as it did not violate the Constitutional provisions. However, it would always be open to the court to direct the Central Government or the State Government to renew or review its policy and to make a fresh policy. The Court also examined whether the company had been established in violation of location requirement, as mentioned in the LOI of the Central Government for issuance of industrial licence to it. The Court held that Section 11(2) of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act 1951, by which conditions could be imposed as to the location of the undertaking by the Central Government, was only directory and it would be open to the Central Government to issue licence without giving any conditions to the company as to the location of the undertaking. Under the environmental aspect, the contention of the appellant was that no study had been made of the prevailing environment and the impact of the abattoir on it, hence, the precautionary principle was ignored by the authority before granting permission to run the slaughter house. The Court held, as ordering closure of abattoir was not called for, rather directions would be given to the authorities to rectify its consent order in accordance with the Environment Protection Rules and also to direct the abattoir to strictly comply with it. In the event that abattoir failed to comply with such directions, it would be open to the authorities to direct closure of the unit. Texto completo COU-155930.pdf Disponible en www.ielrc.org/content/e0615.pdf