Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Kerala High Court: In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) instituted highlighting the issue of inadequate and insufficient veterinary care in the Lakshadweep Island, a Division Bench of Nitin Jamdar, C.J. and Ziyad Rahman A.A., J., issued necessary directions vis-a-vis filling the vacant veterinary posts and for inviting applications from local NGOs for livestock care, thereby ensuring that veterinary care does not suffer due to bureaucratic delays.
In the instant matter, the petitioner, a resident of Kalpeni Island, pointed out that livestock across the inhabited islands were left without veterinary attention for prolonged periods. The grievance was that despite earlier judicial intervention, vide order dated 31-03-2022, where the Court expressed concern that livestock had not been provided veterinary care since 23-09-2021, and that such lack of medical attention would “adversely affect their health,” no substantial progress had been made.
The petitioner contended that there were twelve sanctioned posts of Veterinary Assistant Surgeon and one post of Technical Assistant, sanctioned prior to 1980, which remained unfilled. However, the Administration submitted that it was in the process of appointing five Veterinary Surgeons on contract basis, though earlier statements before the Court indicated that nine posts would be filled and nine Mobile Veterinary Units would be established.
The Court noted that the petitioner’s assertion regarding sanctioned posts had “not been specifically denied”. The Court took noted of a UPSC notification of 2020 referring to nine permanent vacancies of Veterinary Assistant Surgeon was taken as prima facie evidence of the existence of permanent posts.
The Court observed that once sanctioned permanent posts exist, the Administration “will have to justify the non-filling of such posts with adequate explanation and supporting material”, and that such a decision “cannot be arbitrary”, particularly in light of earlier judicial observations.
The Court further found it significant that the earlier commitment to fill nine posts had been revised to five “without seeking leave of this Court”, and that no application for modification or review had been filed.
The Court directed the Union Territory Administration to —
-
Place on record the number of sanctioned posts along with documents showing the staffing pattern and sanctioned strength.
-
Produce material demonstrating that the decision not to fill sanctioned posts was a reasoned one.
-
Explain why the earlier commitment to fill nine posts was revised to five posts without prior permission of the Court.
-
Pending compliance, the Administration was directed to issue a notification inviting applications and expressions of interest from local non-governmental organizations willing to provide veterinary care, so that “the primary objective of ensuring veterinary care does not suffer due to bureaucratic delays”.
-
Next date of hearing was fixed on 07-01-2026.
[C.P Abdul Kabeer v. UT of Lakshadweep, WP(PIL) NO. 64 OF 2025(S), Decided on 11-12-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
K.M. Firoz & Aashique Akthar Hajjigothi, Counsel for the Petitioner
Sri. R.V. Sreejith and Sri. Sajith Kumar V., Standing Counsels, Counsel for the Respondent 1 to 7
Sri. Benraj K.R., Central Government Counsel, Counsel for the Respondent 8 and 10,
Sri. Jaishankar V.Nair, Central Government Counsel, Counsel for the Respondent 9
Sri.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, Standing Counsel, Counsel for the Respondent 11