Residential societies cant ban people from having pets

by

Can’t remove Pets or harass those who feed street animals, Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon tells RWAs

In the recent past, the Helpline at Jaagruti has received many calls from a lot of street dog lovers/pet owners in Gurgaon on the subject of their respective Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs) barring them from keeping pets or feeding street dogs or fining them etc., and we have directed them to take a stance against their respective RWAs taking inspiration from the content posted on this article of ours.

Taking notice of many such animal lovers rising up in unison, the Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon has taken an informed proactive stance on the matter and dispatched a stern letter to all such RWA office bearers on the adamance, arrogance and above all IGNORANCE being shown by their respective RWA office bearers on this subject, by coming out with warnings and society bye-laws that are in strict contravention to all the national laws.

We appreciate the position taken by Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon on this subject.

To all of these concerned compassionate people worried about the street animals and the pets they love, feed and take care off, the recent news in the Times of India comes as a welcome relief. Please read on.

Can’t remove Pets, Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon to RWAs

By Aditya Dev, TNN, 6th Nov 2012

GURGAON: Even as the management bodies of residential societies are making their own rules for keeping pets, the Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon (MCG) has written to various residents’ welfare associations warning them not to formulate rules and regulations regarding pets and that any such move is in conflict with the law. Such a move may lead to dissolution of the RWA and prosecution of its office bearers, says the letter.

The managing committee Kanchunjunga Cooperative Group Housing Society in Sector 56 had last year imposed a ban on its residents keeping pets. The Close North (Nirvana Country) management also recently banned flat owners from using elevators to take out pets and instructed them to use service elevators instead.

The corporation sent letters to RWAs this February following incidents of cruelty against animals by RWAs, their office bearers and residents were reported. It also came to light that a few RWAs attempted to prevent pet ownership through stipulations in terms of their rental or ownership agreement, threatening pet owners with electricity and water cut offs.

If any rule laid down by anybody is in conflict with the law of the urban local body, state body or central body it is automatically superseded and rendered null and void. The letter says that an RWA threatening discontinuation of basic facilities is illegal.

It is illegal to remove animals from the area through security guards employed by RWAs. Nor can they intimidate residents who may be feeding those animals. Under stray dog management rules 2001, it’s illegal for an individual, RWA or estate management to remove or relocate dogs. The dogs have to be sterilized and vaccinated and returned to the same area. Vaccinated and sterilized dogs cannot be removed by the municipality too.

Under Section 506 of the IPC, it’s a crime to threaten, abuse or harass neighbours who feed animals.

by

Residential Societies can’t ban people from having Pet Animals

Over the past many months, Jaagruti’s helpline has been inundated with calls and queries from people across many major Indian cities, like Gurgaon, Mumbai, Bangalore and other metros where RWAs or Residential Welfare Associations that are formed in various societies have come up with ‘no pet clauses’ and are forcing residents therein to abandon their pets! This post is to apprise you all that ‘RWAs cannot come with such clauses which are both unconstitutional and unlawful.

Please click on the link below to download the notice that was sent to a society in Gurgaon sometime back by a team of well-respected lawyers. If you are facing a similar issue, then take guidance from the text mentioned therein and with the help of a competent advocate/law firm/your very own lawyer friends – get a similar notice drafted and get it sent across to the Office Bearers in your Housing Society. If they don’t get the point on reading your notice, drag them to the Consumer Courts. Remember that all those who have taken this step have won the case and so have their pets and dogs!

Click, Download and Read: Notice issued by respected law firm in Delhi to Kanchanjunga Coop.Group Housing Society in Gurgaon that was asking residents to abandon their pets

Also, read the below pasted Times of India article dated 24th May 2012 and spread it around!

Housing societies can’t prohibit pets, say legal eagles

By Journalist named Swati Deshpande

MUMBAI: Pet owners need not worry. Senior advocates say that housing societies cannot introduce by-laws to prohibit residents from keeping pets in their flats.The Maharashtra Cooperative Housing Societies Act does not prohibit members from keeping pets and no society can pass by-laws to ban pets or families with pets from society premises.

Mulraj Shah, a lawyer, says a cooperative housing society may-by majority vote- make a by-law against pet ownership, but that is only on the valid grounds of continuous nuisance created by such pets. Even such a resolution may not be binding on occupants as it would have to be tested for legality in court, said a constitutional law expert practising at Bombay high court.

In the past, courts have ruled in favour of pet owners. A housing society in Navi Mumbai was fined for having restrained a family pet from using the lift. The Thane consumer court in 2008 imposed a fine of Rs 5,000 and held that the society’s decision to prevent pets from using the lift without any valid reason amounted to “deficiency in service”. A family residing in a housing society is a “consumer” under the law.

In another important ruling in December 2010, a consumer forum in Mumbai Central ordered a housing society in Mahim to stop charging a family an additional Rs 500 for each of its pet dogs, which it said was illegal and directed that the amounts already collected be returned. Societies have a right to make rules for the benefit of its members but the law has to be reasonable and not impinge an individual’s fundamental freedoms and right to life, said lawyers.