Introduction:
In a significant move to ensure the cleanliness of public parks and gardens in Bengaluru, the Karnataka High Court issued a series of directions to state authorities, emphasizing the need for stricter regulations and penalties for irresponsible pet owners. A division bench comprising Chief Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice K.V. Aravind observed that while pet owners enjoy the liberty to bring their dogs to parks, they also bear the responsibility of ensuring cleanliness. The Court ruled that penalties imposed on dog owners for failing to clean up after their pets should be higher than those imposed on individuals violating general cleanliness norms. The case arose from a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the NGO Compassion Unlimited Plus Action (CUPA), which highlighted issues of park cleanliness and improper maintenance by the authorities. The bench, while addressing the petition, underlined the fundamental right to live in a clean and healthy environment as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.
Arguments of the Petitioner:
The petitioner, represented by Compassion Unlimited Plus Action (CUPA), emphasized the growing menace of unhygienic practices in Bengaluru’s public parks, particularly caused by irresponsible pet ownership. They contended that pet waste left unattended in parks posed a significant cleanliness issue and a health hazard for other park users. The PIL highlighted the inefficiency of the municipal corporation, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), in enforcing existing waste management guidelines.
The petitioner also drew attention to prominent parks such as Cubbon Park, which, despite being iconic landmarks, often suffer from cleanliness lapses due to unregulated behavior by some dog owners. They pointed out that the Solid Waste Management Bye-laws of 2016, as well as the Karnataka Parks, Playfields, and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulation) Act, 1985, were either not implemented effectively or lacked clear provisions to address specific issues caused by pet waste. The petitioner sought stricter implementation of these laws and urged the Court to direct BBMP and the state government to take corrective measures.
Arguments of the Respondents:
The BBMP and state authorities, represented by AGA Niloufer Akbar, argued that they had already issued guidelines for the maintenance of parks and gardens. They pointed out that a circular had been issued in 2020, outlining responsibilities for Resident Welfare Associations, apartment owners’ associations, and pet owners concerning cleanliness and hygiene. However, they acknowledged the need for stricter monitoring mechanisms to ensure compliance with these guidelines.
The respondents argued that limited resources and manpower often hinder effective implementation of cleanliness measures. They assured the Court of their commitment to improving the situation and implementing stricter penalties for violators, including pet owners who fail to clean up after their pets.
Court’s Observations:
The division bench observed that public parks are meant to be spaces of cleanliness and tranquility, where citizens can enjoy a hygienic environment. It emphasized that unclean parks defeat their purpose and can become chaotic spaces filled with nuisance and garbage. The Court stated that maintaining cleanliness in public spaces is not just an administrative duty but also a shared social responsibility.
The bench highlighted the principle of “luxury with responsibility,” noting that pet ownership comes with the obligation to ensure hygiene and cleanliness in public spaces. It further stated that pet owners who fail to maintain cleanliness contribute to the menace faced by other park visitors and must be held accountable through stricter penalties.
Importantly, the Court stressed that the right to a clean and healthy environment is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. It observed that parks and gardens play a crucial role in promoting public health and well-being, and any compromise on their cleanliness infringes upon this right.
Court’s Directions:
The Karnataka High Court issued several key directions to ensure the cleanliness and maintenance of Bengaluru’s parks and gardens:
- Implementation of Laws: Authorities were directed to strictly implement the provisions of the Karnataka Parks, Playfields, and Open Spaces Act, 1985, and the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.
- Increased Penalties: The Court mandated that penalties for dog owners failing to clean up after their pets must be higher than those imposed on general cleanliness violators.
- Budget Allocation: BBMP and state authorities were instructed to allocate adequate funds for park maintenance and cleanliness in their budgetary provisions.
- Vigilance Mechanism: A permanent mechanism for monitoring park cleanliness was ordered, including regular supervision by BBMP and the state’s Horticulture Department.
- Supervisory Teams: A three-member supervisory team was to be constituted, comprising one officer from the Horticulture Department and two from BBMP, to inspect major parks quarterly and suggest remedial measures.
- Amendments to Bye-laws: BBMP was directed to amend its bye-laws to incorporate provisions for stricter penalties and monitoring of cleanliness violations.
The Court also emphasized the need to address the menace of stray dogs in parks, which pose a threat to public safety and movement. It directed authorities to take necessary steps to ensure the free and safe use of parks for all citizens.
Judgment:
The Court dismissed the PIL after issuing these comprehensive directions, emphasizing that both citizens and authorities have a shared responsibility to maintain the cleanliness and beauty of Bengaluru’s parks. It allowed the petitioner to withdraw the case, noting that the implementation of its directions would address the concerns raised in the PIL.
The bench concluded by underscoring the importance of neatness and hygiene in public parks, noting that a clean environment enhances the quality of life and promotes the fundamental right to a healthy living space.