HC upholds transfer of 1,000 crocodiles to Gujarat zoo

Team Udayavani, Aug 10, 2022, 6:53 PM IST

PTI Photo

Chennai: The Madras High Court on Wednesday upheld the action of the Tamil Nadu government and the Central Zoo Authority (CZA) in New Delhi to transfer 1,000 crocodiles from the Madras Crocodile Bank Trust (MCBT) in Mamallapuram to Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre in Gujarat.

The first bench of Chief Justice M N Bhandari and Justice N Mala upheld the decision while dismissing a PIL petition from A Viswanathan (76) of Chintadripet here, today.

When the experts were satisfied with the facilities available at the GZRR Centre in Gujarat, supported by Reliance Industries Limited, the court does not want to interfere with the same, the bench said adding that the petitioner had not submitted any materials to contradict the decision taken by the experts.

“We are, therefore, of the opinion that the objection of the petitioner to transfer the 1,000 crocodiles is devoid of merits and without any factual basis,” the bench said.

The Supreme Court had made it clear that the approach of the court in such issues should be eco-centric and not anthropocentric. The court was basically intended at protecting both humans and non-humans. The rescue and rehabilitation of the crocodiles in the present case must be viewed from an eco-centric angle. Wild animals are not the property of the State or the Central Government or any organisation or individuals.

They are the wealth of the nation and no one can claim ownership over them, the judges said.

The judges noted that the MCBT had conceded before the court that it does not have the financial backing to take care of the proliferating number of crocodiles in its facility at Mamallapuram near here and referred them to the GZRRC, where the state-of-the-art facilities are available.

Further, the bench said that it had perused the photographs produced by the MCBT, which showed the comforts available for the crocodiles to be shifted at the GZRRC in Gujarat, whereas the former was crammed, the bench said and dismissed the PIL.