Can't direct Centre, Tamil Nadu to frame special law on Jallikattu: HC

The Madras HC dismissed a public interest litigation seeking enactment of a special law

The Madras High Court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking enactment of a special law with conditions by the Centre and the Tamil Nadu government for holding Jallikattu, saying it cannot issue such a direction.

"The court cannot issue such a direction," the bench, comprising Chief Justice S K Kaul and Justice M Sundar said while hearing a petition by K K Ramesh, Managing Trustee of Tamil Nadu Centre for PIL.

On a plea by advocate R Krishnamurthy for action against "illegal" gathering of a large number of people on the Marina beach here in support of Jallikattu, the bench said it is an administrative matter.

"It is a matter of administration..., approach the government," it said.

Ramesh, in his PIL, submitted that Jallikattu is a "bull-hugging" sport played in Tamil Nadu as part of Pongal festivities and is an old practice. Though it looked similar to Spanish bull-fighting, it was different in Tamil Nadu as the bull is not killed, he said.

The petitioner claimed many people had been killed in Jallikattu events over the past few years, but not a single bull had died or been harassed, proof of which was there in government records itself.

Ramesh submitted that the sport was held in neighbouring Andhra Pradesh during Sankranthi with even the chief minister and his family in attendance.

Referring to the ongoing agitation across Tamil Nadu opposing the ban, he contended that students have organised meetings and taken out processions, demanding lifting of the ban and that it was the bounden duty of the central and state governments to bring forward a special law.

He said that the ban had resulted in a steep decrease in the number of particular breeds of bulls in Tamil Nadu.

Ramesh said he was forced to move the court as his January 16 representation in this regard to the state and central governments had not elicited any response.

Dismissing the PIL, the bench in its order made it clear that any petition which is filed in the name of Tamil Nadu Centre for Public Interest Litigation cannot be maintained and "no such petition shall be maintained in this name and style".

"The name under which this organisation is being run creates a wrong impression in the public as if the organisation is a specialist only in filing public interest litigations. An organisation doing voluntary work and having expertise in a particular field may approach the court."

"We cannot allow an organisation to pick up the morning newspaper, find out what is the issue raised and file half-baked petitions without any knowledge of the subject or law and that too without any research on the subject."

"We are thus of the view that any petition which is filed in the name of the Tamil Nadu Centre for Public Interest Litigation cannot be maintained and no such petitions shall be maintained in this name and style."

The bench said the "lack of expertise" on the part of the petitioner is apparent from the fact that he has sought a direction to enact a special law. "We say so as it is the sole prerogative of the government to enact law."

The bench referred to a Supreme Court judgment as well as a judgment of the full bench of the Delhi High Court wherein it was made clear that the writ of mandamus can be issued only in a case where there is a statutory duty imposed upon a person and there is a failure to discharge that statutory duty and the same cannot be issued to the legislature to enact a particular legislation.

"This court is not empowered to issue such a direction as is sought by the petitioner and it is for the government and the legislature to take a call on the issue," the bench said.

The petitioner had sought a direction to the state and central governments to enact a special law for conducting jallikattu with strict conditions.