The High Court has strongly reprimanded local governing bodies across Goa for their “casual approach” and persistent delays in complying with judicial directives regarding the management and enumeration of stray dogs. The High Court has ordered that if the defaulting municipal councils and the Corporation of the City of Panaji (CCP) through their Chief Officers and Commissioner fail to file their compliance affidavits in the court registry during the course of the day, the Director of Municipal Administration (DMA) shall initiate disciplinary action against them for willful non-compliance.

​During the hearing on Monday in a suo moto PIL, the High Court warned chief officers of municipal councils and secretaries of village panchayats of strict disciplinary action and contempt proceedings if court orders are not complied with immediately.

​The High Court observed with dismay that despite explicit directions issued on 6 October, several local bodies had failed to file their affidavits and public notice records on time.
​When the matter was called, the court was informed that only a few municipal councils had initially filed their compliance affidavits. Counsel representing various local bodies—including the Sanguem Municipal Council, Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council, Cuncolim Municipal Council, and Margao Municipal Council—scrambled during the hearing to submit their replies, offering assurances that filings would be completed during the course of the day.

​Expressing displeasure at the lack of preparedness, the Bench remarked that administrative officers appeared indifferent to judicial orders and the urgency mandated by the Supreme Court of India. "These directions were issued long back. We find that these Chief Officers are being very casual about this matter... They are just not complying with the court’s orders," the High Court observed, questioning why adverse entries should not be recommended in their official service records.


​The court clarified that administrative disciplinary action would be initiated without prejudice to the High Court’s powers to institute independent proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act.

​The proceedings also addressed the setup of dog shelters. Counsel informed the court that the Town and Country Planning (TCP) department had granted technical clearance on October 15 for an animal shelter facility proposed by the CCP at Curca. Subsequent to technical clearance, an application for a construction license was moved on October 16 before the Village Panchayat of Curca-Bambolim-Talaulim. Noting that the panchayat secretary was not present in court, the Bench directed the panchayat to place the proposal for a construction license on the agenda for immediate consideration—either in its scheduled meeting or by convening a special meeting within the week, given the urgency of the matter and Supreme Court guidelines.

​Addressing the submission of stray dog survey data, the court noted that while all municipal councils and the CCP had submitted reports of stray dog surveys to the Directorate of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services (DAHVS), a significant number of village panchayats had failed to do so.

​The High Court court directed all defaulting village panchayats across Goa to strictly comply with paragraphs 4 and 5 of the October 6 order by November 1.

​The High Court warned that if any panchayat fails to submit its compliance report by the deadline, the Director of Panchayats must initiate disciplinary proceedings against the respective panchayat secretaries and report the action taken back to the High Court.