JUDGMENT : 1. During the course of hearing of the main petition our attention was drawn to the vulnerability of the captive tigers in the zoo at Nandan Kanan, Bhubaneshwar and later on to the most ghastly incident of skinning alive of a tigress at Nehru Zoological Park, Hyderabad. It was on noticing these situations that we had desired that apart from taking steps to prevent killing, poaching and hunting of tigers so as to save them from extinction, it was necessary also to look at the status of the tigers and other animals in captivity particularly in the zoos. We shall, therefore, take up the issue relating to zoos as a separate issue from the main case. 2. On 30th October, 2000 we directed the Member Secretary of Central Zoo Authority to appear before us. Mr. P.R. Sinha, Member Secretary, Central Zoo Authority is present today along with Mr. Harish N. Salve, learned Solicitor General. 3. An affidavit has been filed by Shri Sinha, Member-Secretary in Court today. The said affidavit is taken on record. 4. From a cursory perusal of the said affidavit we find that except, the Delhi Zoo, which is under the administrative control of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India, all other zoos in the country are under the administrative control of the respective State Governments/municipal corporations/ trusts. In the wake of death and killing of the tigress an unprecedented incidence in the history of zoo management at the Nehru Zoological Park, Hyderabad, directions have been issued to beef up security arrangements around tiger and leopard enclosures in the zoos. A copy of the letter which was addressed to the State Governments by the Ministry of Environment and Forests or the Central Zoo Authority in this behalf has been attached to this affidavit by Shri Sinha. It appears that out of 47 zoos holding tigers in their collection, security arrangements have been beefed up insofar as 32 zoos are concerned. 15 zoos have yet to comply with that direction. We are at a loss to understand as to why the States and the concerned departments in those States are taking time to comply with the direction of beefing up of security arrangements in the remaining 15 zoos. This sort of indifference is objectionable. We hope the needful shall be done without any waste of time. 5. According to the affidavit of Mr. This sort of indifference is objectionable. We hope the needful shall be done without any waste of time. 5. According to the affidavit of Mr. Sinha, a meeting of various Secretaries has been convened by the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India for 27th November, 2000 when it is proposed to review security arrangements in major zoos of the country. It would be appropriate that the Wardens or Officers-in-Charge of various zoos are asked to furnish a status report about the animals in captivity of the zoos under their charge to the concerned Order dated November 20, 2000 in W.P. (C) No. 47/1998 with S.L.P. (C) No. 1474/1998 Secretary of the State so that the same can be produced by the Secretaries at the time of meeting on 27th November, 2000. 6. Learned Solicitor General submits that significant improvement in the management of the zoos in the country is absolutely necessary and can take place if initially following steps are undertaken: “(a) No new zoo should be allowed to be established without the approval of the Central Zoo Authority, Government of India. (b) All stipulation laid by Central Zoo Authority while granting conditional recognition should be strictly adhered to within the time frame prescribed by it. (c) Funds released by Central Zoo Authority should be allowed to be utilised by the Zoos directly without going through the budget procedure of the respective State Govt. so that fund reach the zoos in time to enable its utilisation and fulfilment of objective for which the funds are released by Central Zoo Authority. (d) Animals collection are planned within the carrying capacity to avoid inbreeding and overcrowding in the zoos. (e) Exchange of animals between zoos should be allowed by respective State Govts. and no price tags should be put on animals. (f) Minimum supervisory level personnel as stipulated in “Recognition of Zoos Rules, 1992” are deployed for improved upkeep and health care of zoo animals.” 7. These suggestions have been indicated in paragraph 15 of the affidavit filed by Shri Sinha. The suggestions appear to be useful and necessary. 8. A copy of the said affidavit together with its annexure shall be furnished to learned counsel appearing for various States and Union Territories and more particularly which are managing zoos in their respective States/Union Territories. These suggestions have been indicated in paragraph 15 of the affidavit filed by Shri Sinha. The suggestions appear to be useful and necessary. 8. A copy of the said affidavit together with its annexure shall be furnished to learned counsel appearing for various States and Union Territories and more particularly which are managing zoos in their respective States/Union Territories. The States and Union Territories shall respond to the suggestions made in paragraph 15 of the affidavit (supra) on an affidavit of a Competent Authority from the State/Union Territory. The needful shall be done by them within four weeks from today. 9. Looking to the pathetic state in which some of the zoos are maintained, we hereby direct that no State Government or Union Territory shall set up a new zoo without getting clearance from the Central Zoo Authority and orders from this Court. 10. A report of the meeting of Committee of Secretaries, which is scheduled for 27th November, 2000 and the follow up action shall be brought to the notice of this Court by the next date of hearing. W.P. (C) No. 47/1998 11. On 26th of August, 2000, an affidavit was filed by Shri Vishwanath Anand, Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests in compliance with the order of this Court dated 20th April, 2000. In that affidavit various suggestions were made and shortcomings highlighted. A copy of that affidavit has already been furnished to learned counsel for different States and Union Territories. Within four weeks from today, the States as also the Union of India shall file a status report indicating what further action has been taken on the basis of the affidavit filed by Shri Vishwane Anand. We expect the States and the Union of India to particularly respond to the suggestions made in paragraph 6 of the affidavit of Shri Anand. 12. Post after five weeks for directions.